OTB, I didn't even consider the correct play of 6/1 6/4. Leaving the 6-7-8 points all stripped along with the uncovered blot on the deuce looked terrible so I decided it was between 6/1 4/2 or the loose hitting play. I figured that the non-hitting play won more games but the loose hit more gammons and wasn't sure if the extra g's were enough so I chosed not to hit. I also figured that covering the deuce would be helpful if Black couldn't roll a 4 or higher and I then rolled a PoH number. Since this was a money game and Black owned the cube, the ratio of extra net gammons/extra losses had to be somewhat over 2/1 for the hitting play to be correct (somwhat over 2/1 since cube ownership will enhance Black's wins). How much over 2/1 this ratio has to be has never been clear to me. Here it's around 16%/6% which is well over 2/1 but the RO still shows hitting to be slightly worse than 6/1 4/2.
Looking at the correct play of 6/1 6/4, we see that only leaves two blotting numbers (43) although 54 and 52 are pretty bad since they force you to abandon the 6-point. By comparison, 6/1 4/2 leaves 8 blotting numbers (55,54,52,44,& probably 43).
|
| |||
| XGID=-CAbCaDBB------a-b-babbb--:1:-1:1:52:0:0:3:0:10 | ||||
 to play 52 | ||||
is Player 2| 1. | Rollout1 | 6/4 6/1 | eq: +0.385 | |||
| ||||||
| 2. | Rollout1 | 6/1 4/2 | eq: +0.337 (-0.047) | |||
| ||||||
| 3. | Rollout1 | 7/2 7/5* | eq: +0.317 (-0.068) | |||
| ||||||
| 1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction. Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller | ||||||
eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.00