| |
BGonline.org Forums
RO
Posted By: Daniel Murphy In Response To: RO (Martin Sterel)
Date: Thursday, 19 January 2012, at 7:23 a.m.
Thank you for posting your variations, Martin. To recap:
(A) when White's 11 forward checkers are on the 6-7-8 (stacked 5, 3 and 3) the best play is two up, 24/21 24/22, by a lot.
(B) when the position is altered so that White has a prime on the 5-6-7-8 points (2, 3, 3 and 3 checkers on those points), 24/21 24/22 is still best.
(C) but when the position is altered so that White has a prime on the 6-7-8-9 points, the best play (in a rollout which should be extended, I think) the bold split-and-slot 24/21 6/4! And 24/21 24/22 is second best.
Why? Oh, I see now that Nack has already answered this: White's nine point blocks Blue's 22 point. A checker on the 22 point cannot escape directly -- if Blue is not attacked, he doesn't have, for instance, 6-5 6-6 and 6-3 to run both checkers or the back checker. And if White attacks on his 4 point, anchoring on the Blue's 22 point no longer saves Blue from a bad game. So Blue should look around for another 2 to play -- a creative 2, since priming plays like 24/21 13/11 or 13/8 and safe plays don't look very good.
Split and slot plays are not common. I would have played 24/21 24/22.
Re "connectivity," as Nack wrote, "These examples seem a little odd to ascribe to a 'connectivity' theme."
But if checker play theory is reduced to four basic concepts: efficiency, connectivity, non-commitment and robustness -- according to the bkgm.com books section, this is Robertie's organization of themes in Modern Backgammon -- then I can see that problem 3-13 would fit best under "connectivity."
Re English, I never apologize for my bad Dutch ;- Ik doe alleen het beste wat ik kan.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.