                         |
| ||||
| XGID=--B-A-D-C-b-cC---dBc-aaa--:0:0:1:63:0:0:3:0:10 | |||||
| Blue to play 63 | |||||
I am not dogmatically opposed to slotting two points. It depends on position, and the alternatives that are available.
In the original position, I would have made the play Svilo did, 13/7, 8/5. That play covers the 5pt, and slots no inside points. In the variant above, however, which differs from the OP by only one pip, I would slot the 5pt, rather than cover the 4pt. Once again, my play would be 13/7, 8/5, but this time, the result would be a double slot. Actually, it's a triple slot, if you count the bar point.
One of the reasons that slotting is less desirable in the OP is that you are slotting the 3pt, a point that you would rather make later, after you make both the 4pt and 5pt. In the variant above, you are slotting 4pt and 5pt. Those are the points you want to make. Another reason that slotting works in the variant is that the alternative (of making the 4pt) does not leave a spare on the bar point.
The fact that covering above makes a worse point than covering does in the OP (the 4pt vs. the 5pt) is probably also a factor, but perhaps not as big a factor as you might think. What would you play in the variant below? It is identical to the OP, except the roll has been changed to 62.
   |
| ||||
| XGID=--B--AD-C-b-cC---dBc-aaa--:0:0:1:62:0:0:3:0:10 | |||||
| Blue to play 62 | |||||
Mike