I'm trying to understand why in the below position, where 3/1 2/1 is the right play, why 3/2 3/1 is such a poor play. Is it related to bear off efficiency, to some need to preserve playable 2's behind O's blot, or something about containment of O inthe event of a hit? There must be something pretty routine here that I'm oblivious to.
Bob
XGID=--ABaBBBBBB--a--a-bbbbbb--:0:0:1:21:0:0:3:0:10
Score is X:0 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 O O O O |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| X X 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: 98 O: 96 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X to play 21
1. Rollout¹ 3/1 2/1 eq:+0.569
Player: 67.89% (G:2.14% B:0.04%)
Opponent: 32.11% (G:3.75% B:0.07%)
Confidence: ±0.010 (+0.559..+0.580) - [100.0%]
Duration: 32.0 seconds
2. Rollout¹ 7/6 7/5 eq:+0.530 (-0.040)
Player: 66.48% (G:2.04% B:0.05%)
Opponent: 33.52% (G:3.29% B:0.05%)
Confidence: ±0.014 (+0.516..+0.543) - [0.0%]
Duration: 25.3 seconds
3. Rollout² 3/2 3/1 eq:+0.489 (-0.081)
Player: 64.84% (G:2.31% B:0.05%)
Opponent: 35.16% (G:4.31% B:0.06%)
Confidence: ±0.012 (+0.476..+0.501) - [0.0%]
Duration: 31.3 seconds
I'm trying to understand why in the below position, where 3/1 2/1 is the right play, why 3/2 3/1 is such a poor play. Is it related to bear off efficiency, to some need to preserve playable 2's behind O's blot, or something about containment of O inthe event of a hit? There must be something pretty routine here that I'm oblivious to.
Bob
XGID=--ABaBBBBBB--a--a-bbbbbb--:0:0:1:21:0:0:3:0:10
Score is X:0 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 O O O O |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| X X 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: 98 O: 96 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X to play 21
1. Rollout¹ 3/1 2/1 eq:+0.569
Player: 67.89% (G:2.14% B:0.04%)
Opponent: 32.11% (G:3.75% B:0.07%)
Confidence: ±0.010 (+0.559..+0.580) - [100.0%]
Duration: 32.0 seconds
2. Rollout¹ 7/6 7/5 eq:+0.530 (-0.040)
Player: 66.48% (G:2.04% B:0.05%)
Opponent: 33.52% (G:3.29% B:0.05%)
Confidence: ±0.014 (+0.516..+0.543) - [0.0%]
Duration: 25.3 seconds
3. Rollout² 3/2 3/1 eq:+0.489 (-0.081)
Player: 64.84% (G:2.31% B:0.05%)
Opponent: 35.16% (G:4.31% B:0.06%)
Confidence: ±0.012 (+0.476..+0.501) - [0.0%]
Duration: 31.3 seconds
¹ 646 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
² 643 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10
On Friday, May 12, 2023 at 9:27:46 AM UTC-4, Robert Zimmerman wrote:the event of a hit? There must be something pretty routine here that I'm oblivious to.
I'm trying to understand why in the below position, where 3/1 2/1 is the right play, why 3/2 3/1 is such a poor play. Is it related to bear off efficiency, to some need to preserve playable 2's behind O's blot, or something about containment of O in
Bob
XGID=--ABaBBBBBB--a--a-bbbbbb--:0:0:1:21:0:0:3:0:10
Score is X:0 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 O O O O |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| X X 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: 98 O: 96 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X to play 21
1. Rollout¹ 3/1 2/1 eq:+0.569
Player: 67.89% (G:2.14% B:0.04%)
Opponent: 32.11% (G:3.75% B:0.07%)
Confidence: ±0.010 (+0.559..+0.580) - [100.0%]
Duration: 32.0 seconds
2. Rollout¹ 7/6 7/5 eq:+0.530 (-0.040)
Player: 66.48% (G:2.04% B:0.05%)
Opponent: 33.52% (G:3.29% B:0.05%)
Confidence: ±0.014 (+0.516..+0.543) - [0.0%]
Duration: 25.3 seconds
3. Rollout² 3/2 3/1 eq:+0.489 (-0.081)
Player: 64.84% (G:2.31% B:0.05%)
Opponent: 35.16% (G:4.31% B:0.06%)
Confidence: ±0.012 (+0.476..+0.501) - [0.0%]
Duration: 31.3 seconds
¹ 646 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
² 643 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
Also more numbers can do this if the blot is closer to all your other checkers.eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10Turn the cube.
