On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 7:29:34 AM UTC, Axel Reichert wrote:

GNU Backgammon Position ID: bLcJASJiz8EAOA
Match ID : UYlkARAAIAAE
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+ O: gnubg
| X O O | | O O O O X | 1 point
| X O | | O O O O X |
| | | O X |
| | | |
| | | |
v| |BAR| | 11 point match
| | | |
| | | X |
| X | | X |
| X | | X X | Rolled 11
| O X | | X X O X O | 4 points
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+ X: axel (Cube: 2)
Pip counts: O 122, X 158

For me, 24/23(3) is essential to establish an escape route and reduce the gammon risk.
Trying to avoid another man sent back, 2/1* seems best.
--
BD

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

GNU Backgammon Position ID: bLcJASJiz8EAOA
Match ID : UYlkARAAIAAE
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+ O: gnubg
| X O O | | O O O O X | 1 point
| X O | | O O O O X |
| | | O X |
| | | |
| | | |
v| |BAR| | 11 point match
| | | |
| | | X |
| X | | X |
| X | | X X | Rolled 11
| O X | | X X O X O | 4 points
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+ X: axel (Cube: 2)
Pip counts: O 122, X 158

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

On December 12, 2022 at 12:29:34 AM UTC-7, Axel Reichert wrote:

GNU Backgammon Position ID: bLcJASJiz8EAOA
Match ID : UYlkARAAIAAE
Rolled 11

13/12 bang!
6/4 bang!
2/1 bang!

Let it sing "my baby shot me down",
with one too many bangs... ;)

MK

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

On 12/12/2022 2:29 AM, Axel Reichert wrote:

GNU Backgammon Position ID: bLcJASJiz8EAOA
Match ID : UYlkARAAIAAE
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+ O: gnubg
| X O O | | O O O O X | 1 point
| X O | | O O O O X |
| | | O X |
| | | |
| | | |
v| |BAR| | 11 point match
| | | |
| | | X |
| X | | X |
| X | | X X | Rolled 11
| O X | | X X O X O | 4 points
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+ X: axel (Cube: 2)
Pip counts: O 122, X 158

Well, I can't see myself passing up the opportunity to step up at
least one checker to the edge of the prime with 24/23. So that
means I'm not playing 6/4*(2). I don't think that 2/1* accomplishes
much. We could use three aces to hit, with 13/12* 6/4* or 13/12*
5/4*(2), but those don't look compelling enough for me to forgo
stepping up a second checker.

So that means I'm playing 24/23(2) and looking for two more aces.
We could step a third checker up with 24/23(3) but I think I'd
rather play either 13/12*(2) or 6/4*. Not at all sure but I guess
I'll try 24/23(2) 13/12*(2).

---
Tim Chow

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

On 12/12/2022 2:29 AM, Axel Reichert wrote:

GNU Backgammon Position ID: bLcJASJiz8EAOA
Match ID : UYlkARAAIAAE
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+ O: gnubg
| X O O | | O O O O X | 1 point
| X O | | O O O O X |
| | | O X |
| | | |
| | | |
v| |BAR| | 11 point match
| | | |
| | | X |
| X | | X |
| X | | X X | Rolled 11
| O X | | X X O X O | 4 points
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+ X: axel (Cube: 2)
Pip counts: O 122, X 158

6/4*(2) is the first play I see, but the rest of the position seems to
clearly indicate that X needs to step up to the edge of the prime lest
he get trapped. So, 24/23(2) seems like a necessity.

That leaves two more aces to play. 24/23 is an obvious candidate, but so
is hitting on the 12 or the 1 or both. And 6/5 also seems reasonable.

I'll go for 2/1* since it takes away half a roll and slotting the ace is
not much worse strategically than slotting the deuce. Then, moving the
third runner to the 23 so I can run with a six without breaking anchor
seems more useful than putting a second checker on the roof or playing
the somewhat passive 6/5. And keeping the midpoint is usually a
reasonable asset.

Good problem.

--
Ah....Clem
The future is fun, the future is fair.

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