Vonasi wrote:

The same as a normal optimization except you turn on WF.

Thanks for the explanation Vonasi.

I have always done it the way you describe, but I thought I was missing a trick!

Only difference being that I’ve always used WF as a final confidence check not as my main optimiser tool.

Reason I guess is as I stated below.

GraHal wrote:

I feel like I have blinkers on when looking at the results from WF??

But always open to alternatives, I’ll try optimise JUST with WF and then optimise JUST as normal.

Anybody done above and got any comments or findings?