It's about how your board is often constructed over the next rolls. By that I mean do you want your hit and cover numbers/your doubles to make the 3pt leaving the 4pt and 2pt open or do you want them to make the ace point leaving the 4pt and 3pt open.
Stick
On Friday, May 12, 2023 at 4:52:20 PM UTC-4, peps...@gmail.com wrote:in the event of a hit? There must be something pretty routine here that I'm oblivious to.
On Friday, May 12, 2023 at 9:13:21 PM UTC+1, Stick Rice wrote:
On Friday, May 12, 2023 at 9:27:46 AM UTC-4, Robert Zimmerman wrote:
I'm trying to understand why in the below position, where 3/1 2/1 is the right play, why 3/2 3/1 is such a poor play. Is it related to bear off efficiency, to some need to preserve playable 2's behind O's blot, or something about containment of O
Bob
XGID=--ABaBBBBBB--a--a-bbbbbb--:0:0:1:21:0:0:3:0:10
Score is X:0 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 O O O O |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| X X 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: 98 O: 96 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X to play 21
1. Rollout¹ 3/1 2/1 eq:+0.569
Player: 67.89% (G:2.14% B:0.04%)
Opponent: 32.11% (G:3.75% B:0.07%)
Confidence: ±0.010 (+0.559..+0.580) - [100.0%]
Duration: 32.0 seconds
2. Rollout¹ 7/6 7/5 eq:+0.530 (-0.040)
Player: 66.48% (G:2.04% B:0.05%)
Opponent: 33.52% (G:3.29% B:0.05%)
Confidence: ±0.014 (+0.516..+0.543) - [0.0%]
Duration: 25.3 seconds
3. Rollout² 3/2 3/1 eq:+0.489 (-0.081)
Player: 64.84% (G:2.31% B:0.05%)
Opponent: 35.16% (G:4.31% B:0.06%)
Confidence: ±0.012 (+0.476..+0.501) - [0.0%]
Duration: 31.3 seconds
¹ 646 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
² 643 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
open. Also more numbers can do this if the blot is closer to all your other checkers.eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10Turn the cube.
It's about how your board is often constructed over the next rolls. By that I mean do you want your hit and cover numbers/your doubles to make the 3pt leaving the 4pt and 2pt open or do you want them to make the ace point leaving the 4pt and 3pt
StickThis is exactly the same point I made.
PaulI think it was synchronicity, judging by the time stamps.
On Friday, May 12, 2023 at 9:13:21 PM UTC+1, Stick Rice wrote:in the event of a hit? There must be something pretty routine here that I'm oblivious to.
On Friday, May 12, 2023 at 9:27:46 AM UTC-4, Robert Zimmerman wrote:
I'm trying to understand why in the below position, where 3/1 2/1 is the right play, why 3/2 3/1 is such a poor play. Is it related to bear off efficiency, to some need to preserve playable 2's behind O's blot, or something about containment of O
Bob
XGID=--ABaBBBBBB--a--a-bbbbbb--:0:0:1:21:0:0:3:0:10
Score is X:0 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 O O O O |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| X X 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: 98 O: 96 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X to play 21
1. Rollout¹ 3/1 2/1 eq:+0.569
Player: 67.89% (G:2.14% B:0.04%)
Opponent: 32.11% (G:3.75% B:0.07%)
Confidence: ±0.010 (+0.559..+0.580) - [100.0%]
Duration: 32.0 seconds
2. Rollout¹ 7/6 7/5 eq:+0.530 (-0.040)
Player: 66.48% (G:2.04% B:0.05%)
Opponent: 33.52% (G:3.29% B:0.05%)
Confidence: ±0.014 (+0.516..+0.543) - [0.0%]
Duration: 25.3 seconds
3. Rollout² 3/2 3/1 eq:+0.489 (-0.081)
Player: 64.84% (G:2.31% B:0.05%)
Opponent: 35.16% (G:4.31% B:0.06%)
Confidence: ±0.012 (+0.476..+0.501) - [0.0%]
Duration: 31.3 seconds
¹ 646 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
² 643 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
Also more numbers can do this if the blot is closer to all your other checkers.eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10Turn the cube.
