opening moves
Gerald E Mortensen
splitting the backmen versus bringing down builders or slotting in
the opening. what is the current thinking on these openers
(references? recent article in Inside Backgammon?) (i know what
robertie's books say)
openers (money game, equal opponent -- let's not get into that again!):
3 2 ?
5 2 ?
4 3 ?
4 1 ?
also assume opponent opened with 4 2 and made the 4 point, money
game. how do i play 4 4 ?
any other examples of openings or responses where the "correct" play
has changed recently?
wilfo
--
** Gerald E. Mortensen (Jay) Syracuse Research Corp. ***
** Research Engineer Merrill Lane ***
** (315)426-3269 -- j...@syrres.com Syracuse, NY 13210 ***
Mika Laukkanen
>Path: nokia.fi!news.funet.fi!sunic!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!yeshua.marcam.com!news.kei.com!travelers.mail.cornell.edu!newstand.syr.edu!gmortens
>From: gmor...@newstand.syr.edu (Gerald E Mortensen)
>Newsgroups: rec.games.backgammon
>Subject: opening moves
>Date: 27 Jul 1994 04:11:36 GMT
>Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse NY, USA
>Lines: 24
>Message-ID: <314mpo$2...@newstand.syr.edu>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: gamera.syr.edu
>X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
>i have heard that expert opinion has shifted somewhat with respect to
>splitting the backmen versus bringing down builders or slotting in
>the opening. what is the current thinking on these openers
>(references? recent article in Inside Backgammon?) (i know what
>robertie's books say)
>openers (money game, equal opponent -- let's not get into that again!):
I'm not an expert and i don't know what are the "correct"
openings but i move
>3 2 ? 24-21 13-11 (used to move 13-11 13-10)
>5 2 ? 13-8 13-11 or sometimes 13-8 24-22 (5-5 is a killer)
>4 3 ? 24-20 13-10
>4 1 ? 13-9 24-23 (used to move 13-9 6-5)
Many players in FIBS have changed the opening moves 4-1 (13-9 6-5),
2-1(13-11 6-5) and 5-1(13-8 6-5) to 13-9 24-23, 13-11 24-23 and 13-8 24-23.
The reason is possibly TD's comments in the match between Kit Woolsey
and Jeremy Bagai.
I'd really like to hear expert (like Kit and KG) opinions too.
Magriel's and Robertie's comments would be valuable to hear too, but i guess
they don't play in FIBS (Robertie was there few times but i hasn't seen him
playing).
>also assume opponent opened with 4 2 and made the 4 point, money
>game. how do i play 4 4 ?
I'd play 24-20(2) 13-9(2).
Kent Goudling
that players have started having computers play large numbers of games,
then compare the results based on which play was made with the opening
roll. In most cases, differences are small, but they exist. Other plays
have changed simply because the "top players" decide they like one play
better than another. My personal preferences:
With 32 play 24/21 13/11
With 43 play 24/20 13/10
With 52 play 13/8 13/11
With 21 try either 13/11 6/5 or 13/11 24/23 (don't worry about it.)
With 41 let your imagination run wild, I've been playing 24/20 6/5 lately.
With 51, slot, split, or BIG split (24/18) are all reasonable.
More important than debating which play is based based on which computer
simulation, I strongly suggest players try ALL the different plays. The
experience gained by watching the different ways games unfold is
extremely valuable. Nobody *knows* which play is best in these early
situations. It's a bad idea to accept a play on blind faith without
understanding what is going on. Get in, make the different plays, and
build up a foundation of personal experience which will guide you in the
future.
--KG
Kit Woolsey
: i have heard that expert opinion has shifted somewhat with respect to
: splitting the back men versus bringing down builders or slotting in
: the opening. what is the current thinking on these openers
: (references? recent article in Inside Backgammon?) (i know what
: robertie's books say)
: openers (money game, equal opponent -- let's not get into that again!):
: 3 2 ?
: 5 2 ?
: 4 3 ?
: 4 1 ?
My preferences (all other things being equal) are currently;
3-2: 24/21, 13/11
5-2: 13/11, 13/8
4-3: 24/20, 13/10
4-1: 24/23, 13/9
However, all things are usually not equal. There are several factors to
consider:
1) My opponent. Some opponents have more difficulty playing against a
splitting style, while others will have more difficulty playing against a
slotting and building game. Thus, I may vary my opening plays accordingly.
2) The state of the match. This is very important. The key is that the
player who is ahead in the match wants to avoid gammonish positions since
this gives his opponent more cube leverage. Thus, he is aiming for races
or mutual holding games, so making an advanced anchor has a higher
priority for him than usual. The player who is behind wants to go for
the swingier gammonish positions. For example, let's suppose X is ahead
2 away, 4 away and let's look at the opening roll of 4-3. X should
definitely not play 13/10, 13/9 -- he should make one of the splitting
plays in order to go after his advanced anchor and aim toward a mutual
holding game where gammons aren't so likely and he can make normal use of
the cube. On the other hand if O wins the opening 4-3 roll he should
definitely play 13/10, 13/9. This makes it too dangerous for X to split
the back men, so X will be forced to bring down builders in response and
the game tends toward a priming battle which is what O wants. This makes
more difference than one might think.
3) Your own personal preference. There really isn't much difference
between the various ways to play the opening rolls, so go with what you
like and are comfortable with. Also, try out different things for
learning purposes. Don't get stuck in one style -- experiment. For a
couple of years I was advocating playing an opening 5-2 with 13/8, 6/4.
I now believe this isn't a good idea, but by playing it I generated new
types of positions I hadn't seen before and learned quite a bit.
: also assume opponent opened with 4 2 and made the 4 point, money
: game. how do i play 4 4 ?
Play 24/20(2), 13/9(2). This is usually the best way to play 4-4 in
response to most opening rolls, and against a 4-2 it is very clear.
Locking up the enemy five point cuts down on the value of his having made
your four point, and the nine point gives you a lot of flexibility for
the future. This one isn't close.
: any other examples of openings or responses where the "correct" play
: has changed recently?
As I have said, there often is no "correct" play. You have to decide for
yourself what works for you.
Kit
Robin Davies
>
>i have heard that expert opinion has shifted somewhat with respect to
>splitting the backmen versus bringing down builders or slotting in
>the opening. what is the current thinking on these openers
>(references? recent article in Inside Backgammon?) (i know what
>robertie's books say)
>
An interesting new opening move I've seen a few times on FIBS is
4 1: 24-23 24-20.
I can't remember who I first saw play this opener, but I was so curious
I had to ask. Apparently the machines seem to like this opener because
splits to the golden point, apparently making up for the apparent
awkwardness of 24-23. No further details available.
I've been playing it for awhile, and it certainly seems relatively harmless.
Not sure whether I really like it yet.
Anyone with comments or more info on this?
Robin.