Gammonfever BG Quiz - Position #8
Micke Nilsson
Money session. Score X-O: 0-0
O on roll, cube action
+-1--2--3--4--5--6--------7--8--9-10-11-12-+
| X X O O O | | O X |
| O O O | | X |
| O | | X | S
| O | | X | n
| | | | o
| |BAR| | w
| | O | | i
| | | O | e
| X | | O |
| X X | | X O |
| O X X X | | X X O |
+24-23-22-21-20-19-------18-17-16-15-14-13-+
Pipcount X: 152 O: 151 X-O: 0-0/Money (1)
CubeValue: 1
Grunty
17 hits on the other side of the board, and many inner hits.
A much stronger home board.
O has a powerful double, and X a hard take.
paulde...@att.net
develop a strong board quickly. It's not a very volatile position and
so it's hard to justify my point by concrete variations. But my
intuition is that X doesn't get the 25% equity necessary to take.
Paul Epstein
David C. Ullrich
wrote:
>A very gammonish position.
>17 hits on the other side of the board, and many inner hits.
My guess is also that it's a double and maybe a drop.
But I don't think these numbers are quite right.
I count 18 shots that send a third man back (eleven twos
plus 11, 41, 51, 56) but fewer than "many" inner-board
hits because of the duplication - the only _extra_
inner-board shots are 44, 55, 45 and 46). Maybe five
is "many"?
Of course O missing is not the same as X winning,
and those 18 shots are indeed gammonish - could
well be a drop(?)
>A much stronger home board.
>O has a powerful double, and X a hard take.
************************
David C. Ullrich
paulde...@att.net
Two points: You listed six inner board hits but gave the number as
"five". I assume it's a simple typo but it's possible that you think
one of the hits should not be counted for some reason.
If Grunty is considering only the next-roll situation, then no, I don't
think five or six is "many". The equity comes from hitting and not
being hit back. Since hitting in the inner board is not all that
devastating, the equity from this source is not so great.
However, I don't think Grunty said or implied "on the next roll." In
many variations, O threatens to hit in the inner board in subsequent
rolls.
As before, my verdict is double and marginal pass. "Maybe a drop" is a
bit vague. I would be interested in your opinion on if it is actually
a drop. In other words, what would you do if offered the cube?
Paul
Philippe Michel
Double and take.
O has quite a lot of hitting rolls, some big market losers (mostly when
he hits and X dances) and nothing really bad can happen to him (even
staying on the bar is far from fatal). He should double now.
On the other hand, O has only a 3-points board and if X is hit on his 2pt,
he is a favorite to anchor immediatly. If he doesn't spend too much time
on the bar, his position will be very sound (X is very unlikely to be
primed, O still has 2 men to escape and if he manages that, his barren
outfield could lead to a tricky bearin). Quite a lot of X losses will be
gammons -- that's annoying but not enough to pass. Last but not least, O
is on the bar and if his 4 dancing rolls are not fatal, they certainly
turn the tables. The take looks comfortable.
Grunty
> However, I don't think Grunty said or implied "on the next roll." In
> many variations, O threatens to hit in the inner board in subsequent
> rolls.
>
> > fewer than "many" inner-board
> > hits because of the duplication - the only _extra_
> > inner-board shots are 44, 55, 45 and 46). Maybe five
> > is "many"?
Paul,
To be honest, I meant on *that* roll. Actually, I didn't bother about
counting the inner hits. Strictly speaking I'd have said "several".
Nonetheless, let's add the 16 to David's list, making it 8 rolls. This
is "many" rolls to me (almost 25%), to be indirect shots.
Furthermore, let's add up the extra power of double hits: 22, 24, 25
and 26. In some sense, these rolls may be thought as worth some extra
hits, not in quantity but in quality (equity).
All in all, I *feel* them as "many" :-)
Grunty
> The take looks comfortable.
Man, you certainly don't suffer claustrophobia.
Peter Schneider
"Grunty" wrote
> Philippe Michel wrote:
> > The take looks comfortable.
>
> Man, you certainly don't suffer claustrophobia.
Nor do I. Philippe summed up quite nicely. I'd like to add that x is not
behind in the race -- if 0 fails to hit the checker on 23, O will often face
an uncomfortably close race. And even *if* s/he hits, x may still just win a
race!
(And now that I have shown in public how bad my cube action is, I'll go and
ask the bot ;-). )
Regards,
Peter/the juggler on fibs
Grunty
> Nor do I.
I also think it's a take. I just don't think it's "comfortable".
> if 0 fails to hit the checker on 23, O will often face
> an uncomfortably close race.
I didn't mention the race because imo, it isn't a heavy feature in the
current position. It will become important only when X:
1. avoid being hit anywhere
2. be able to jump his 2 checkers out
3. avoid being hit anywhere
4. put together his overextended homeboard.
All this just to keep the race close. I wouldn't call this "O often
facing an uncomfortably close race".
> And even *if* s/he hits, x may still just win a race!
Sure, that things do happen. The question is how often.