It's about how your board is often constructed over the next rolls. By that I mean do you want your hit and cover numbers/your doubles to make the 3pt leaving the 4pt and 2pt open or do you want them to make the ace point leaving the 4pt and 3pt open.
I think it was synchronicity, judging by the time stamps.StickThis is exactly the same point I made.
Paul
I'm trying to understand why in the below position, where 3/1 2/1 is the right play, why 3/2 3/1 is such a poor play. Is it related to bear off efficiency, to some need to preserve playable 2's behind O's blot, or something about containment of O inthe event of a hit? There must be something pretty routine here that I'm oblivious to.
Usually, a blot on the 1pt is harder to cover than....
I'm trying to understand why in the below position,
where 3/1 2/1 is the right play, why 3/2 3/1 is such
a poor play.....
XGID=--ABaBBBBBB--a--a-bbbbbb--:0:0:1:21:0:0:3:0:10
X to play 21
1. Rollout¹ 3/1 2/1 eq:+0.569
2. Rollout¹ 7/6 7/5 eq:+0.530 (-0.040)
3. Rollout² 3/2 3/1 eq:+0.489 (-0.081)
On May 13, 2023 at 7:59:56 AM UTC-6, Timothy Chow wrote:...
Usually, a blot on the 1pt is harder to cover than....
This is a combined response to what Paul, Stick
and you have said about 3/1 2/1 vs 3/2 3/1. You
all are somewhat right in your arguments but all
of you three are also wrong about what the right
play is because you all focus on 3/1 2/1 being
the best play just because the bots say so.
On Tuesday, May 16, 2023 at 11:32:15 AM UTC+1, MK wrote:
... you three are also wrong about what the right
play is because you all focus on 3/1 2/1 being
the best play just because the bots say so.
It's "because the bots say so and the world's best
bg players are bots."
On May 16, 2023 at 6:16:37 AM UTC-6, peps...@gmail.com wrote:...
On Tuesday, May 16, 2023 at 11:32:15 AM UTC+1, MK wrote:I understand that you are not objecting to what I said
... you three are also wrong about what the rightIt's "because the bots say so and the world's best
play is because you all focus on 3/1 2/1 being
the best play just because the bots say so.
bg players are bots."
but to how I said it. Feel free to clarify if not so.
I didn't mean that you all have no reasons to believe
what the bots say. However your trust in the bots is
unfounded, undeserved. There has never been any
empirical evidence establishing bots as the world's
best bg players.
On Wednesday, May 17, 2023 at 8:51:37 AM UTC+1, MK wrote:
I didn't mean that you all have no reasons to believe
what the bots say. However your trust in the bots is
unfounded, undeserved. There has never been any
empirical evidence establishing bots as the world's
best bg players.
I don't have time to substantiate this fully,
but there is strong empirical evidence that
bots are the world's best bg players.
On May 17, 2023 at 4:58:04 AM UTC-6, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, May 17, 2023 at 8:51:37 AM UTC+1, MK wrote:
"Partially" would be good enough to start withI didn't mean that you all have no reasons to believeI don't have time to substantiate this fully,
what the bots say. However your trust in the bots is
unfounded, undeserved. There has never been any
empirical evidence establishing bots as the world's
best bg players.
if you could spare time for that much.
On May 18, 2023 at 1:51:25 AM UTC+1, MK wrote:
On May 17, 2023 at 4:58:04 AM UTC-6, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't have time to substantiate this fully,
"Partially" would be good enough to start with
if you could spare time for that much.
I can't spare time for that much.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 297 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 15:43:14 |
Calls: | 6,667 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 12,216 |
Messages: | 5,336,693 |