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

BGonline.org Forums

An immortal rule of thumb revisited.

Posted By: Timothy Chow
Date: Tuesday, 19 June 2012, at 10:53 p.m.

In Response To: An immortal rule of thumb revisited. (higonefive)

Without addressing the specific position you posted, I'd say that the safe/bold criteria are an attempt to address the question, "How bad is it to get hit?"

There are different approaches one can take to answering this question. You might say:

1. Not bad, because I have strong offensive/defensive resources. (Board/strength, anchor, blots.) Or, bad, because my opponent has strong offensive/defensive resources.

Or you might say:

2. Not bad, because I'm losing anyway. (Race, number of checkers back.) Or, bad, because I'm winning as long as I don't get hit.

Ultimately, what you're always trying to do is to compare temperature maps, without actually calculating temperature maps quantitatively because we're human beings and not bots. Shot-counting and duplication are attempts to categorize rolls into two categories, good and bad. Safe/bold criteria are attempts to estimate how bad the bad rolls are.

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.