BGonline.org Forums

Backgame blunder?

Posted By: Timothy Chow
Date: Thursday, 10 July 2014, at 1:53 a.m.

In Response To: Backgame blunder? (joe freedman)

Variation 3 looks identical to the initial position.

Anyway, to get gammoned here, you pretty much need to expose a second blot first, and have it get hit. Exposing a second blot will usually happen when you've been sent behind Blue's prime. Blue is only 1/3 to hit you right away; if he misses, then I think you're a favorite to bear off something without getting hit again, so that's maybe 40-50% chances of getting off the gammon right there. If you do get hit, then I think Blue will run off the 23pt to give you 1's, 2's, and 4's to expose another blot. It's hard to judge but I'd guess you're a favorite to expose a blot at that point. But then Blue still has to hit it, and then win a gammon from there. Even if he's a slight favorite for each of these steps, each step cuts down the chances. I'd guess you lose 10-15% gammons.

Even if I'm off in this estimate, I think that this is a reasonable approach in general to estimating gammons. Figure out what sequence of events has to happen and estimate the probability of each step.

For the variants, I think that in general having dead checkers on the 1pt hurts your flexibility. If you have spares on high points then you may be able to build points in your board.

Messages In This Thread

• Backgame blunder?
  joe freedman -- Wednesday, 9 July 2014, at 2:46 p.m.
  • Backgame blunder?
    Timothy Chow -- Wednesday, 9 July 2014, at 10:13 p.m.
    • Backgame blunder?
      joe freedman -- Thursday, 10 July 2014, at 12:47 a.m.
      • Backgame blunder?
        Timothy Chow -- Thursday, 10 July 2014, at 1:53 a.m.