| |
BGonline.org Forums
The QF is there's no QF
Posted By: Timothy Chow In Response To: The QF is there's no QF (Michael Depreli)
Date: Sunday, 26 February 2012, at 7:47 p.m.
Despite studying these sorts of decisions quite a bit, I still get them wrong routinely. First, here are the candidates I see: 22/13, 13/4, 13/9 6/1, 13/9 13/8, 6/2 6/1.
A play like 22/13 can be right if White has a weakness in her board, and nothing to attack with, because then the single straggler can hold the fort on its own. However, it looks very bad to me here because of White's strong board, even though Blue doesn't care about losing a gammon.
Between 13/4 and 13/9 6/1, I think I prefer 13/9 6/1 even though it breaks the 6pt, because it should be easier to make a six-point board after 13/9 6/1, but I suspect the plays are close.
Between 13/9 13/8 and 6/2 6/1, I think I prefer 13/9 13/8 because it doesn't seem worth killing a checker in order to hold the midpoint.
The upshot is that I'm playing 13/9 and have to choose between 6/1 and 13/8. It's obvious that 6/1 fares worse if White hits. When does 6/1 gain? I don't think White has any rolls that force her to leave a blot on the midpoint right away. However, White does have a bunch of rolls that she will use to clear one checker from her midpoint after 13/8, but that she will use to clear her bar point instead if we play 6/1. Is that enough compensation for possibly getting hit? I think so, in part because even if we are hit, the game isn't over yet, and again we don't care about gammon losses. Not sure, but I'll try 13/9 6/1. At a normal score I'd try 13/9 13/8.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.