Breaking contact in a close race
Alan Webb
more or less even and you have the opportunity to break contact from a
holding position here is an example...
Double match point
X to play 6-5
pip count X: 120 O:124
---18-17-16-15-14-13-+
| O X X |
| O X X |
| |
| |
| |
| |[64]
| |
| |
| O |
| O |
| X O |
----7--8--9-10-11-12-+
I've only drawn the outfield here but assume both boards are roughly
distributed the same.
This roll puts me slightly ahead in the race and I can break contact with
16/10 16/11. Now however i am the mercy of the dice and must hope I'll keep
my pip count lead and go on to bear off first. The alternative is of course
13/7 13/8. This does not break contact and is rather defensive in its
holding theme. This kind of decision occurs often and in the various books I
have, I don't believe it is addressed for the occasions when races are
close. Up untill now I've run against stronger players than myself but
stayed against what I perceive to be weaker players. Hardly the optimum
strategy I know :-). In addition I have been comparing boards as I THINK
this is the deciding factor. eg. if my opponent has gaps on his 5 point with
many checkers stacked on the six point I would run IF my distributuion was
better. If on the other hand my bearoff distribution was poor I'd be
inclined to stay. Is this the overriding factor? or is it say, after the
roll if you are xyz pips in front then run if not stay? There are many
instances where you have to decide to run for it and not waste pips at the
expense of an anchor. On most occasions the race standings decide for me
when to run or not but when it is even I go on hunches and have no real idea
apart from what I've outlined above. I'd appreciate it if someone could tell
me exactly what the theme and strategy should be on breaking contact on even
races.
Kind regards
Alan Webb
Webby's Backgammon Site
http://www.isg-vsg.de/backgammon/BGHome.htm
JP White
Alan Webb wrote:
Alan, I'm not sure I have the answer you are looking for. But I am willing to
share with you what I do in situations like these, be it right or wrong.
If the game is important to the match, I would not break contact. Somehow
leaving it all up to the dice to determine the outcome of a match is too much
for me to swallow. I want to have some control.
If it's a game that doesn't make too much difference, I'd run and practice
getting ready to bear off in the best possible way to see how much of an
advantage I can eke out. I have learnt a lot by experimenting with ways to bring
the checkers in. Once I get good at it, maybe I'll be more willing to run in
situations like these, knowing I've got more than just lady luck to depend on.
The strength of your opponent may be of significance. An inexperienced player is
likely to bring his checkers in all wrong, so running may make sense. A better
player will do it well, so maybe hang around for something lucky to happen.
That's my two penneth spent.
--
JP White
Mailto:jp.w...@nashville.com
Donald Kahn
>Kind regards
>
>Alan Webb
>
>Webby's Backgammon Site
>http://www.isg-vsg.de/backgammon/BGHome.htm
>
>
>
Have you given the count correctly (x leads by 4 pips *before* moving
his 6-5)?
Surely no one is going to choose to play a holding game, up 15 pips
after the move.
And even if x were *down* 4 pips instead, I would run. Look at the
outfield after 13/7 13/8. You finish ahead 7 pips, (only just a
little better than even in the race) BUT - where is the guarantee that
YOU are not going to be the one who has to break? You won't be very
happy about that, I think.
dk
VSG
JP White <jp.w...@nashville.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
381CED1E...@nashville.com...
> share with you what I do in situations like these, be it right or wrong.
>
> If the game is important to the match, I would not break contact. Somehow
> leaving it all up to the dice to determine the outcome of a match is too much
> for me to swallow. I want to have some control.
>
> If it's a game that doesn't make too much difference, I'd run and practice
> getting ready to bear off in the best possible way to see how much of an
> advantage I can eke out. I have learnt a lot by experimenting with ways to
bring
> the checkers in. Once I get good at it, maybe I'll be more willing to run in
> situations like these, knowing I've got more than just lady luck to depend on.
>
> The strength of your opponent may be of significance. An inexperienced player
is
> likely to bring his checkers in all wrong, so running may make sense. A better
> player will do it well, so maybe hang around for something lucky to happen.
