XGID=--BCaDD------a----acbbbba-:1:-1:1:11:0:0:0:0:10

X:Player 1 O:Player 2
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| O O | | O O O O O O | +---+
| | | O O O O O | | 2 |
| | | O | +---+
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | X X |
| | | X X X |
| | | X X X X |
| | | X X O X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 57 O: 87 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 11

---
Tim Chow

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

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 4:32:26 AM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:

XGID=--BCaDD------a----acbbbba-:1:-1:1:11:0:0:0:0:10

X:Player 1 O:Player 2
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| O O | | O O O O O O | +---+
| | | O O O O O | | 2 |
| | | O | +---+
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | X X |
| | | X X X |
| | | X X X X |
| | | X X O X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 57 O: 87 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 11

---
Tim Chow

A fairly easy problem, I would think.
(This is not intended to imply that my solution is correct.
I just judge it to be solvable by players better than myself.)

Unusual plays should obviously be scrutinized.
But nevertheless, it's clearly mandatory to point on the opponent and create a 5 point board.
5/4*(2) for sure and then think about the other aces.

Here, our position is clearly worth more than a single win. However, we're underdogs to get the gammon.
Our concerns are twofold. Avoid the loss. Make lucky sequences very lucky because we will need luck to get the gammon.

I think we don't want the opponent settling on the ace point, creating a potential threat. Not as bad as if the opponent made our
acepoint, but still something to avoid. So 2/1(2). Not a very gammonish play but, bearing in mind that we only get 40% gammons if
the opponent has two checkers on the bar, we're big underdogs to get the gammon anyway. Also it's quite a QF-friendly play too.
5/4*(2) 2/1(2) with moderate confidence. (I'll be slightly surprised if I'm wrong.)

Paul

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

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 8:29:35 AM UTC+1, peps...@gmail.com wrote:

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 4:32:26 AM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:

XGID=--BCaDD------a----acbbbba-:1:-1:1:11:0:0:0:0:10

X:Player 1 O:Player 2
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| O O | | O O O O O O | +---+
| | | O O O O O | | 2 |
| | | O | +---+
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | X X |
| | | X X X |
| | | X X X X |
| | | X X O X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 57 O: 87 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 11

---
Tim Chow

A fairly easy problem, I would think.
(This is not intended to imply that my solution is correct.
I just judge it to be solvable by players better than myself.)

Unusual plays should obviously be scrutinized.
But nevertheless, it's clearly mandatory to point on the opponent and create a 5 point board.
5/4*(2) for sure and then think about the other aces.

Here, our position is clearly worth more than a single win. However, we're underdogs to get the gammon.
Our concerns are twofold. Avoid the loss. Make lucky sequences very lucky because we will need luck to get the gammon.

I think we don't want the opponent settling on the ace point, creating a potential threat. Not as bad as if the opponent made our
acepoint, but still something to avoid. So 2/1(2). Not a very gammonish play but, bearing in mind that we only get 40% gammons if
the opponent has two checkers on the bar, we're big underdogs to get the gammon anyway. Also it's quite a QF-friendly play too.
5/4*(2) 2/1(2) with moderate confidence. (I'll be slightly surprised if I'm wrong.)

Paul

It's also important to minimise shotleavers. I'm not sure whether my play leaves the fewest shotleavers or not. I notice that 64 blots.
I don't know if there are other blotting rolls.
If I had time (or felt like spending the time) to count the blotting rolls for each candidate, I would select among those blotting the least.
I doubt that my play can be improved by that criterion.

Paul

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

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 3:29:35 AM UTC-4, peps...@gmail.com wrote:

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 4:32:26 AM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:

XGID=--BCaDD------a----acbbbba-:1:-1:1:11:0:0:0:0:10

X:Player 1 O:Player 2
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| O O | | O O O O O O | +---+
| | | O O O O O | | 2 |
| | | O | +---+
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | X X |
| | | X X X |
| | | X X X X |
| | | X X O X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 57 O: 87 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 11

---
Tim Chow

A fairly easy problem, I would think.
(This is not intended to imply that my solution is correct.
I just judge it to be solvable by players better than myself.)

