| |
BGonline.org Forums
Will the real Bob Floyd please stand up
Posted By: Nack Ballard In Response To: Will the real Bob Floyd please stand up (Timothy Chow)
Date: Saturday, 11 March 2017, at 5:12 a.m.
Ah! Thanks (and have a nice trip). I had missed Tom Keith's post linking Bob Floyd's article (until minutes ago I had seen neither that nor Bill Kennedy's article). I finally understand why in another post Tom referred to "Bob Floyd's position (Bill Kennedy's position)" -- he may have been trying to gently correct me.
Evidently, Bob Floyd did not create any such position (though I erroneously attributed one to him, and you erroneously attributed a different one to him!). As far as I can tell, Bob only wrote about it (though very well). I had been keying purely off of the Paul Tanenbaum link in your post that started this whole theoretical discussion -- though I suppose I should share some of the blame by starting the Smith-Jones thread in the first place. :)
Bill Kennedy's Position 1 (the one you called Bob Floyd's position) is similar to Paul Tanenbaum's position (the one he realized he hadn't quite reconstructed exactly that he said Bob Floyd wrote about -- the one I called Bob Floyd's position), and it is similar to your position (the one with both player's 5pts blotted), though with the difference that yours cannot be legally reached. In all three positions, the players have five-point boards.
Having clarified all that (hopefully), Bill Kennedy's "Position 2" (scroll down to his second diagram) has not yet been mentioned in this thread, as far as I know. I'm bringing it up because both sides have FOUR point boards. In reading his article, I got the sense that Bill was trying to achieve a similar effect, but with the odds of fanning reduced from 25/36 to 16/36 each roll. I'd be interested to see anyone's comments on that change or of that part of Bill's article.
The Smith/Jones position takes board strength to the other extreme, in that it is still of the FARE (fan and redouble eternally) ilk, but both players have only a ONE point board. I believe there must be far, far fewer of these positions (that are FARE and can be reached with perfect play) than there are of such positions with stronger boards (which are much easier to reach through decent or perfect play than are blot-spray positions). That's just a closing observation, I'm not trying to make any particular point.
Nack
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.