| 162 | |
|---|---|
| |
| 61P-32S-63 | 160 |
One might well argue, "Sure, Blue plays 24/21 instead of 7/4* because of the value of the 7pt spare. Fair enough. However, the complete three-play result is [Z H21 R26]; that is, R (Run, 24/15) is only .005 behind H. That 63H and 63R are virtually tied is a vital piece of knowledge/understanding.
|
| ||||||||||||||||
On the right, H crushes R by .06. Why does R perform relatively better by .055 (being inferior by only .005) on the left? The answer is twofold: (a) Blue's midpoint has already been reduced from five checkers to four; and (b) Blue is 7 pips better off in the race.
Repeating the left-hand position again...
|
| ||||||||||||||||
On the right is Tim's position. It is the same as on the left, except that one checker each on White's 13pt, 11pt and 8pt are moved to her 7pt. What is the effect of that change?
I believe the main four factors (and probably in this ranking) are:
- (1) White can no longer hit on her 10pt with an ace.
(2) White is 11 pips better off in the race.
(3) White's midpoint has already been reduced from four checkers to three (13/10* would strip it).
(4) White has a three-point prime; Blue's incentives both to escape and to avoid having a third checker sent back are greater.
Only (2) supports H. The other three factors support R. I offer that as "proof" that R is better than H in Tim's position (on the right).
[It may also be worth noting that in Tim's position it must be wrong for Blue to split with 63 (i.e., 24/21 13/7, which in this case can be nactated either S or Z), even though 63Z is best in the left-hand position. Among other reasons, the 3-split and 4-split are more equally footed on the right; White's 11pt builder can directly attack a blot on her 5pt, not her 4pt, whereas the checkers on her 7pt can be used to directly attack a blot on either point.]
Nack