Unusual plays should obviously be scrutinized.
But nevertheless, it's clearly mandatory to point on the opponent and create a 5 point board.
5/4*(2) for sure and then think about the other aces.

Here, our position is clearly worth more than a single win. However, we're underdogs to get the gammon.
Our concerns are twofold. Avoid the loss. Make lucky sequences very lucky because we will need luck to get the gammon.

I think we don't want the opponent settling on the ace point, creating a potential threat. Not as bad as if the opponent made our
acepoint, but still something to avoid. So 2/1(2). Not a very gammonish play but, bearing in mind that we only get 40% gammons if
the opponent has two checkers on the bar, we're big underdogs to get the gammon anyway. Also it's quite a QF-friendly play too.
5/4*(2) 2/1(2) with moderate confidence. (I'll be slightly surprised if I'm wrong.)

Paul

You recognize there are hardly any gammons yet you make a play one might consider gammon hungry. Is this the play you make at dmp? If you realize there are hardly any gammons you should generally strive even harder to make the dmp play.

Stick

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

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 9:50:47 PM UTC+1, Stick Rice wrote:

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 3:29:35 AM UTC-4, peps...@gmail.com wrote:

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 4:32:26 AM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:

XGID=--BCaDD------a----acbbbba-:1:-1:1:11:0:0:0:0:10

X:Player 1 O:Player 2
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| O O | | O O O O O O | +---+
| | | O O O O O | | 2 |
| | | O | +---+
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | X X |
| | | X X X |
| | | X X X X |
| | | X X O X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 57 O: 87 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 11

---
Tim Chow

A fairly easy problem, I would think.
(This is not intended to imply that my solution is correct.
I just judge it to be solvable by players better than myself.)

Unusual plays should obviously be scrutinized.
But nevertheless, it's clearly mandatory to point on the opponent and create a 5 point board.
5/4*(2) for sure and then think about the other aces.

Here, our position is clearly worth more than a single win. However, we're underdogs to get the gammon.
Our concerns are twofold. Avoid the loss. Make lucky sequences very lucky because we will need luck to get the gammon.

I think we don't want the opponent settling on the ace point, creating a potential threat. Not as bad as if the opponent made our
acepoint, but still something to avoid. So 2/1(2). Not a very gammonish play but, bearing in mind that we only get 40% gammons if
the opponent has two checkers on the bar, we're big underdogs to get the gammon anyway. Also it's quite a QF-friendly play too.
5/4*(2) 2/1(2) with moderate confidence. (I'll be slightly surprised if I'm wrong.)

Paul

You recognize there are hardly any gammons yet you make a play one might consider gammon hungry. Is this the play you make at dmp? If you realize there are hardly any gammons you should generally strive even harder to make the dmp play.

I didn't see 2/off(2). I don't know why not.

Paul

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

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 11:07:45 PM UTC+1, peps...@gmail.com wrote:

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 9:50:47 PM UTC+1, Stick Rice wrote:

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 3:29:35 AM UTC-4, peps...@gmail.com wrote:

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 4:32:26 AM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:

XGID=--BCaDD------a----acbbbba-:1:-1:1:11:0:0:0:0:10

X:Player 1 O:Player 2
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| O O | | O O O O O O | +---+
| | | O O O O O | | 2 |
| | | O | +---+
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | X X |
| | | X X X |
| | | X X X X |
| | | X X O X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 57 O: 87 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 11

---
Tim Chow

A fairly easy problem, I would think.
(This is not intended to imply that my solution is correct.
I just judge it to be solvable by players better than myself.)

Unusual plays should obviously be scrutinized.
But nevertheless, it's clearly mandatory to point on the opponent and create a 5 point board.
5/4*(2) for sure and then think about the other aces.

Here, our position is clearly worth more than a single win. However, we're underdogs to get the gammon.
Our concerns are twofold. Avoid the loss. Make lucky sequences very lucky because we will need luck to get the gammon.

