Crawford game Hit or not?

[Walt]

XGID=-aBBCBBB-----A---bbbdcaA--:0:0:1:51:4:2:1:5:10

X:X O:O
Score is X:4 O:2 5 pt.(s) match.
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X O O | | O O O O X |
| O O | | O O O |
| | | O O |
| | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | X |
| X | | X X X X X |
| X | | X X X X X O |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 94 O: 101 X-O: 4-2/5 Crawford
Cube: 1
X to play 51

[Tim Chow]

I'm sure I'd play 23/22* 13/8 OTB without much thought. But let's
think about it a bit. Hitting means that O will either anchor on the
ace point, or dance for a while and hold her prime. Either way O has
chances. If we don't hit, then presumably we play 13/7 or 13/8 4/3.
O will then have to move forwards, and perhaps crunch while we hold
our six-prime. Since it's Crawford, and we don't care about winning a
gammon, maybe we shouldn't hit?

I think this reasoning is spurious. If we don't hit, we could still
lose the priming battle. We're not at the edge of O's prime and we're
almost out of time ourselves. If we hit then we have quite a bit of
time to roll our escaping 6. It's true that O will have some chances
to play an ace-point game, but an ace-point game is no bargain.

---
Tim Chow

[badgolferman]

23/21*, 7/2. I hope real hard for a 6 on the next roll.

[Bradley K. Sherman]

Walt <walt_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> | X O O | | O O O O X |
> | O O | | O O O |
> | | | O O |
> | | | O |
> | | | |
> | |BAR| |
> | | | |
> | | | |
> | | | X |
> | X | | X X X X X |
> | X | | X X X X X O |
> +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+

>Pip count X: 94 O: 101 X-O: 4-2/5, Cube: 1, X to play 51

Good problem. I would hit:
23/22*,13/8

--bks

[Paul]

Tim,

I think you find the reasoning more specious than spurious. I don't
find the reasoning either specious or spurious. I would use another
word -- "correct".

I would also hit over the board, but even if you don't use QF, hitting
seems obviously wrong given the benefits of being asked to think
carefully about the position.
If you hit, it's a massive (though less than 50%) parlay that you
crunch while waiting for your non-appearing 6. And even if you get the
6, you have O's acepoint game to contend with.

I think it's a much safer plan to play 13/7 (positionally more
attractive than 13/8 4/3) and wait for O to crunch.

You are correct that this plan is unlikely to preserve X's full prime
for very long. However, when X fails to preserve the full prime,
there are many strong variations for X involving hitting loose on the
ace.

X is not an overwhelming favourite, merely a clear favourite. So no
plan exists which makes a win for X nearly certain. However, my plan
is much less likely to lose than yours is.

Paul Epstein

[Neil Kazaross]

On May 17, 7:53 pm, "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolfer...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> 23/21*, 7/2.  I hope real hard for a 6 on the next roll.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Hitting is an absolute must here as you have considerably more risk to
lose the priming battle if you don't hit, but playing 7/2 after
hitting is a huge mistake as it needlessly allows counter attacking
jokers from the bar. This is much more important than gaining a couple
more rolls to make a close out next turn. 23/22x 13/8 is clear.

[Walt]

I should have been guided by Stick's aphorism - at DMP, hit first and
ask questions later. Instead I talked myself into not hitting, thinking
that I could win the timing battle with O crunching before me.

XG 3 ply rollout says eschewing the hit is a double whopper with cheese.

Timing is important here, and X doesn't have nearly enough to win the
crunch race. Move the spare on the four back to the 16 and shift O's
spares on the 20 to the 21 and not hitting becomes correct, but by a
very slim margin.

//Walt
-

XGID=-aBBCBBB-----A---bbbdcaA--:0:0:1:51:4:2:1:5:10

X:Player 1 O:Player 2

Score is X:4 O:2 5 pt.(s) match.
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X O O | | O O O O X |
| O O | | O O O |
| | | O O |
| | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | X |
| X | | X X X X X |
| X | | X X X X X O |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 94 O: 101 X-O: 4-2/5 Crawford
Cube: 1
X to play 51

1. Rollout� 23/22* 13/8 eq:+0.512
Player: 75.78% (G:32.25% B:4.10%)
Opponent: 24.22% (G:2.48% B:0.11%)
Confidence: �0.005 (+0.508..+0.517) - [100.0%]
Duration: 4 minutes 08 seconds

2. Rollout� 23/22* 7/2 eq:+0.402 (-0.110)
Player: 70.47% (G:30.66% B:2.96%)
Opponent: 29.53% (G:4.76% B:0.23%)
Confidence: �0.004 (+0.398..+0.406) - [0.0%]
Duration: 3 minutes 18 seconds

3. Rollout� 13/7 eq:+0.261 (-0.251)
Player: 63.39% (G:18.70% B:1.22%)
Opponent: 36.61% (G:5.20% B:0.18%)
Confidence: �0.004 (+0.257..+0.266) - [0.0%]
Duration: 3 minutes 05 seconds

4. 2-ply 13/8 4/3 eq:+0.243 (-0.269)
Player: 62.48% (G:12.05% B:0.55%)
Opponent: 37.52% (G:4.00% B:0.22%)

5. 1-ply 7/1* eq:+0.049 (-0.463)
Player: 53.82% (G:20.52% B:0.32%)
Opponent: 46.18% (G:12.73% B:1.02%)


� 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller


eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.03, MET: Kazaross XG2

[badgolferman]

You are correct. I did not see the X sitting on 18 when I wrote that
post. In retrospect I would have played that.