| |
BGonline.org Forums
Rollout
Posted By: Nack Ballard In Response To: Rollout (Timothy Chow)
Date: Thursday, 7 January 2010, at 9:31 p.m.
Nack Ballard wrote:
"Every time I look at candidate plays hitting on the 7pt+1pt or 7pt+5pt [sic] with three of the fours they seem to end up weaker than they first appear."
Is there a typo in what you wrote here? In this position, the hits were on the 5pt and the 1pt.
Thanks, good catch. Yes, I meant "...7pt+1pt or 5pt+1pt..."
Here I would also have double-hit. I knew that in several analogous opening positions it was right to make the 5-point, but here I thought that the 10th checker in the zone plus the made 4-point would have tipped the balance in favor of the double hit. Perhaps if the defender's position is weakened further, by changing the outfield point into an outfield blot, the double-hit becomes stronger still?
Yes, I have no doubt that K (13/5*/1* 8/4) would considerably gain relative to P (Point, 13/5*(2)), as you suspect.
However, K might not gain versus y (y-split, 24/20(2) 13/9 8/4), because it is stronger to anchor against a blot than against a point. Seems like a close call on the tradeoff.
That is, both K and y would gain significantly and likely overtake P, but probably stay close relative to each other. (All three plays will gain in an absolute sense, of course.)
If you like, you could test this by rolling out 21U-54H-52S-44 (P, K and y). It's the same position but with Opp's 11pt blot uncovered. Too bad 21U isn't a standard opening play, but it would give you more to go on than my speculation alone.
32S-54H-52P-44 [P K26 y31] 5k (XG, rolled by Stick)
21U-54H-52S-44 [??????????] ?k (??, rolled by Tim)Just a suggestion :)
Nack
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.