Article View: rec.games.backgammon
Article #27Re: A backgame question
From: Avi Roy Shapira
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 03:37
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 03:37
66 lines
3590 bytes
3590 bytes
pbf@inoms.bellcore.com (Phil Franklin) writes: : : Money game, even opponents. : : a) X to play 2-1. : b) X to play 5-1. : : : 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 : --------------------------------------- : |X X O . O O | | O O . . . X| : |X O O O | | O O | : |X O | | | : | | | | : | | | | : | | | | : | | | | : | | | | : | X | | | : | X X X X | | O| [2] : |. X X O X X | | . X . . O O| : --------------------------------------- : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 : : These positions comes from "The Backgammon Quizbook" by Joli Kansil. : I'm posting them because I disagree with his suggested moves. I'm : looking for either confirmation of my analysis or a new way of looking : at this type of problem. So let me know what you think. : : a) X to play 2-1. Kansil recommends 13/11*,24/23, stating "It's going : to be difficult to gain the timing you need for a successful back : game, but you may be able to hit and contain your opponent in your : inner board and then make his 4-point and gradually escape." : : Huh? His game plan sounds the same as mine, but I have to wonder : about his execution. I would move 6/4*, 24/23, reasoning that I can't : afford to let O make my 4-point if I want to contain him in my inner : board -- I need that point for myself. And if I do get hit, then I'm : improving my timing, and I need all I can get for a 1-2 backgame. His : play of 13/11*, on the other hand, doesn't help X's timing, and gives : X the chance to make the 4-point, making it hard for X to contain O. : : : b) X to play 5-1. Kansil recommends 24/23, 13/8, stating "Playing : 13/8 for the 5 is better than moving to your 1-point, even though your : objective is not really to get rid of your blots." : : Why is 13/8 better? I want O to hit me, or for me to hit him and : force him to hit back. I'd play 24/23, 6/1, and hope for a chance at : him. I'm tempted by the thought of 6/1, 5/4*, but that's just too : bold without a second point in O's inner board. So I'll hope I get : another shot at him -- but I'm not going to reduce my chances by : jumping past one blot and leaving myself only one number if I get a : shot at all. I am even more aggressive. I think the 2 men on the 2 are too far advanced. with 2-1 I would hid the men on 4 and play 2-1. My hope is that O will hit with 1 or 2, and I'll get an additional men back in circulation. Again with 5-1 hit on 4 and slot the 2 point. I agree that hitting on 11 is a useless maneuvre. Unless O rolls outrageoulsy poor numbers, you will have to break your innerboard structure by the time you get a chance to hit and escape. Avi
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Jul21.033724.5419@ramon.bgu.ac.il>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!usc!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!malgudi.oar.net!news.ysu.edu!psuvm!frmop11!barilvm!vms.huji.ac.il!ramon.bgu.ac.il!chen.bgu.ac.il!avirReferences:
<1992Jul17.221118.9478@walter.bellcore.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!usc!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!malgudi.oar.net!news.ysu.edu!psuvm!frmop11!barilvm!vms.huji.ac.il!ramon.bgu.ac.il!chen.bgu.ac.il!avir Newsgroups: rec.games.backgammon Subject: Re: A backgame question Message-ID: <1992Jul21.033724.5419@ramon.bgu.ac.il> From: avir@chen.bgu.ac.il (Avi Roy Shapira) Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 03:37:24 GMT Sender: usenet@ramon.bgu.ac.il (The Ever-So-Great Usenet) References: <1992Jul17.221118.9478@walter.bellcore.com> Organization: Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheva, Israel Lines: 66