BGonline.org Forums

Kit's article, "Anatomy of a Backgame"

Posted By: Timothy Chow
Date: Thursday, 19 July 2012, at 2:51 p.m.

Does anybody know what the match score was for this game? The one clue is that at one point in the article, Kit states:

It may seem that I have a double here; in fact that maybe I should have been doubling all along. The idea behind this is that in the variations where I lose I am very likely to be gammoned, so why not turn the cube since if I get gammoned it won't matter whether the cube is on 2 or 4.

This means that Scott is either 3-away or 4-away. A few sentences later, Kit says:

If I hit and he flunks, will he then have a pass? Nah. My four point is still open, I still have two men back, and his board is as strong as mine. I might be the favorite, but nowhere near a 3 to 1 favorite. Since he won't have a pass after my best scenario, it can't be right to double.

This makes it sound like the score was 3a/3a. However, it would be nice to have confirmation.

Messages In This Thread

• Kit's article, "Anatomy of a Backgame"
  Timothy Chow -- Thursday, 19 July 2012, at 2:51 p.m.
  • Kit's article, "Anatomy of a Backgame"
    storm -- Thursday, 19 July 2012, at 3:30 p.m.
  • Kit's article, "Anatomy of a Backgame"
    Tom Keith -- Thursday, 19 July 2012, at 5:52 p.m.