Enter Your Reply

For completeness, I listed the combinations that are relevant for
comparison of the Q, A and C value here:

Q-BNN    (172+ 186- 75=) 48.4%
Q-BBN    (143+ 235- 54=) 39.4%
C-BNN    (130+ 231- 71=) 38.3%
C-BBN    ( 39+  86- 11=) 32.7%
A-BNN    (124+ 241- 67=) 36.5%
RR-Q     (174+ 194- 64=) 47.7%
RR-CP    (131+ 227- 74=) 38.9%
RR-AP    (166+ 199- 67=) 46.2%
RR-C     (188+ 170- 74=) 52.1%
RR-A     (197+ 162- 73=) 54.1%
QQ-CC    (131+ 55-  30=) 67.6%
QQ-AA    (117+ 60-  39=) 63.2%
QQ-CCP   (112+ 72-  32=) 59.3%
QQ-AAP   (112+ 78-  26=) 57.9%
CC-AA    (102+ 89-  25=) 53.0%
Q-CP     (164+ 191- 77=) 46.9%
Q-AP     (191+ 186- 55=) 50.6%
Q-C      (215+ 161- 56=) 56.3%
Q-A      (219+ 138- 75=) 59.4%
C-A      (187+ 182- 63=) 50.6%
A-RN     (261+ 122- 49=) 66.1%
C-RN     (273+ 101- 58=) 69.9%
A-RNP    (247+ 121- 64=) 64.6%
C-RNP    (242+ 144- 46=) 61.3%

So it is not only that C and A has been tried against each other, alone or
in pairs. They have also been tested against Q (alonme or in pairs, with or
without pawn odds for the latter), BNN, RR and RN (with or without Pawn
odds). On the average, C does only slightly better than A, on the average
2-3%, where giving Pawn odds makes a difference of ~12%. 

The A-RNP result seems a statistical fluke, as it is almost the same as
A-RN, while the extra Pawn obviously should help, and the A even does
better there than C-RNP. Note the statistical error in 432 games is 2.2%,
so that 32% of the results (so eight) should be off by more than 2.2%, and
5% (1 or 2) should be off by more than 4.5%. And A-RNP is most likely to be
that latter one.