BGonline.org Forums

$ Cube Action?

Posted By: Nack Ballard
Date: Monday, 21 December 2009, at 2:53 a.m.

In Response To: $ Cube Action? (Petter Bengtsson)

Nack: "If White covers with a nine (4 numbers), she doesn't even lose her market..."

Petter: I'm quite sure you should have counted 54 as a running roll and not as a covering roll...

Nack: Sharp of you to notice the option, and I appreciate your feedback, but actually the play of 54 depends on where the cube is. According to Snowie eval (I just checked), if White has redoubled, he should run with 54 (by .112), but if White has NOT redoubled, he should cover with 54 (by .149), as I implied.

In the paragraph you're quoting me, I was breaking down the situations when White does NOT redouble (this loses her market, that doesn't lose her market, etc.) Granted, a complete analysis would need to include how all the rolls are played in both cube positions and create and account for more subcategories as well, but that would require more energy than I wanted to give the explanation (and probably more than most readers would want).

If I had been pointedly addressing the redoubled scenarios, a misplayed 54 would still short-change the redouble by only .112 / 18 = .006 -- it would have little effect on the big picture of the cube decision -- though at least then I could admit to a transgression :)

Nack

Messages In This Thread

• $ Cube Action?
  Michael Depreli -- Sunday, 20 December 2009, at 11:13 a.m.
  • $ Cube Action?
    Leonardo Jerkovic -- Sunday, 20 December 2009, at 2:02 p.m.
    • $ Cube Action?
      Nack Ballard -- Sunday, 20 December 2009, at 5:40 p.m.
      • $ Cube Action?
        Nack Ballard -- Monday, 21 December 2009, at 1:15 a.m.
        • $ Cube Action?
          Leonardo Jerkovic -- Monday, 21 December 2009, at 1:48 a.m.
        • $ Cube Action?
          Petter Bengtsson -- Monday, 21 December 2009, at 1:48 a.m.
          • $ Cube Action?
            Nack Ballard -- Monday, 21 December 2009, at 2:53 a.m.
            • $ Cube Action?
              Petter Bengtsson -- Monday, 21 December 2009, at 3:04 a.m.
              • Largest bot misevaluation
                Nack Ballard -- Monday, 21 December 2009, at 4:32 a.m.
                • 54 play...and its fun to have a fast computer now
                  neilkaz -- Monday, 21 December 2009, at 4:40 a.m.
                  • 54 play...and its fun to have a fast computer now
                    Nack Ballard -- Monday, 21 December 2009, at 4:45 a.m.
                • Would you count something like this?
                  Matt Cohn-Geier -- Monday, 21 December 2009, at 4:53 a.m.
                  • Two categories: (a) checker play, (b) cube
                    Nack Ballard -- Monday, 21 December 2009, at 5:21 a.m.
                • Largest bot misevaluation Bot Data
                  Michael Depreli -- Monday, 21 December 2009, at 7:55 a.m.
                • Largest bot misevaluation
                  Timothy Chow -- Monday, 21 December 2009, at 3:28 p.m.
                  • Largest bot misevaluation
                    Bob Koca -- Wednesday, 23 December 2009, at 4:30 a.m.
    • $ Cube Action?
      neilkaz -- Sunday, 20 December 2009, at 6:39 p.m.
      • $ Cube Action?
        Leonardo Jerkovic -- Sunday, 20 December 2009, at 6:54 p.m.