XGID=-a----E-C---dD--bcAeA---A-:0:0:1:33:0:0:0:0:10

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-+
| X O O X | | O X X |
| X O O | | O |
| X O | | O |
| X | | O |
| | | O |
| |BAR| |
| | | X |
| O | | X |
| O X | | X |
| O X | | X |
| O X | | X O |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 168 O: 148 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X to play 33

---
Tim Chow

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

On Saturday, June 4, 2022 at 4:27:34 PM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:

XGID=-a----E-C---dD--bcAeA---A-:0:0:1:33:0:0:0:0:10

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-+
| X O O X | | O X X |
| X O O | | O |
| X O | | O |
| X | | O |
| | | O |
| |BAR| |
| | | X |
| O | | X |
| O X | | X |
| O X | | X |
| O X | | X O |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 168 O: 148 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X to play 33

Good problem.
Here, we are behind in the pip count but not by very much.
We should definitely play 24/18 to make a very valuable point and
blunt some of the opponent's blitzes. Yes, it does reduce contact somewhat
but the race is close enough that we don't have a desperate need to hit.

I think that no, losing the 8 point to make the 5 point is less of a pay increase
than making a totally new point. I want an inner board point.
24/18 6/3(2).

Paul

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

XGID=-a----E-C---dD--bcAeA---A-:0:0:1:33:0:0:0:0:10

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-+
| X O O X | | O X X |
| X O O | | O |
| X O | | O |
| X | | O |
| | | O |
| |BAR| |
| | | X |
| O | | X |
| O X | | X |
| O X | | X |
| O X | | X O |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 168 O: 148 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X to play 33

The equity difference between the top two plays in the rollout is
relatively small (compared to that of other positions I post here),
but I thought it was worth posting because of Paul's interest in
the issue of breaking the 8pt to make the 5pt. XG approves of
Paul's play of 24/18 6/3(2), though 8/5(2) 6/3(2) is not far
behind. I should also say that when this position arose for me
OTB, the score was 6-away/2-away, and at that score, XG favors
8/5(2) 6/3(2).

1. Rollout¹ 24/18 6/3(2) eq:-0.197
Player: 44.51% (G:9.14% B:0.29%)
Opponent: 55.49% (G:10.87% B:0.39%)
Confidence: ±0.006 (-0.203..-0.190) - [100.0%]

2. Rollout¹ 8/5(2) 6/3(2) eq:-0.227 (-0.030)
Player: 44.56% (G:12.57% B:0.49%)
Opponent: 55.44% (G:16.28% B:1.07%)
Confidence: ±0.008 (-0.235..-0.220) - [0.0%]

3. Rollout² 24/18 13/10(2) eq:-0.259 (-0.062)
Player: 43.71% (G:8.98% B:0.29%)
Opponent: 56.29% (G:12.92% B:0.52%)
Confidence: ±0.013 (-0.272..-0.246) - [0.0%]

4. Rollout² 24/18 8/5(2) eq:-0.285 (-0.088)
Player: 42.40% (G:8.97% B:0.25%)
Opponent: 57.60% (G:11.73% B:0.46%)
Confidence: ±0.013 (-0.299..-0.272) - [0.0%]

¹ 5184 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller

² 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.207.pre-release

----
6a2a
----

XGID=-a----E-C---dD--bcAeA---A-:0:0:1:33:1:5:0:7:10

X:Player 1 O:Player 2
Score is X:1 O:5 7 pt.(s) match.
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X O O X | | O X X |
| X O O | | O |
| X O | | O |
| X | | O |
| | | O |
| |BAR| |
| | | X |
| O | | X |
| O X | | X |
| O X | | X |
| O X | | X O |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 168 O: 148 X-O: 1-5/7
Cube: 1
X to play 33

1. Rollout¹ 8/5(2) 6/3(2) eq:+0.002
Player: 44.90% (G:12.75% B:0.36%)
Opponent: 55.10% (G:17.82% B:2.25%)
Confidence: ±0.007 (-0.005..+0.009) - [100.0%]

2. Rollout¹ 24/18 6/3(2) eq:-0.034 (-0.036)
Player: 44.38% (G:9.78% B:0.24%)
Opponent: 55.62% (G:12.45% B:1.08%)
Confidence: ±0.006 (-0.040..-0.027) - [0.0%]

¹ 5184 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.207.pre-release, MET: Kazaross XG2

---
Tim Chow

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

On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 1:11:14 PM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:

XGID=-a----E-C---dD--bcAeA---A-:0:0:1:33:0:0:0:0:10

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-+
| X O O X | | O X X |
| X O O | | O |
| X O | | O |
| X | | O |
| | | O |
| |BAR| |
| | | X |
| O | | X |
| O X | | X |
| O X | | X |
| O X | | X O |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 168 O: 148 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X to play 33
The equity difference between the top two plays in the rollout is
relatively small (compared to that of other positions I post here),
but I thought it was worth posting because of Paul's interest in
the issue of breaking the 8pt to make the 5pt. XG approves of
Paul's play of 24/18 6/3(2), though 8/5(2) 6/3(2) is not far
behind. I should also say that when this position arose for me
OTB, the score was 6-away/2-away, and at that score, XG favors
8/5(2) 6/3(2).

At 6A 2A, the issue doesn't seem clear enough to me for me to be able
to know what I would have played.
However, I certainly see that 8/5(2) 6/3(2) is a better play at that
score than in the money variantization.
Since we are likely to cube anyway, we don't care that much about losing a gammon,
so the solidity and anti-blitzabilityishness of 24/18 is less attractive.
Also, as significant trailers, the gammon is worth more to us than normal and grabbing
two inner board points makes us more gammonlessnessless (the two "less"'s make a double negative which makes a positive - it's a Rowan Atkinson trick.)

Paul

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