The read combines several kinds of evidence — race, dice, phase, the choice that existed, the change on the board, structure, timing and what came next — each bounded so no single event drowns the rest. It is strongest when those signals agree, softer when they conflict or the dice did most of the work, and it speaks only once the evidence crosses a threshold. When the table says nothing, that is the read too — silence is the report that the evidence did not earn a sentence. So it says the table noticed, never your profile shows.
Pressure is usually visible before the result is final: a stranded checker, a missed escape, a broken structure, an awkward bear-off, a race that quietly turns. The model reads those traces rather than waiting for the hit to make the damage official. Forced moves and luck are kept out of judgement — a move you had no choice in is recorded but not assessed, and being shut out by a prime is read as position, not misfortune.
Underneath everything the pip count is the floor: however a game fills with primes and anchors, it never stops being a race, and the same structure reads as strong when behind and indulgent when already ahead. The review looks for related crunch points rather than isolated slips, and raises a ghost line only when one moment stands for a wider sequence — same dice, controlled replay, more resilience.
This grew from a wider question — how systems under stress show their strain before they fail — and its discipline is borrowed from fields that live with that question. From forecasting: a read is a judgement under uncertainty, scored against what happened, never against a single right answer. From decision theory: the quality of a choice is held apart from the luck of its outcome — a brave line punished by the dice is not a bad line. From work on financial vulnerability: strain is measurable before failure is visible, and the tension trace is that instrument at this table. And from statistics, mostly restraint: one game is a small sample, and the read says so. What the model will not do is mistake one game for a player: a single game can show a line, never define anyone, and the read is only ever as good as the position it can see.