>
I think this may be the other way round personally. How often is it that you are
playing against a weaker opponent and he/she out rolls you in a race? I tend to
avoid race situations against weaker opponents as the skill factor is diminished
considerably. I'd rather have my weaker opponent not saving 6s and wasting pips
in a mutual holding position. I try to outplay them in other words and not leave
the game up to the dice gods. On the other hand, I don't want to be hanging back
where I can be outmanouevered/played against a stronger opponent. I want to get
myself into a racing position and roll those doubles :-)
I think I over do the "opponent level" strategy in anycase. There must be a
general rule or optimum strategy for playing whoever.
regards
Alan
Hank Youngerman
Allowing for the 4-pip advantage of being on roll, you will be up 11
pips after the roll. That's a sizable advantage. Moreover, your
opponent now has the timing advantage. If anyone is likely to leave a
later shot, it is you.
Why is a contact position here more "skillful" than a non-contact
position? Yes, you may exercise slightly better judgment in deciding
when to run, but realistically he is going to be waiting for a shot,
and you are going to be the one who probably has to leave it.
It seems VERY clear to me to run. Actually, if he rolls badly next
roll (1-2, 2-1, or 3-1, maybe even 4-1 or 3-2) ) you have a double.
On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 22:52:41 +0100, "Alan Webb"
<we...@hannover.sgh-net.de> wrote:
VSG
Hank Youngerman <hankyou...@home.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
381d92ec.39326057@news...
> It seems clear to break here.
>
> Allowing for the 4-pip advantage of being on roll, you will be up 11
> pips after the roll. That's a sizable advantage. Moreover, your
> opponent now has the timing advantage. If anyone is likely to leave a
> later shot, it is you.
>
> Why is a contact position here more "skillful" than a non-contact
> position? Yes, you may exercise slightly better judgment in deciding
> when to run, but realistically he is going to be waiting for a shot,
> and you are going to be the one who probably has to leave it.
>
> It seems VERY clear to me to run. Actually, if he rolls badly next
> roll (1-2, 2-1, or 3-1, maybe even 4-1 or 3-2) ) you have a double.
I realise now that the example wasn't a particular good one due to the clear pip
count advantage after the roll and the timing considerations. What if however
the pip count was even after the roll and both players had no real timing
advantage? Sorry for the misleading original post.
Alan Webb
Chuck Bower
Kit has said many times "if you are ahead in the race, then race. If
you are behind in the race, don't race". As always, there are exceptions,
but you need to be able to recognize the conditions which make breaking the
rule correct.
Although I understand your logic, I have emphasized above something you
said, and I repeat: "(if I break contact...) i am the mercy of the dice..."
Problem is, if you DON'T break contact, you are STILL at the mercy of the
dice. What you've effectively done is made it more likely that the dice
will hurt you AND more likely that your opponent will help you. So you have
bargained for a tradeoff, but did you get the better of the deal??
Chuck
bo...@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu
c_ray on FIBS
Alan Webb
Chuck Bower schrieb in Nachricht <7vkel8$phb$1...@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu>...
I am aware of the strategies when behind or ahead in the race. Nothing has
really been written, from what I know, referring to positions where after a
move is made the race is level. The position I used was not appropriate to
my question and I regret using it as Hank points out it is reasonably clear
to run due to the 11 point (7 point when you consider O is on roll)
difference. I'm referring to positions where the race will be level after
breaking contact. From the posts so far it seems running and breaking
contact is the way to go when races are even and all else being equal.
Daniel Hollis
If I understand you correctly, you're asking "if the race will be even
after I break, should I break or not, given all other timing is
equivilent." And you're really interested in what general factors of
position are tipping the scales towards breaking your point, kinda like a
% rule for doubling in a race.
Since the race and timing comparisions between X and O vary rather
smoothly (as a discrete game goes), it ought to be possible to post a
benchmark position where the decision is about even. Then, if you improve
X's racing position some, it ought to be even better to race. Or, if you
improve O's racing position some, then it ought to be better to stay back.
Such a position should answer your question. I don't have one, though.
I wonder if this benchmark position will depend on how far away the
anchor is. Clearly, a anchor 4 points away is harder to clear than an
anchor 1 point away, and it defends better. However, that means both you
and your opponent's holding games are more powerful -- even when you're
ahead. The anchor position doesn't seem to change whether you actually
want to clear it or not; it just seems to amplify the equities involved in
the holding game. I.e., if holding is correct, it will be more correct
with a anchor further away. Really, though, I'm just guessing here.
