Generating RA indices using CVData?

[jack.jackson]

has ne1 ever tried to gen indexes and got a "runtime error 6: overflow" error notice?

what does it mean and how do i fix it?

Try rebooting!

 

[rukus]

The Beat to deaths, didnt make any difference.

The problem was,for some reason, you must genereate, the H/S indexes, first, otherwise you'll get NEVER split on 88vX. As far as the other split indexes go, I believe you can Generate these(accurately) without having to Generate the H/S indexes first. Thats what made it so hard to track down.

One of the reasons, I was doing it this way, was because I was Generating seperate indexes, for 2 different counts. Also, make sure your playing strategy name and index generation name are the same when running seperate indexes.

On a side issue, could I get your opinion on which of these counts you think has better efficiency for 88vX? I cant decide!

a)12223210-1-3(A/X)

b)2223210-1-2-3(2/A)

looks like you beat me to an answer. apologies, i have been very busy at work these last two months.

anyway, i never figured it out and just manually put in "always split" for that play in RA mode. if i recall correctly it generated properly in EVMax mode just not in RA mode. so to be clear, if i generate all H/S indices first and then go to generate the split indices, i will get a good index for 8,8 v 10?

 

[ace157]

Try rebooting!

3 reboots later and we have success :-D

In the "help" section it recommends just using the "greater accuracy" setting for best results... simply because the "beat to death" takes much longer and does not show much of a difference in accuracy

 

[bjcount]

The Beat to deaths, didnt make any difference.

The problem was,for some reason, you must genereate, the H/S indexes, first, otherwise you'll get NEVER split on 88vX. As far as the other split indexes go, I believe you can Generate these(accurately) without having to Generate the H/S indexes first. Thats what made it so hard to track down.

One of the reasons, I was doing it this way, was because I was Generating seperate indexes, for 2 different counts. Also, make sure your playing strategy name and index generation name are the same when running seperate indexes.

JJ
When I ran my ZEN RA indices I ran standard mode for every hand play to get full indices. The 88vX was still split always. Did you get an index number for it?

BJC

 

[jack.jackson]

JJ
When I ran my ZEN RA indices I ran standard mode for every hand play to get full indices. The 88vX was still split always. Did you get an index number for it?

BJC

Well al least you were getting Always, opposed to Never Nevertheless, you still should of got a index around +2 or so for the RA.

Ya, I was finally able to get an Index, for my count. As long as the h/s indexes, were already generated in the strategy(regardless, if they were done consecutively or not).

 

[jack.jackson]

looks like you beat me to an answer. apologies, i have been very busy at work these last two months.

anyway, i never figured it out and just manually put in "always split" for that play in RA mode. if i recall correctly it generated properly in EVMax mode just not in RA mode. so to be clear, if i generate all H/S indices first and then go to generate the split indices, i will get a good index for 8,8 v 10?

Yes! If my calculations are right of course As a test, if you define your own strategy playing strategy>set it on quick and dirty, and just generate the 88vX, you will be able to see for yourself what im talking about. Then run the h/s indexes, proceeded by the 88xX, index. This time, it will give you the index. That goes for RA as well.

 

[rukus]

Yes! If my calculations are right of course As a test, if you define your own strategy playing strategy>set it on quick and dirty, and just generate the 88vX, you will be able to see for yourself what im talking about. Then run the h/s indexes, proceeded by the 88xX, index. This time, it will give you the index. That goes for RA as well.

cool, thanks. i havent worried about it for over a year in zen since it is not a hugely important decision since the required TC to stand and not split is so high anyway.