Comparing outcomes of emergency c-sections to scheduled c-sections is always going to come out in favour of scheduled c-sections. On one side something is going wrong 100% of the time and the other something is not always going wrong. Not sure how to make this anymore obvious. This is a pointless comparison.
Comparing outcomes of natural births as a whole vs scheduled c-sections is far more useful comparison.
"Scheduled c-sections outperform emergency c-sections in every metric tracked."
The comparison is natural birth to c-sections. Comparing scheduled c-sections to emergency c-sections is a ridiculous thing to track, go compare GP visits vs admission to emergency while you're at it.
A smart cheater isn't just going to replicate bot moves and make it easy to detect. They may just use it to decide between 2 moves they were 50/50 on already. Do this 2 or 3 times and it would make a big difference at the grand master level. This would be quite hard to detect.
I've tried YNAB multiple times but would inevitably miss entering a transaction and then it would be a pain reconciling my bank accounts with YNAB. Without tracking the transactions I couldn't accurately use YNAB to determine how much was left in the budget.
Having an envelope like system built into a bank would be extremely useful.
Comparing outcomes of natural births as a whole vs scheduled c-sections is far more useful comparison.