I'd rolled a 41 previously and opted for 13/9 6/5 instead of the rapid build alternative of 8/4 6/5. I wanted to curtail XG slotting freely in its outer board and securing a second holding point. This sort of tactic would lead to a cube shortcut sooner than I would have liked. So when XG came up with 14/10 13/11 I was somewhat surprised. So what's with this play beyond the duplication factor?
1. The number of specific 6's available. After 8/4 6/4 or 14/8, XG has one viable specific 6 whereas, after the double slot XG has three. You may think you've established an asset in the 4pt but it comes at a cost of having limited diversity. Hence the asset creates a liability.
2. Weighing the cost of liabilities. I can hit with any 4 & 3 but only 9 hit & cover. Note, 8/4 6/4 also allows for 9 hit and covers. So which of these plays is the greater liability? After making the 4pt, XG will be be forced to expose a blot on 42 41 32 & 26 and ironically end up with 2 blots but positionally much worse off and with little future constructive use. Even if I get lucky with a hit n' cover, XG will secure a second holding point on the 10 or 11pt.
NBM
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.03