On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 2:53:35 AM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:
On 8/19/2022 10:44 AM, [email protected] wrote:
Can't speak for anyone else. But I would request the XGID. That's what I would do.
Sorry, that was an unintentional cut-and-paste error.
XGID=aBAB-BC-----cA-b-cBc-c-AA-:0:0:1:63:0:0:0:0:10
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 O X X |
| O O X | | O O |
| O | | O O |
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | O | |
| | | |
| O | | X |
| O | | X X X X |
| O | | X X X X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 134 O: 138 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X to play 63
Essentially, I'm Walting here.
I did read ah..Clem's post but I took care not to read it,
until I'd made my own decision.
I agree with ah...Clem's post (on the whole), and am making the same play.
A few other (banal) comments of my own:
This looks too easy to be true [but "looks" is the operative word], and I can't find another candidate.
Maybe 13/4 or 24/18 13/10 but they both look a bit Trumpian.
The way I see it is that 13/7 is essential as an extra cover for the 2 and then we only have one sensible 3 (23/20)
I disagree that a desire to slot the GP is a big part of it -- it's just that 13/7 is essential and that's the only 3 that doesn't
ruin our position.
I wonder if this is an anti-QF problem or if XG comes up with a blinder here.
Paul
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)