| |
BGonline.org Forums
Novi Lecture Help
Posted By: Phil Simborg In Response To: Novi Lecture Help (Michael)
Date: Thursday, 29 June 2017, at 12:05 p.m.
The approach you describe is more in line with Woolsey's Law, which both John and I still strongly advocate and which, I have seen, most Giants use almost religiously.
Most of the time I show a difficult cube position to a Giant I will hear them first consider whether or not the taker will take the cube, and, according to Woolsey's Law, they often make their doubling decision based on that. If they think it is a pass, then for sure it is a double, unless you are too good to double. If they are not sure whether it is a take or pass, then again, you should double. It is when you are sure it is a take that we then go to O'Hagan's Law to help determine if you lose your market enough to give the cube.
I also coined a term I call Reverse Woolsey's Law, and I got Kit's permission to give it that name. If you are doubled but you are not sure you would have cubed, then for sure you should take. (Unless, again, the reason you aren't sure you should cube was because it might be too good.)
Again, there are types of games where it is probably more effective not to use O'Hagan's Law but instead use reference positions (blitzes and back games, for example) to decide if you should double, or another tool or formula (The Rule of Four, by Grant Hoffman, for high holding games, or racing formulas in races).
And of course, everything must be tempered by match score considerations where take points and gammon values and recube vig must be taken into account.
Lastly, there is the human factor, which we do teach, but only after the student first learns the approach against a player we assume will make the right decision.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.