🚀 go-pugleaf

> In article <C0D3oC.KD4.1@cs.cmu.edu> Marc.Ringuette@GS80.SP.CS.CMU.EDU writes:
> ||  24 23 22 21 20 19 | | 18 17 16 15 14 13
> ||   O  O  O  O  O    | |
> ||   O  O  O  O  O    | |
> ||   O           O    | |
> ||               O    | |
> ||                    | |
> ||                    |X|
> ||   X  X             | |
> ||   X  X             | |
> ||   X  X  X  X  X    | |                       +-+
> ||   X  X  X  X  X    | |                       |2|
> ||   1  2  3  4  5  6 | |  7  8  9 10 11 12     +-+
> ||
> ||  Money game:  O to play 1-1
> ||
> ||  O (a good player) played 24/off 24/off 24/off 20/21, which I think
> ||  is a horrible play.  He couldn't be right, could he?
> 

In article <1993Jan5.084523.28443@rulway.LeidenUniv.nl>, zweije@slc9 (Vincent Zweije) writes:

> Some thoughts:
> 
>  1: O is going for gammon, and bearing off as many men as possible. If
>     X enters on 24, he may not be able to escape immediately.  Still, I
>     the odds aren't enough in favor of gammon for O to risk an unlucky
>     next roll (6-5) and be hit.
> 
I think it may be worth playing for gammon, because O doesn't risk very much
taking 3 men off

if X has to come out on 6 O has at least protected his lead in race. If X comes
in on 1 he has to jump over with 15 and 16, so same applies as above. if X roll
11, 12, 13 or 14 he has to break one point in his 5 point board. If X stays 
out O's gammon chances has raised. If X stays out or stays on 1, it is true
that O may leave a blot with 65 next roll (and maybe other shots later) but at
that point X has already at least 7 men off and even if hit O has still to roll
very well to turn the game (note that to become to this point it is much 
less prabable than X rolling 66 immediatelly). And if not hit immediatelly i 
think there wont be many future shots since X is forced to run soon (and if he
doesn't run soon gammon chances will be higher).

so i think taking 3 off can't be a big mistake, it may be the inferior move,
but definitely not by wide margin.

-Mika

>  2: O wants protection from 6-6 as next roll from X, which otherwise
>     would bring X only two men behind in bearing off.  But then again,
>     only one roll out of 36 is a 6-6, and two men behind is too much to
>     stand a reasonable chance of winning.  This is even worse than
>     option 1.
> 
>  3: The money game is really a *virtual* money game, and O is not
>     paying attention, or O is not such a good player after all.  :-)
> 
> No, I can't find a real reason either to bear off three men from 21.
> I'd safely play 20/22(2), or, if I didn't feel 5-5 or 6-6 for my next
> roll as a threat, 20/21 20/22 24/off.                          Vincent.