BGonline.org Forums

32 response to 63 split

Posted By: fomalhaut
Date: Friday, 18 February 2011, at 2:04 p.m.

While piling through the responses listed on this site, the parlay mentioned in the subject line (W:24/18 13/10 B:24/21 6/4?) was one of the ones in particular that really stood out. The duplication of threes seems spurious at best and it looks entirely too big; a minor split here seems preferable. (Is coming under the gun to challenge the blot on the 15pt compulsory, or reckless?) Also, aren't split & slot plays—especially ones so diversified for your opponent as this—one of the cardinal sins of backgammon?

Even as an intermediate player I have little trouble seeing sensible patterns in most all of the opening sequences; however this play still leaves me unsettled. Until a more insightful player than I can illustrate the reasoning behind it, I know I would have a hard time making it over the board.

Messages In This Thread

• 32 response to 63 split
  fomalhaut -- Friday, 18 February 2011, at 2:04 p.m.
  • 63S-32W
    Paul Weaver -- Friday, 18 February 2011, at 3:52 p.m.
    • 63S-32W
      Stick -- Friday, 18 February 2011, at 3:59 p.m.
    • 63S-32W
      fomalhaut -- Friday, 18 February 2011, at 4:10 p.m.
      • Another wild position: 52D-43D-43
        Timothy Chow -- Friday, 18 February 2011, at 11:55 p.m.
        • Another wild position: 52D-43D-43
          fomalhaut -- Saturday, 19 February 2011, at 12:21 a.m.
        • 52D-43D-43 and 65R-22N-43D-43
          Nack Ballard -- Saturday, 19 February 2011, at 12:38 a.m.
  • 32 response to 63 split
    neilkaz -- Friday, 18 February 2011, at 4:52 p.m.
    • Data for 62S-32 and 63S-32
      Nack Ballard -- Friday, 18 February 2011, at 5:11 p.m.
      • Data for 62S-32 and 63S-32
        fomalhaut -- Friday, 18 February 2011, at 5:27 p.m.
  • 63S-32W
    Nack Ballard -- Friday, 18 February 2011, at 5:01 p.m.