[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums

Insignificant Correction: Example should be 52S-55A-2-C

Posted By: Taper_Mike
Date: Saturday, 22 October 2011, at 11:50 p.m.

In Response To: Nactation for White's entering play (Nack Ballard)

In Nack's post, he uses the example 62S-55A-2-C in a discussion of rolls that enter only one checker from the bar (when there are two or more checkers on the bar).

The problem is that the given sequence places only one checker on the roof to begin with. I am guessing that Nack intended to split with the two, and so he must of meant 62Z-55A-2-C or, more likely, 52S-55A-2-C. Thereafter, Nack's discussion makes sense:

Let's take 62S-55A-2-C as an example, where the enter-one-checker roll just before C (Cube) was 21. Recapping, while I like 2 or 21< best, I'd rather see 2x than 21 (because the latter is what I would write if both checkers entered). Isolating any of 2, 2x or 21<, it is not necessary to play through the sequence or see the position to determine what happened on that particular roll. More importantly, if the interpreter confuses the sequence elsewhere and is trying to reconcile, "21" offers less help than the other three, because it doesn't identify itself as a one-checker entrance. It could be a two-checker entrance or it could even mean that 21 was transcribed as the roll and the nactator didn't have time (or forgot) to also transcribe the play.

Mike

Messages In This Thread

 

Post Response
Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:
Subject:
Message:

If necessary, enter your password below:

Password:
 

 

[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.