I printed the XG++ analysis of this position which indicated the subject equity difference. The problem is that I ran XG++ on all but the first two top plays. This explains why the folk I consulted seemed so puzzled by the results.
Stick has identified the two top plays, which are very different in kind. As you can see, XG++ says the plays are very close.
I did a rollout which may or may not confirm the XG++ result (hey, I am learning the lingo from the spate of recent televised congressional hearings), and which I will post later as is customary group policy.
          
 
          
 | | White is sopo2
score: 1
pip: 158 | | 5 point match | pip: 136
score: 0
Blue is leobueno |
|
| XGID=-a--a-EDB---eB---bBcba----:0:0:1:62:0:1:0:5:10 |
| Blue to play 62 |
| 1. | XG Roller++ | 7/1* 6/4* | eq: +0.294 |
| Player:
Opponent: | 56.03% (G:18.92% B:0.54%)
43.97% (G:11.06% B:0.46%) | |
|
| 2. | XG Roller++ | 13/11 13/7 | eq: +0.284 (-0.010) |
| Player:
Opponent: | 58.50% (G:12.23% B:0.30%)
41.50% (G:7.61% B:0.28%) | |
|
| 3. | XG Roller++ | 13/7 6/4* | eq: +0.192 (-0.102) |
| Player:
Opponent: | 55.09% (G:15.52% B:0.64%)
44.91% (G:11.20% B:0.42%) | |
|
| 4. | XG Roller++ | 13/11 7/1* | eq: +0.122 (-0.172) |
| Player:
Opponent: | 54.36% (G:12.90% B:0.31%)
45.64% (G:10.28% B:0.45%) | |
|
| 5. | XG Roller++ | 7/5 7/1* | eq: -0.008 (-0.302) |
| Player:
Opponent: | 51.22% (G:12.68% B:0.31%)
48.78% (G:12.39% B:0.49%) | |
|
eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2