Dan
Paul Tanenbaum
"VSG" <vsg...@t-online.de> wrote:
> Hank Youngerman schrieb in im Newsbeitrag: 381d92ec.39326057@news...
> > It seems clear to break here.
> > Allowing for the 4-pip advantage of being on roll, you will be up 11
> > pips after the roll. That's a sizable advantage. Moreover, your
> > opponent now has the timing advantage. If anyone is likely to
> > leave a later shot, it is you.
>
> the clear pip count advantage after the roll and the timing
> considerations. What if however the pip count was even after the roll
> and both players had no real timing advantage?
> Sorry for the misleading original post.
> Alan Webb
> >
> > On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 22:52:41 +0100, "Alan Webb"
> > > pip count is more or less even and you have the opportunity to
> > >
> > >Double match point
> > >X to play 6-5
> > >pip count X: 120 O:124
> > >
> > >---18-17-16-15-14-13-+
> > > | O X X |
> > > | O X X |
> > > | |
> > > | |
> > > | |
> > > | |[64]
> > > | |
> > > | |
> > > | O |
> > > | O |
> > > | X O |
> > >----7--8--9-10-11-12-+
> > >
> > > I've only drawn the outfield here but assume both boards are
> > > roughly distributed the same.
I'm surprised that no one has pointed out the essential principle
in these positions.
If the pip count is equal, then X is effectively 8 pips down. Why?
Assume neither player gets a safe clearing roll. They will play their
other 13 checkers forward, piling up on the lower home board points.
Taking this to the extreme, they each end up with all 13 checkers on
the one points. In that case, it's clear that X is 8 pips behind.
Obviously, this doesn't happen, but the principle still holds: As both
players waste pips playing in their home boards, X gradually falls
behind in the race.
Furthermore, the race is really the important thing here. It's
tempting to consider the possibilities of holding the 16-point and
hitting a shot, but that occurs more seldom as the race gets longer.
I don't know any solid gold rule, but if I'm playing X, rolling a
65, I will clear the 16-point even if I'm slightly behind (say 4 pips)
after the roll. By staying, I'm likely to fall further behind due to
pip wastage.
---
Paul T.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Stein Kulseth
Alan Webb wrote in message <7vki93$cf9$1...@trinity.hannover.sgh-net.de>...
>I am aware of the strategies when behind or ahead in the race. Nothing has
>really been written, from what I know, referring to positions where after a
>move is made the race is level.
Other considerations:
* Is the race *really* level?
eg. do you have an edge in crossovers, better structure, less waste?
Then you may well have the racing edge even if the pip count implies an
even race.
* Where is the cube, and what is likely to happen with the it?
Generally if you have the cube you will want to make small plays that
allows you
to creep slowly up to an efficient double. Conversely if he has the
cube, you
don't mind making big plays that either work or don't, making it
difficult for
him to cube efficiently.
In a level-race holding game this usually transform to your wanting to
run if you
hold the cube. In a straight race cube turn are often quite efficient,
whereas if
you stick to the holding game, your cube turn will often come about
something like:
- he rolls high, and is forced to break his point first. As he now leads
the
race, doubling is not justified, then you hit the shot and lose your
market
by a country mile.
- you roll high, yet because of the growing risk of you leaving the shot
you cannot
yet double. Then you have to leave the shot, he misses, and you lose
your market.
* Who is most likely to leave a shot or will have to play awkwardly to avoid
doing
so?
If this seems to be you, you'd better start running.
* Who faces the better board - and will be hurt more if hit?
Again, this beeing you argues for running.
* Last, *and* least, which type of position is your opponent most likely to
misplay?
Neither racing nor holding positions require high skill, so in both
cases you must
depend on getting the better dice. Yet, there is a penalty for
inflexible play in
both types of games, and if you have reason to believe that your
opponent
mishandles one of them you could take that into consideration.
But correctly assessing what extra equity can be gained from your
opponent's
mistakes is no easy task, and my guess is that you're better off
thinking about
other things.
--
Stein Kulseth
Alan Webb
Stein Kulseth schrieb in Nachricht ...
Thanks for breaking it down Stein. I'd never thought about the cube really.
I've come to the conclusion that several factors need to considered where as
before I pretty much based it on pip count alone and a brief look at both
inner boards. There is obviously more than meets the eye. This game still
continues to fascinate me lol.
When the race is close, in future I will mentally work through your above
factors. Thanks.
Regards
Alan