XGID=-EaB--B---------a--bbbc-d-:1:-1:1:21:0:0:0:0:10
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 | | 2 |
| | | O O | +---+
| | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X X X | X
| | | X X O X | X X
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 23 O: 75 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 21
---
Tim Chow
Since the opponent isn't forced to leave next turn we have to play for safety over multiple turns (aka clean up next turn) so while 3/off minimizes shots now, overall it leaves far more shots on average when we're missed and have to try to clean up themess next turn with our opponent sitting, waiting. 6/3 should be the safest overall. If our opponent was forced to run with sixes I would expect minimizing shots immediately to come out on top.
XGID=-EaB--B---------a--bbbc-d-:1:-1:1:21:0:0:0:0:10
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 | | 2 |
| | | O O | +---+
| | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X X X | X
| | | X X O X | X X
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 23 O: 75 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 21
On 12/23/2022 4:43 PM, Stick Rice wrote:the mess next turn with our opponent sitting, waiting. 6/3 should be the safest overall. If our opponent was forced to run with sixes I would expect minimizing shots immediately to come out on top.
Since the opponent isn't forced to leave next turn we have to play for safety over multiple turns (aka clean up next turn) so while 3/off minimizes shots now, overall it leaves far more shots on average when we're missed and have to try to clean up
Trying to force the blot forward by hitting isn't a candidate?
---
Tim Chow
On Saturday, December 24, 2022 at 7:52:32 AM UTC-5, Tim Chow wrote:the mess next turn with our opponent sitting, waiting. 6/3 should be the safest overall. If our opponent was forced to run with sixes I would expect minimizing shots immediately to come out on top.
On 12/23/2022 4:43 PM, Stick Rice wrote:
Since the opponent isn't forced to leave next turn we have to play for safety over multiple turns (aka clean up next turn) so while 3/off minimizes shots now, overall it leaves far more shots on average when we're missed and have to try to clean up
Trying to force the blot forward by hitting isn't a candidate?
---
Tim Chow
Not really but which not really are you asking about so I can address it, hit and off or hit and scootch?
XGID=-EaB--B---------a--bbbc-d-:1:-1:1:21:0:0:0:0:10
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 | | 2 |
| | | O O | +---+
| | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X X X | X
| | | X X O X | X X
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 23 O: 75 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 21
There is a tradeoff between short-term shot jeopardy and long-term
shot jeopardy that one needs to try to estimate here. Also, one
needs to judge the importance of having an extra checker off, since
that can make a significant difference if we get hit.
Trying to force the blot forward by hitting it can sometimes be the
right idea, but here, the chances of forcing it forward are not so
good, and usually doesn't reduce the long-term shot jeopardy by much
anyway.
I've included two variants this time, for good measure. The main
takeaway, from my perspective, is that the 6pt is a huge liability
here, and getting rid of it is worth some risk.
1. Rollout¹ 6/3 eq:+0.622
Player: 82.66% (G:3.86% B:0.01%)
Opponent: 17.34% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.004 (+0.618..+0.626) - [100.0%]
2. Rollout¹ 3/Off eq:+0.549 (-0.073)
Player: 77.49% (G:9.19% B:0.11%)
Opponent: 22.51% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.006 (+0.543..+0.555) - [0.0%]
3. Rollout¹ 3/2* 2/Off eq:+0.531 (-0.091)
Player: 76.45% (G:9.93% B:0.09%)
Opponent: 23.55% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.006 (+0.525..+0.536) - [0.0%]
4. Rollout¹ 3/1 3/2* eq:+0.494 (-0.128)
Player: 76.61% (G:6.15% B:0.02%)
Opponent: 23.39% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.006 (+0.488..+0.499) - [0.0%]
¹ 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.211.pre-release
---------
Variant 1
---------
XGID=-EaB--B------------dbbb-d-:1:-1:1:21:0:0:0:0:10
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 | | 2 |
| | | O O | +---+
| | | O O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X X X | X
| | | X X O X | X X
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 23 O: 75 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 21
1. Rollout¹ 6/3 eq:+0.587
Player: 82.02% (G:1.99% B:0.01%)
