On Wednesday, July 13, 2022 at 2:35:56 PM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:
XGID=-CaCBBB----------------ba-:1:1:1:43:0:0:0:0:10
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 |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | X X | +---+
| | | X X X X X | | 2 |
| | | X X X X O X | +---+
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 42 O: 28 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, X own cube
X to play 43
---
Tim Chow
When you count the pips with expected wastage, I think we're underdogs but it's hard (for me) to compute this exactly.
So we will need to be somewhat aggressive. I like 6/2* 5/2. This works well if we're hit and we return the hit, and it works well
if the opponent dances.
So it fails 5/9 * 25/36 of the time which ain't that often.
Tim's title makes me wary of it. Would he really create a title which hints at the solution like that? Some kind of double bluff peut-etre?
Stimmt das so?
I'll project a fake air of confidence while backing 6/2* 5/2
If I'm wrong, I hope to see a variantization where my idea works.
Hmmm, maybe the tricksterishness comes from my play being correct but not because of the return hit but because of the dancing parlay.
The dancing variation might be some sort of cube.
I like my play even better now.
Paul
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)