Philippe Michel
Why should you be overly worried ? O only has a 3pts board. X has no man
on the bar, O does.
If it were after some kind of "standard" blitz (you point on his split
backmen, he enters, you hit loose, he hits back), one would think that the
blitz is looking like it is about to fail.
Here O is better than usual with his 4,5 and 6pts and 2 loose blots to
shoot at, but not overwhelmingly better. His forward position is awkward
if the game becomes positional (which it probably will if O misses or if X
enters quickly when hit). Just a made 8pt instead of a blot there would
probably make a big difference.
Grunty
this a take.
I just say it's not a "comfortable" one, because of the much stronger
board in face of the hitting battle likely to come.
David C. Ullrich
>David
>
>Two points: You listed six inner board hits but gave the number as
>"five". I assume it's a simple typo but it's possible that you think
>one of the hits should not be counted for some reason.
At first there were only five on the list - when I added the
sixth one I failed to update the "five" to "six".
>If Grunty is considering only the next-roll situation, then no, I don't
>think five or six is "many". The equity comes from hitting and not
>being hit back. Since hitting in the inner board is not all that
>devastating, the equity from this source is not so great.
>
>However, I don't think Grunty said or implied "on the next roll." In
>many variations, O threatens to hit in the inner board in subsequent
>rolls.
>
>As before, my verdict is double and marginal pass. "Maybe a drop" is a
>bit vague. I would be interested in your opinion on if it is actually
>a drop.
I have no idea - if I had an opinion I would have said what it was.
>In other words, what would you do if offered the cube?
Not really the same question at all - if offered the cube saying
"I don't know whether this is a take" is not an option.
Probably I'd mutter that I wish I knew how to play this game,
then I think I'd probably take.
>Paul
>
>David C. Ullrich wrote:
>> On 17 Sep 2005 14:20:07 -0700, "Grunty" <grunti...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >A very gammonish position.
>> >17 hits on the other side of the board, and many inner hits.
>>
>> My guess is also that it's a double and maybe a drop.
>> But I don't think these numbers are quite right.
>>
>> I count 18 shots that send a third man back (eleven twos
>> plus 11, 41, 51, 56) but fewer than "many" inner-board
>> hits because of the duplication - the only _extra_
>> inner-board shots are 44, 55, 45 and 46). Maybe five
>> is "many"?
>>
>> Of course O missing is not the same as X winning,
>> and those 18 shots are indeed gammonish - could
>> well be a drop(?)
>>
>> >A much stronger home board.
>> >O has a powerful double, and X a hard take.
>>
>>
>> ************************
>>
>> David C. Ullrich
************************
David C. Ullrich
Micke Nilsson
thought and that it's only a marginal double and certainly that X is in much
better shape than most gave X credit for. It's actually a huge blunder to
drop this double...
/Micke
3-ply instant evaluation:
Money session. Score X-O: 0-0
O on roll, cube action
+-1--2--3--4--5--6--------7--8--9-10-11-12-+
| X X O O O | | O X |
| O O O | | X |
| O | | X | S
| O | | X | n
| | | | o
| |BAR| | w
| | O | | i
| | | O | e
| X | | O |
| X X | | X O |
| O X X X | | X X O |
+24-23-22-21-20-19-------18-17-16-15-14-13-+
Pipcount X: 152 O: 151 X-O: 0-0/Money (1)
CubeValue: 1
3-Ply Money equity: 0,458
2,1% 29,3% 63,2% 36,8% 11,2% 0,7%
1. Double, take 0,648
2. No double 0,605 (-0,043)
3. Double, pass 1,000 (+0,352)
Proper cube action: Double, take
------------------------------ End ----------------------------------
Money session. Score X-O: 0-0
O on roll, cube action
+-1--2--3--4--5--6--------7--8--9-10-11-12-+
| X X O O O | | O X |
| O O O | | X |
| O | | X | S
| O | | X | n
| | | | o
| |BAR| | w
| | O | | i
| | | O | e
| X | | O |
| X X | | X O |
| O X X X | | X X O |
+24-23-22-21-20-19-------18-17-16-15-14-13-+
Pipcount X: 152 O: 151 X-O: 0-0/Money (1)
CubeValue: 1
Rollout Money equity: 0,475
2,8% 28,7% 63,2% 36,8% 10,1% 0,4%
95% confidence interval:
- money cubeless eq.: 0,475 ą0,028,
- live cube no double: 0,656 ą0,047,
- live cube double take: 0,682 ą0,062.
Rollout settings:
Full rollout,
324 games (equiv. 7618 games),
played 3-ply (standard), cube 3-ply,
settlement 0,550 at 16 pts,
seed 1, without race database.
Evaluations
1. Double, take 0,682
2. No double 0,624 (-0,058)
3. Double, pass 1,000 (+0,318)
Proper cube action: Double, take
Live cube
1. Double, take 0,682
2. No double 0,656 (-0,026)
3. Double, pass 1,000 (+0,318)
Proper cube action: Double, take
------------------------------ End ----------------------------------