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

BGonline.org Forums

I badly misread this position

Posted By: Daniel Murphy
Date: Tuesday, 24 April 2012, at 11:12 a.m.

In Response To: I badly misread this position (Casper van der Tak)

I'd take but perhaps wrongly. Casper has noted all the relevant features of the position, which indeed add up to "pretty bad" for White. With regard to the score, I know of no single source on 5-point match scores that surpasses Kit Woolsey's August 1999 GammOnLine article, so let's review what he wrote about 4-away all:

If the redouble is passed, the player is behind 3-1 [4-away 2-away] with 32% [33.14%, R-K MET] equity. If he takes it is for the match. Therefore, the initial doubler must win 32% [33%] of the time cubeless in order to justify a take of a potential redouble. This means that the original taker has far more recube leverage than normal, so he can take more liberally than for money. It is interesting that it is correct to pass more quickly than for money at the 2-2 [3-away] score, but take more quickly at the 1-1 [4-away all] score.

However:

It should come as no surprise by now that gammons change the picture. With the doubler needing exactly four points, a gammonish cube should be treated with extra caution. Since passing the double means being behind only 2-1 [4-away 3-away] for 41% equity [42.85%, R-K MET], it isn't a good idea to risk the whole match on a serious gammon threat even with the powerful recube vig.

Which leaves us back with Tim's position that has considerable recube potential but is also strong and gammonish for the initial doubler ;-

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.