[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums

OLM 20160220A The Prime Factors Consultation

Posted By: Chuck Bower
Date: Saturday, 20 February 2016, at 2:32 p.m.

In Response To: OLM 20160220A The Prime Factors Consultation (Jason Lee)

(Just cut and pasted from the earlier thread where Casper and I started our consultation discussion earlier today.)

I'm pretty busy the next couple days and may otherwise miss the consultation discussion so here are my 2 cents:

I think a good RoT (maybe in Stick's article?) is this: "if you're not going to cover a blot on the acepoint in a contact game then don't put it there in the first place." So you need a very good reason to shun the cover when you get the chance. 24 pips don't grow on trees. This is 2016, not 1976. Sure, we would rather cover with a 5 and not strip the 8-point, but waiting a roll (or longer) for the perfect cover roll isn't worth it, IMO.

What roll would have caused me not to cover (when it was possible)? {33,44} for sure, and maybe 53. Probably not even 66.

Looking at the plays which received votes, I prefer Dan's double split as my second choice (but I'm sure it won't get much support now). I think that gives us the best chance to make an advanced anchor if things go awry. 24/20, 13/10 looks pure and duplicatish, but it's too late for purity and no need to duplicate if we just minimize our blots rather than creating four of them. The 10-point checker may look like a safe builder but it turns into an unsafe target quite often, after a roll or two.

8/1

Messages In This Thread

 

Post Response
Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:
Subject:
Message:

If necessary, enter your password below:

Password:
 

 

[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.