| |
BGonline.org Forums
OLM Su 12/09/12
Posted By: Chuck Bower In Response To: OLM Su 12/09/12 (Jason Lee)
Date: Monday, 10 December 2012, at 8:13 p.m.
I don't see stopping on the 13-point and losing the spare deuce (after 3/2) as being better than just using the full roll to advance the back checker. Stopping does avoid the immediate hit with opp's 66 but it's farther from home and we might need that homeboard spare higher when we're bearing off and opp is still on the bar. Whether we stop on the 13- or advance to the 12-point, there are the same (if I counted correctly) number of rolls that force us to blot in our homeboard next turn.
We can't use a backgammon. However, not hitting makes it less likely that we win the gammon as well. As typical there can be advantages to having fewer opp checkers on the bar if we're concerned about just winning, and I can imagine that entering the equation here. (We can only use 2 of the 4 extra points we receive from the gammon. It looks like we're laying between 1::3 and 1::4 when we try for G at the risk of losing -- still haven't looked up our MWC leading 2a,10a.)
Another advantage to hitting a 3rd checker is that even when opp rolls 65 he'll have one remaining on the bar (so easier for us to get the last checker home). This doesn't seem like a big factor, though.
Opp needs 62 pips to get home. We need 8 rolls to bear off after this turn. There are inefficiencies for both sides (opp being on the bar and us needing to be careful bearing off). I'm starting to think this isn't worth the 1::X tradeoff mentioned above. Not hitting is unlikely to be the popular choice, but I fired a triple whopper a couple days ago so my vote can't be worse than that (can it)?
17/16/12
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.