XGID=-ECB------a-c----babbbb--A:1:-1:-1:00:4:0:3:0:10
X:eXtremeGammon O:Daniel

Score is X:0 O:4. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X X | | O O O |
| X | | O O O |
| X | | O O |
| | | O |
| | | O |
| |BAR| |
| | O | |
| | | |
| | | | +---+
| X | | X X X X | | 2 |
| X X | | X X X X | +---+
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 113 O: 42 X-O: 0-4
Cube: 2, X own cube
X on roll, cube action

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

On 10/20/2021 1:51 PM, [email protected] wrote:

XGID=-ECB------a-c----babbbb--A:1:-1:-1:00:4:0:3:0:10
X:eXtremeGammon O:Daniel

Score is X:0 O:4. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X X | | O O O |
| X | | O O O |
| X | | O O |
| | | O |
| | | O |
| |BAR| |
| | O | |
| | | |
| | | | +---+
| X | | X X X X | | 2 |
| X X | | X X X X | +---+
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 113 O: 42 X-O: 0-4
Cube: 2, X own cube
X on roll, cube action

I don't think there's anything like this in Wachtel's books.
He focuses on positions where O has a lot more checkers off.
This one looks like D/P to me. If O were closed out then it
would be a clear D/P. O isn't quite closed out but she doesn't
have a whole lot of slime vig.

A more apropos title might be, "should we wait until XG3 is
out before posting a rollout of this position?"

---
Tim Chow

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

On Thursday, October 21, 2021 at 2:51:51 AM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:

On 10/20/2021 1:51 PM, [email protected] wrote:

XGID=-ECB------a-c----babbbb--A:1:-1:-1:00:4:0:3:0:10
X:eXtremeGammon O:Daniel

Score is X:0 O:4. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X X | | O O O |
| X | | O O O |
| X | | O O |
| | | O |
| | | O |
| |BAR| |
| | O | |
| | | |
| | | | +---+
| X | | X X X X | | 2 |
| X X | | X X X X | +---+
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 113 O: 42 X-O: 0-4
Cube: 2, X own cube
X on roll, cube action

I don't think there's anything like this in Wachtel's books.
He focuses on positions where O has a lot more checkers off.
This one looks like D/P to me. If O were closed out then it
would be a clear D/P. O isn't quite closed out but she doesn't
have a whole lot of slime vig.

A more apropos title might be, "should we wait until XG3 is
out before posting a rollout of this position?"

Yes, I think you're basically right. It rolled out to a 1.044 pass if
I remember correctly, which is broadly in line with your thoughts.
However, when XG gave its analysis before I asked for the rollout,
the verdict was ultra-marginal -- a 1.008 pass.
On that basis, XG was fine with my take although it was a lazy
steamish take on my part, which was partially motivated by a
refusal to give up. Having said that, I would certainly not take something
I knew was a pass -- I just had a psychological bias towards taking.
The fact that XG's initial analysis shows a 1.008 pass means the take might
be reasonable, even at the highest levels of human play.


Paul

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

On October 20, 2021 at 7:51:51 PM UTC-6, Tim Chow wrote:

A more apropos title might be, "should we wait until XG3 is
out before posting a rollout of this position?"

Already much before 2017, I had predicted that there would
never be XG3 and in this old post I had said "so far, so good".

https://groups.google.com/g/rec.games.backgammon/c/t0xygKcfN54/m/A3dPELZ-AQAJ

Four years later, I can still say "so far, so good"...

You may consider waiting for Godot, instead. ;)

MK

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

On 10/22/2021 5:10 AM, MK wrote:

On October 20, 2021 at 7:51:51 PM UTC-6, Tim Chow wrote:

A more apropos title might be, "should we wait until XG3 is
out before posting a rollout of this position?"

Already much before 2017, I had predicted that there would
never be XG3 and in this old post I had said "so far, so good".

https://groups.google.com/g/rec.games.backgammon/c/t0xygKcfN54/m/A3dPELZ-AQAJ

Four years later, I can still say "so far, so good"...

You may consider waiting for Godot, instead. ;)

Or worse, for "Peerless."

