Thread View: rec.games.backgammon
2 messages
2 total messages
Started by Marc.Ringuette
Fri, 08 Jan 1993 06:22
Re: O to play 1-1
Author: Marc.Ringuette
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 06:22
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 06:22
51 lines
2342 bytes
2342 bytes
>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?
Dick King and Mark Bisgeier like the play, trying to salvage a back game.
Who are you guys kidding? This isn't a back game, it's a disaster. It's
much better not to put any more checkers back, and try to save the gammon.
Play 24-23, 4-1.
A related case is Position 191 from Advanced Backgammon, volume 1,
by Bill Robertie.
24 23 22 21 20 19 | | 18 17 16 15 14 13
X X O O O | | O O O O
X X O O O | | O O
X | |
| |
| |
| |
X | |
X X | |
X X X | | O +-+
X X O X X | | O |2|
1 2 3 4 5 6 | | 7 8 9 10 11 12 +-+
X to play 4-1
X played 5/4* 5/1
"This play looks clever but in fact it hardly ever works. The usual result
is that Black gets a couple of extra men hit, his men reenter, his board
collapses anyway, and his chances of being gammoned increase because he now
has 7 men back instead of 5."
"Black has to understand that his timing is gone and he can't restore it.
His only rational goal is to minimize his chances of being gammoned in a very
bad position. His best play is the simple 24/23 6/2." --Bill Robertie
-- Marc Ringuette (mnr@cs.cmu.edu)
Re: O to play 1-1
Author: Mark Bisgeier
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 08:10
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 08:10
66 lines
2753 bytes
2753 bytes
Marc.Ringuette@GS80.SP.CS.CMU.EDU writes:
>>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?
>Dick King and Mark Bisgeier like the play, trying to salvage a back game.
>Who are you guys kidding? This isn't a back game, it's a disaster. It's
>much better not to put any more checkers back, and try to save the gammon.
>Play 24-23, 4-1.
>A related case is Position 191 from Advanced Backgammon, volume 1,
>by Bill Robertie.
>24 23 22 21 20 19 | | 18 17 16 15 14 13
> X X O O O | | O O O O
> X X O O O | | O O
> X | |
> | |
> | |
> | |
> X | |
> X X | |
> X X X | | O +-+
> X X O X X | | O |2|
> 1 2 3 4 5 6 | | 7 8 9 10 11 12 +-+
>X to play 4-1
>X played 5/4* 5/1
> "This play looks clever but in fact it hardly ever works. The usual result
>is that Black gets a couple of extra men hit, his men reenter, his board
>collapses anyway, and his chances of being gammoned increase because he now
>has 7 men back instead of 5."
> "Black has to understand that his timing is gone and he can't restore it.
>His only rational goal is to minimize his chances of being gammoned in a very
>bad position. His best play is the simple 24/23 6/2." --Bill Robertie
>-- Marc Ringuette (mnr@cs.cmu.edu)
Notice, though, that in the Robertie example 0 has the outside prime
building, making it much tougher for X to get out and therefore more likely
that his board will collapse in any event... in our example it's not quite
so tough for X, possibly giving him more time to wait until 0
collapses/blots... plus, with one or two more men back, X can hit and still
keep both 0's 1 and 2 points... but maybe you're right anyway :) ...
--
Mark Bisgeier mdb@netcom.com
...Let your mind wander...
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads