1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. REC.GAMES.BACKGAMMON

  • A standard Axelisation

    From pepstein5@gmail.com@21:1/5 to All on Thu Apr 14 14:03:02 2022
    I really struggled with the Axelisation below.
    In a very standard position, I felt bad about being
    so clueless. Maybe I should learn the Isight method
    after all.
    I basically took a wild 50/50 guess, and guessed right.

    Paul

    XGID=-A-ACCB------------acbb-b-:0:0:-1:00:0:4:3:0:10
    X:eXtremeGammon O:Daniel

    Score is X:4 O:0. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver
    +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
    | | | O O O O O |
    | | | O O O |
    | | | O O |
    | | | |
    | | | |
    | |BAR| |
    | | | |
    | | | |
    | | | X |
    | | | X X X X |
    | | | X X X X X |
    +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
    Pip count X: 37 O: 43 X-O: 4-0
    Cube: 1
    X on roll, cube action

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Axel Reichert@21:1/5 to peps...@gmail.com on Thu Apr 14 23:33:52 2022
    "peps...@gmail.com" <pepstein5@gmail.com> writes:

    I really struggled with the Axelisation below.

    Maybe because zero adjustments are required?

    If it helps you memorizing, you can work your way forward from behind: Cross-overs (none), gaps on 6, 5, 4 (none), stacks on 3, 2, 1 (none),
    checkers off (no difference).

    So it's

    p = 80 - l/3 + 2 * Delta l

    = 80 - 37/3 + 2 * (43 - 37)

    = 80 - 12.33 + 12

    = 79.67 > 76

    Double, pass

    So I failed. (-:

    The slightly more precise and slightly more complicated method sketched
    on page 40 of my article yields:

    p = 84 - 0.4*l + 2 * Delta l

    = 84 - 0.4*37 + 2 * (43 - 37)

    = 84 - 14.8 + 12

    = 81.2 > 78

    Double, pass

    So I failed again.

    But the good thing is that I worked in customer support for a long time
    and thus I am quite used to only problems getting reported instead of
    songs of praise and joy for my wonderful contribution to the backgammon community. (-;

    Happy holidays!

    Axel

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From pepstein5@gmail.com@21:1/5 to Axel Reichert on Fri Apr 15 00:55:59 2022
    On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 10:33:54 PM UTC+1, Axel Reichert wrote:
    "peps...@gmail.com" <peps...@gmail.com> writes:

    I really struggled with the Axelisation below.
    Maybe because zero adjustments are required?

    If it helps you memorizing, you can work your way forward from behind: Cross-overs (none), gaps on 6, 5, 4 (none), stacks on 3, 2, 1 (none), checkers off (no difference).

    So it's

    p = 80 - l/3 + 2 * Delta l

    = 80 - 37/3 + 2 * (43 - 37)

    = 80 - 12.33 + 12

    = 79.67 > 76

    Double, pass

    So I failed. (-:

    The slightly more precise and slightly more complicated method sketched
    on page 40 of my article yields:

    p = 84 - 0.4*l + 2 * Delta l

    = 84 - 0.4*37 + 2 * (43 - 37)

    = 84 - 14.8 + 12

    = 81.2 > 78

    Double, pass

    So I failed again.

    But the good thing is that I worked in customer support for a long time
    and thus I am quite used to only problems getting reported instead of
    songs of praise and joy for my wonderful contribution to the backgammon community. (-;

    Happy holidays!

    Axel

    I think it is a wonderful contribution to the backgammon community.
    It might be the best method that exists. I don't know why I (correctly)
    took this one. I certainly had no confidence about it. I kind of had a vague feeling that there was a lot of time for me to roll a miracle like 66/55/44
    and that there was a lot of cubic vig so I could take at significantly below 25% GWC -- perhaps as low as 20% GWC.
    I lost the game in the end so my lucky guess became unlucky in the end.

    Paul

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)