[EM] Not contentous on Schwartz-vs-Beatpath

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

I want to emphasize that I don't want to seem contentious or defensive
about the matter of the Schwartz set approach vs the beatpath approach.

I asked for advantages that the beatpath approach has, and I got
some answers about that. That's what I was asking for, and I'm
glad to have those answers.

Though I don't think the beatpath approach's advantages outweigh
the proposability advantage of the Schwartz approach, I certainly
recognize that those beatpath advantages are valid.

But I must add that both approaches need to specify what happens
when there's a final tie. Of course the Schwartz set approach is the
one that needs to specify what happens when there are several
defeats that are equal and weakest, during the middle of the count.
But "drop them all" isn't complicated.

Fewer details to specify, and greater calculation efficiency certainly
do count for the beatpath approach. The efficiency difference suggests
that the Schwartz set approach, even though it is more plausible &
obvious, is also doing things in a more roundabout way.

Anyway, though I still feel that the Schwartz set approach would be
more convincing to members of the public, I don't deny the beatpath
advantages that I've heard, and I'm interested in any more that
can be posted.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com