| |
BGonline.org Forums
Paul Weaver Interviewed
Posted By: Stick In Response To: Paul Weaver Interviewed (Phil Simborg)
Date: Monday, 6 February 2017, at 6:49 p.m.
At 2a 4a with an opening [32] the normal big split is correct, 24/21 13/11. It can be found in the XG opening book that Paul referenced. I don't know where/why he would say it is the reverse split.
As much of a proponent of learning all the opening moves, replies, even getting heavy into the 3rd and 4th rolls, by no means would I recommend learning them for all the scores. That is a huge time suck and adds little to your game assuming you understand them for money and understand your goals at the score you can adjust your play in the opening to make the correct moves.
Also, it was mentioned a couple of the top ranked fish in the world (he says a couple amongst the top 5 but doesn't name names because he doesn't want to embarrass anybody ... they're the top ranked players in the world, I think they can handle it and he can only be referring to Falafel and Akiko) aren't that solid in opening play and that if they learned it their PRs would "drop way down". This just isn't true. It would improve their game and their PR would improve ever so slightly. It's not like either of them have no idea what's going on in the opening. Overall, they're making the right plays and steering clear of major errors. Cleaning up their opening game would be nice but a big PR improvement to these players it would not be.
Petko has made 11 posts on this site, not just one. Eleven times as many as you thought!
In discussing the Giant's list you mention basically how there are X number of players who play under PR Y and that these are basically the people who should be on the list. Then you go on to say that Ed O' had an amazing year last year (results oriented) and that he wasn't on the list and imply it's a minor travesty that he isn't. So you either know Ed's PR and think that he should be included on the list because of that or you don't think the Giant's list should be based on PR alone. (or you're oblivious to Ed's PR and part of the problem with who gets put on the Giant's list if you're voting and that's what you want the results to be based around!) It seems like you're trying to go both ways, you can't in supporting what you were saying at the time.
Paul underlines a lot of problems in backgammon when responding to if there would be a Book B in saying "there's no money in it". That applies to many things bg related.
Thanks for the interview, good stuff.
Stick
Pet peeve: Referring to competitive Table Tennis players as 'people who play ping pong'. It should be pretty obvious who the best bg/tt players are. They were likely ranked once upon a time if not currently but I'm too lazy to check and make a list.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.