Just another early blitz cube

[Timothy Chow]

XGID=aBB--BB-A-a-eD---b-db---B-:0:0:1:00:0:0:0:0:10

Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X O | | O O X |
| X O | | O O X |
| X | | O |
| X | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| O | O | |
| O | | |
| O | | |
| O | | X X X X |
| O O X | | X X X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 136 O: 155 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X on roll, cube action

---
Tim Chow

[Stick Rice]

There are immediately 15 amazing numbers and in the remaining 21 games he'll dance about 9 times (making any number you rolled the previous turn dandy). So 24 games you're happy as a pig in shit, the rest of the games you're still doing just fine. Seems pretty clear to me.

Stick

[peps...@gmail.com]

After a quick google, this post seems totally inaccurate. Pigs wallow in mud for various good and googlable reasons.
They are mammals just like we are, and they are averse to shit just like we are. Of course, domesticated pigs
may have behaviours that are unnatural because of being exploited by humans. (As a meat-eater, I'm one of the exploiters).

With regard to the play, thanks for immediately stating that the answer to Tim's quiz is D/P only 15 minutes (approx) after
Tim's post, before anyone else has had a chance to think about it. Not all of us are Waltish.

I certainly knew it was a double. I'm not sure whether I would have found the pass or not, but I hope so.
I think a reasonable reference position (or position type) is where, from the opening position, X splits with 62/63/64,
O rolls 55, and X dances. These are very marginal between D/P and D/T. If our position is better than these, it's a pass.
If our position is worse than these, it's a take.

Compared to these reference positions, our board is far stronger but, on the other hand, we have far fewer shots at the other blot.
But also, the reference positions give us two blots to aim at rather than just one.
So the fact that this is D/P tells us that the stronger board here is more important than the increased blottiness in the reference positions.
Not sure if I would have realised that or not (and it doesn't much matter). But I know now.

Paul

[Stick Rice]

You can't believe that when I check rgb I look at the time stamp of other people's posts? I get on when I can, answer if I want. I also make a specific effort not to put something quick that the eyes can catch like "DP" in my analysis so there are no spoilers unless you chose to read my post. It's on you, not me.

Everyone probably knows already as it's pretty common knowledge but in case you don't and you wonder so you don't have to Google "happy as a pig in shit" stems from the less vulgar expression "happy as a pig in mud". Pigs commonly roll around in mud because they have no sweat glands so this allows them to stay cool. That's the short version anyway.

Stick

[peps...@gmail.com]

I had never heard of either the pig-in-mud or pig-in-shit expressions.
Anyway, the reasons pig wallow in mud turn out to be interesting, and there are several of them.

Your point about your post is a reasonable one. I am curious as to whether I would have got this right if you didn't give the answer.
I kind of suspect not, because the fact that we're an underdog to hit immediately weighs quite heavily on me.
But I'll never know whether I would have got it right or not.
But obviously it's not worth worrying about.

Thanks, Stick, for your contributions to this forum and for your services to backgammon more generally.

Paul

[Timothy Chow]

Being on the bar against a four-point board, with another blot
vulnerable to being hit, is obviously not a pleasant situation
to be in, but O has her 5pt made, which typically offers a lot
of protection against an early blitz. However, according to XG,
it's not enough for a take. But see the variant below.

Analyzed in Rollout
No double
Player Winning Chances: 66.18% (G:44.83% B:0.39%)
Opponent Winning Chances: 33.82% (G:8.25% B:0.53%)
Double/Take
Player Winning Chances: 66.38% (G:45.90% B:0.41%)
Opponent Winning Chances: 33.62% (G:8.39% B:0.55%)

Cubeful Equities:
No double: +0.787 (-0.213)
Double/Take: +1.125 (+0.125)
Double/Pass: +1.000

Best Cube action: Double / Pass

Rollout:
1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
Confidence No Double: ± 0.011 (+0.775..+0.798)
Confidence Double: ± 0.019 (+1.106..+1.144)

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.211.pre-release

-------
Variant
-------

XGID=aBB--BB-A-a-dD---c-db---B-:0:0:1:00:0:0:0:0:10

Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X O | | O O X |
| X O | | O O X |

| X O | | O |

| X | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | O | |
| O | | |
| O | | |
| O | | X X X X |
| O O X | | X X X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+

Pip count X: 136 O: 150 X-O: 0-0

Cube: 1
X on roll, cube action

Analyzed in Rollout
No double
Player Winning Chances: 64.15% (G:42.33% B:0.38%)
Opponent Winning Chances: 35.85% (G:8.87% B:0.56%)
Double/Take
Player Winning Chances: 64.46% (G:43.52% B:0.30%)
Opponent Winning Chances: 35.54% (G:9.03% B:0.60%)

Cubeful Equities:
No double: +0.728 (-0.248)
Double/Take: +0.976
Double/Pass: +1.000 (+0.024)

Best Cube action: Double / Take

Rollout:
1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
Confidence No Double: ± 0.009 (+0.719..+0.737)
Confidence Double: ± 0.019 (+0.958..+0.995)

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.211.pre-release

---
Tim Chow

[peps...@gmail.com]

Wow, Tim!

This is by far the best exhibition of variantization I've ever seen in my 42 years of backgammon!!
Clearly, you're a world-class variantizer even though not a world-class player.

Here, the original/variantization difference seems subtle indeed -- just a matter of a transfer from 13 to 8.
It is clear that the variantization is much better for the underdog than the original.

However, I think this kind of exposes Stick's response as being inadequate because Stick's pigs
argument would seem to work to give a (slightly) bad pass in your variantization.

So "seems pretty clear to [Stick]" seems wrong because, if it were indeed "pretty clear", the variantization
would be a pass, too.

And indeed I don't think 0.125 cube errors are all that rare among world-class players.
So I'd be surprised if this position is so clear to Giants.

Paul

[Stick Rice]

The variant is a huge change in the position whether it seems subtle or not. I'll acknowledge that my quippy 30 second replies to things like this certainly don't cover all the details but anyone who has studied early game blitzes knows that a stacked midpoint + stripped 8pt when facing a cube is wildly different than the more even distribution as Tim shows here. It's 5 pips, it's another checker in the zone, it's miles and miles of flexibility/counter play.

Stick

[peps...@gmail.com]

Thanks, Stick for your interesting response.
Clearly you understood correctly that the original position was a clear pass.
So, presumably, without the rollout, you would also have known that the variant was not a clear pass?

Paul

[Stick Rice]

With the variant I'd have tilted my head sideways and thought it was close. Luckily that's all I generally need to know and other factors make the decision quite clear.

Stick

[peps...@gmail.com]

Having watched a lot of the world's best players on youtube, I don't think any human can do better than that.
With Tim's variantization, the best players would just have to take a 50/50 guess at the take/pass decision.
Playing against a fish, it's probably a practical pass for the expert because then you get to start a new game.

Paul

[Stick Rice]

Playing against a fish for money this is a take all day long. Playing against a fish in a match it's a pass all day long.

Stick

[peps...@gmail.com]

Yes, that's correct. In fact, Lionel Richie recently made a new hit -- "All Day Long" where he says the same thing.

Paul