🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <C0GG9n.B90.1@cs.cmu.edu>, tesauro@watson.ibm.com (Gerald Tesauro (8-863-7682)) writes:
|> Also from the same session, here's an even more
|> spectacular play by the same player:
|> 
|> 24 23 22 21 20 19 | | 18 17 16 15 14 13     +-+
|>  X  X  O  O  O  O | |  O  O  O              |2|
|>  X     O  O  O  O | |  O  O                 +-+
|>  X           O    | |
|>  X                | |
|>                   | |
|>                   | |
|>                   | |
|>        X  X       | |
|>  X     X  X  X    | |
|>  X  O  X  X  X    | |
|>  1  2  3  4  5  6 | |  7  8  9 10 11 12
|> 
|> Money game:  X to play 3-1
|> 
|> X played 5/2* 24/23 !?  Any comments?

I would never have looked at this play, but it makes sense.  O is
playing for a gammon, and having extra checkers back certainly doesn't
hurt X at this point.  On the other hand, stacking on the 1-point
doesn't help.  X is unlikely to get off the gammon unless O is hit in
the bear-off and re-hit again and again while X brings the back
checkers home.  

5/2* is likely to recirculate a checker which would otherwise be put
out of play.  If X is lucky, he might even be stuck on the bar for a
few rolls.

- Phil