| |
BGonline.org Forums
to Stein or Stick (for Stick's opening theory)
Posted By: Timothy Chow In Response To: to Stein or Stick (for Stick's opening theory) (pontiac)
Date: Thursday, 8 December 2011, at 4:00 p.m.
The link is here but you need to be a paying member of Gammon Village to read the article.
What Stick wrote was this:
Rule #8: If on the second roll your opponent rolls double 4s or double 5s and uses the entire roll to make an offensive point do not touch your back checkers on the third roll.
Notice I said back checkers. This means you still have two men back. If you only have one man back it will obviously often be right to run the last checker even if you are behind in the race.
A couple of paragraphs later he wrote:
Exceptions ... maybe there are, maybe there aren't. As far as I know there aren't, not how I mean the rule. That's the toughest part about trying to convey these rules to other people. I know what I mean but actually getting the words to fit the meaning I have for every position is tough. For example, the wording of this rule doesn't explicitly state that on the first roll you didn't move the back checkers thus on the third roll you can't anchor up. I hope you are smart enough to realize that if you split the back checkers and can anchor up you obviously anchor up. I shouldn't have to explain the most obvious things but people like to nitpick. I have written some rules over the years for myself and am always happy to have someone else come along and re-write my rule so that it makes more sense for other people. These rules are also meant to deal with the standard openings. This doesn't include plays such as bringing two men up with an opening 43, 41, or any 6X. This doesn't include any of the other weird misplays I see, only the standard old boring according to the bot best plays.
And of course once you go past the second roll, there are plenty of exceptions, such as this one that I posted here back in May.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.