🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Oct30.020833.28932@kestrel.edu> king@reasoning.com (Dick King) writes:
>In article <1992Oct24.134431.3048@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> jrk2v@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (John Robert Klein) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct20.181039.22651@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> jrk2v@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (John Robert Klein) writes:
>>>	|24 23 22 21 20 19| |18 17 16 15 14 13|
>>>	|O  O  X  X  O  O | |O  O             |
>>>	|O  O  X  X  O  O | |O  O             |
>>>	|         X       | |O  O             |
>>>	|		  | |                 |
>>>	|                 | |                 |
>>>	|            X  X | |                 |
>>>        |   X  X     X  X | |                 |
>>>	|O  X  X     X  X | |                 | [2]
>>>	|1  2  3  4  5  6 | |7  8  9  10 11 12|
>>>
>>>	Money game,  X to play 6-5
>>>	
>>>	I like 21/15, 6/1*.  It looks to be the  most flexible
>>>	but there  are several  other good possibilities.
>>>
>>Michael Zehr and Dick King both like 21/10 better than 21/15, 6/1* and 
>>it might be a better play.   Something about hitting on the one point 
>>does look wrong.
>>Did anyone else consider 21/15, 21/16?
>
>Pick and Pass bait.
>-dk

A couple of expert players I showed this to said 21/10 by a wide margin.
My tentative rollouts confirm this.  Basically, O doens't mind being on
the board while X crashes.

X's best chance in this game is to hit O while O is bearing off.  This
means *not* hitting O until absolutely necessary.  X should hope for O
to have to play some awkward 4's or 5's soon.

If O plays a 6-1, i'm not sure what X should do. probably not hit back.
O is going to leave shots bearing off.

-michael