I think we don't want the opponent settling on the ace point, creating a potential threat. Not as bad as if the opponent made our
acepoint, but still something to avoid. So 2/1(2). Not a very gammonish play but, bearing in mind that we only get 40% gammons if
the opponent has two checkers on the bar, we're big underdogs to get the gammon anyway. Also it's quite a QF-friendly play too.
5/4*(2) 2/1(2) with moderate confidence. (I'll be slightly surprised if I'm wrong.)

Paul

You recognize there are hardly any gammons yet you make a play one might consider gammon hungry. Is this the play you make at dmp? If you realize there are hardly any gammons you should generally strive even harder to make the dmp play.

I didn't see 2/off(2). I don't know why not.

Paul

BTW, I now see that I was absolutely correct that this is an easy problem.

Paul

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

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 11:09:07 PM UTC+1, peps...@gmail.com wrote:

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 11:07:45 PM UTC+1, peps...@gmail.com wrote:

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 9:50:47 PM UTC+1, Stick Rice wrote:

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 3:29:35 AM UTC-4, peps...@gmail.com wrote:

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 4:32:26 AM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:

XGID=--BCaDD------a----acbbbba-:1:-1:1:11:0:0:0:0:10

X:Player 1 O:Player 2
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| O O | | O O O O O O | +---+
| | | O O O O O | | 2 |
| | | O | +---+
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | X X |
| | | X X X |
| | | X X X X |
| | | X X O X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 57 O: 87 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 11

---
Tim Chow

A fairly easy problem, I would think.
(This is not intended to imply that my solution is correct.
I just judge it to be solvable by players better than myself.)

Unusual plays should obviously be scrutinized.
But nevertheless, it's clearly mandatory to point on the opponent and create a 5 point board.
5/4*(2) for sure and then think about the other aces.

Here, our position is clearly worth more than a single win. However, we're underdogs to get the gammon.
Our concerns are twofold. Avoid the loss. Make lucky sequences very lucky because we will need luck to get the gammon.

I think we don't want the opponent settling on the ace point, creating a potential threat. Not as bad as if the opponent made our
acepoint, but still something to avoid. So 2/1(2). Not a very gammonish play but, bearing in mind that we only get 40% gammons if
the opponent has two checkers on the bar, we're big underdogs to get the gammon anyway. Also it's quite a QF-friendly play too.
5/4*(2) 2/1(2) with moderate confidence. (I'll be slightly surprised if I'm wrong.)

Paul

You recognize there are hardly any gammons yet you make a play one might consider gammon hungry. Is this the play you make at dmp? If you realize there are hardly any gammons you should generally strive even harder to make the dmp play.

I didn't see 2/off(2). I don't know why not.

Paul

BTW, I now see that I was absolutely correct that this is an easy problem.

Paul

I'd like to see a Tim-style variantization by considering gammon-go.

Paul

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

XGID=--BCaDD------a----acbbbba-:1:-1:1:11:0:0:0:0:10

X:Player 1 O:Player 2
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| O O | | O O O O O O | +---+
| | | O O O O O | | 2 |
| | | O | +---+
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | X X |
| | | X X X |
| | | X X X X |
| | | X X O X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 57 O: 87 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 11

Not enough gammons to justify hitting.

1. Rollout¹ 2/Off(2) eq:+0.954
Player: 97.66% (G:0.60% B:0.00%)
Opponent: 2.34% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.002 (+0.952..+0.956) - [100.0%]

2. Rollout¹ 6/4*(2) eq:+0.873 (-0.081)
Player: 91.50% (G:7.28% B:0.14%)
Opponent: 8.50% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.003 (+0.870..+0.876) - [0.0%]

3. Rollout¹ 6/4* 5/4 3/2 eq:+0.859 (-0.095)
Player: 90.77% (G:7.92% B:0.14%)
Opponent: 9.23% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.003 (+0.856..+0.862) - [0.0%]

¹ 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.207.pre-release

---
Tim Chow

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