Opponent: 17.98% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.004 (+0.583..+0.591) - [100.0%]
2. Rollout¹ 3/Off eq:+0.556 (-0.031)
Player: 79.03% (G:5.99% B:0.06%)
Opponent: 20.97% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.005 (+0.551..+0.561) - [0.0%]
¹ 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.211.pre-release
---------
Variant 2
---------
XGID=-EaB--B---------a--bbbc-d-:1:-1:1:31:0:0:0:0:10
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 | | 2 |
| | | O O | +---+
| | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X X X | X
| | | X X O X | X X
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 23 O: 75 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 31
1. Rollout¹ 6/3 1/Off eq:+0.709
Player: 85.15% (G:6.52% B:0.04%)
Opponent: 14.85% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.004 (+0.706..+0.713) - [100.0%]
2. Rollout¹ 3/Off 1/Off eq:+0.662 (-0.047)
Player: 80.98% (G:11.83% B:0.16%)
Opponent: 19.02% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.006 (+0.656..+0.668) - [0.0%]
3. Rollout¹ 6/5 6/3 eq:+0.658 (-0.051)
Player: 84.13% (G:3.57% B:0.01%)
Opponent: 15.87% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.004 (+0.654..+0.661) - [0.0%]
4. Rollout¹ 3/2* 3/Off eq:+0.617 (-0.092)
Player: 79.35% (G:11.32% B:0.09%)
Opponent: 20.65% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.005 (+0.612..+0.622) - [0.0%]
¹ 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.211.pre-release
---
Tim Chow
Did you cleverly eschew simply bringing your blot from the outfield to the 6pt which would be the normal way to create a variant without also unnecessarily rearranging spares because it didn't fit your bottom line? It could have still fit yournarrative if you took the time to explain it v. the ghetto version of that variant you included, variant #1.
On 12/25/2022 3:22 PM, Stick Rice wrote:narrative if you took the time to explain it v. the ghetto version of that variant you included, variant #1.
Did you cleverly eschew simply bringing your blot from the outfield to the 6pt which would be the normal way to create a variant without also unnecessarily rearranging spares because it didn't fit your bottom line? It could have still fit your
There's no "normal way to create a variant." Keeping the pip count
constant is one principle that is sometimes useful.
And certainly, it was not because "it didn't fit my bottom line."
As you yourself say, it still fits my bottom line. In any case,
I always create variants first and only then try to come up with a
"bottom line." (When I say "always," maybe I should qualify that
by saying at least in the last 8 or 9 years. Before that, I may
have been less disciplined.)
---
Tim Chow
On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 4:58:39 PM UTC-5, Tim Chow wrote:narrative if you took the time to explain it v. the ghetto version of that variant you included, variant #1.
On 12/25/2022 3:22 PM, Stick Rice wrote:
Did you cleverly eschew simply bringing your blot from the outfield to the 6pt which would be the normal way to create a variant without also unnecessarily rearranging spares because it didn't fit your bottom line? It could have still fit your
you think would match? Did you not first originally look at the variant I suggested? I'd find that hard to believe.There's no "normal way to create a variant." Keeping the pip count constant is one principle that is sometimes useful.
And certainly, it was not because "it didn't fit my bottom line."
As you yourself say, it still fits my bottom line. In any case,
I always create variants first and only then try to come up with a
"bottom line." (When I say "always," maybe I should qualify that
by saying at least in the last 8 or 9 years. Before that, I may
have been less disciplined.)
---Of course there's a normal way to create a variant, it's why we often arrive at the same one without consulting. If you were to pick 100 random problems that were posted and asked myself and Nack to pick the most instructive variant how many of them do
Tim Chow
Stick
Of course there's a normal way to create a variant, it's why we often arrive at the same one without consulting. If you were to pick 100 random problems that were posted and asked myself and Nack to pick the most instructive variant how many of themdo you think would match? Did you not first originally look at the variant I suggested? I'd find that hard to believe.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (3 / 13) |
| Uptime: | 13:17:08 |
| Calls: | 6,667 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,214 |
| Messages: | 5,336,512 |