---
Tim Chow

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

On October 22, 2021 at 8:13:42 PM UTC-6, Tim Chow wrote:

On 10/22/2021 5:10 AM, MK wrote:

Already much before 2017, I had predicted that there would
never be XG3 and in this old post I had said "so far, so good".
Four years later, I can still say "so far, so good"...
You may consider waiting for Godot, instead. ;)

Or worse, for "Peerless."

Why how worse? Less than 50% 49% of the time??

MK

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

On Saturday, October 23, 2021 at 3:13:42 AM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:

On 10/22/2021 5:10 AM, MK wrote:

On October 20, 2021 at 7:51:51 PM UTC-6, Tim Chow wrote:

A more apropos title might be, "should we wait until XG3 is
out before posting a rollout of this position?"

Already much before 2017, I had predicted that there would
never be XG3 and in this old post I had said "so far, so good".

https://groups.google.com/g/rec.games.backgammon/c/t0xygKcfN54/m/A3dPELZ-AQAJ

Four years later, I can still say "so far, so good"...

You may consider waiting for Godot, instead. ;)

Or worse, for "Peerless."

I am unable to understand this reply, being unfamiliar with the
reference -- "waiting for Peerless" (or whatever reference you are making).
I'd appreciate it if you could give a reference, or make further clarifications to
explain your point.
[Here, I am making the simplifying assumption that improved comprehension
is a good thing.]

Paul

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

On 10/23/2021 7:31 AM, [email protected] wrote:

I am unable to understand this reply, being unfamiliar with the
reference -- "waiting for Peerless" (or whatever reference you are making).

It's a reference to this short piece of fiction:

https://groups.google.com/g/rec.games.backgammon/c/2zco2nEdC1k/m/86LQ6Fr3BAAJ

---
Tim Chow

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

On Sunday, October 24, 2021 at 3:16:51 AM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:

On 10/23/2021 7:31 AM, [email protected] wrote:

I am unable to understand this reply, being unfamiliar with the
reference -- "waiting for Peerless" (or whatever reference you are making).

It's a reference to this short piece of fiction:

https://groups.google.com/g/rec.games.backgammon/c/2zco2nEdC1k/m/86LQ6Fr3BAAJ

Ok, so I have good news and bad news.
The bad news is: I wasted time google-searching many pages for phrases like "waiting for Peerless"
assuming it was a classic reference.
The good news is: The time I wasted was somewhat small and certainly not large enough to deter me
from my goals for that day (approx 5 to 10 minutes).

Paul

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

On October 24, 2021 at 4:18:03 AM UTC-6, [email protected] wrote:

The bad news is: I wasted time google-searching many
pages for phrases like "waiting for Peerless" assuming
it was a classic reference.

Everything classic was once new...

"Peerless" is a misspelling of "PR-less". Try Googling that.

The good news is: The time I wasted was somewhat small
and certainly not large enough to deter me from my goals
for that day (approx 5 to 10 minutes).

Glad you didn't read my "fiction" that Chow was referring to.
That would have taken another 5 to 10 minutes of your life...

MK

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

On 10/20/2021 1:51 PM, [email protected] wrote:

XGID=-ECB------a-c----babbbb--A:1:-1:-1:00:4:0:3:0:10
X:eXtremeGammon O:Daniel

Score is X:0 O:4. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X X | | O O O |
| X | | O O O |
| X | | O O |
| | | O |
| | | O |
| |BAR| |
| | O | |
| | | |
| | | | +---+
| X | | X X X X | | 2 |
| X X | | X X X X | +---+
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 113 O: 42 X-O: 0-4
Cube: 2, X own cube
X on roll, cube action

X makes the seven point with any six or ace or 8 . That's 29 rolls if I
counted right. O has four checkers off and the reference position of
closed out on the board with four off is about 20%. Now, O is not
closed out, but she also has some misses in the bearoff, but it would
seem to me that the escaping chances plus the ~20% chances after being
closed out would be enough to take.

Maybe the possibility of X picking up a second checker tips it into pass territory, but I'd take this. Without liking it very much.

D/T.

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