Thanks for your input Neil. I guess the solid 4-prime of White is strong enough to force us to play as pure positionally as possible.
| 1. | Rollout1 | 24/22 7/3* | eq: -0,244 |
| Player: Opponent: | 36,24% (G:13,24% B:0,72%) 63,76% (G:22,85% B:1,40%) | Conf.: ± 0,010 (-0,254...-0,234) - [100,0%] Duration: 19 minutes 36 seconds |
|
| 2. | Rollout1 | 7/3* 3/1 | eq: -0,295 (-0,051) |
| Player: Opponent: | 33,44% (G:14,60% B:0,66%) 66,56% (G:22,14% B:1,32%) | Conf.: ± 0,009 (-0,304...-0,286) - [0,0%] Duration: 17 minutes 18 seconds |
|
| 3. | Rollout2 | 24/22 8/4 | eq: -0,337 (-0,093) |
| Player: Opponent: | 33,37% (G:12,46% B:0,52%) 66,63% (G:23,78% B:1,57%) | Conf.: ± 0,024 (-0,361...-0,313) - [0,0%] Duration: 2 minutes 01 second |
|
| |
1 2592 Games rolled with Variance Reduction. Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
2 324 Games rolled with Variance Reduction. Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
|
In the variant below (White's 7pt. moved to the 8pt., roll modified from 4-2 to 5-2 to produce a similar decision) the gapped prime is so much weaker of a blockade, that we should just go ahead with the hit&cover.
| 1. | Rollout1 | 8/3* 3/1 | eq: -0,021 |
| Player: Opponent: | 41,31% (G:18,52% B:0,71%) 58,69% (G:18,36% B:1,06%) | Conf.: ± 0,036 (-0,057...+0,015) - [100,0%] Duration: 1 minute 52 seconds |
|
| 2. | Rollout1 | 24/22 8/3* | eq: -0,112 (-0,091) |
| Player: Opponent: | 39,93% (G:14,92% B:0,88%) 60,07% (G:20,86% B:1,23%) | Conf.: ± 0,031 (-0,144...-0,081) - [0,0%] Duration: 2 minutes 04 seconds |
|
| 3. | 2-ply | 8/3* 7/5 | eq: -0,160 (-0,139) |
| Player: Opponent: | 39,48% (G:14,98% B:1,02%) 60,52% (G:23,05% B:1,81%) | |
|
| 4. | 2-ply | 8/3* 5/3 | eq: -0,322 (-0,301) |
| Player: Opponent: | 34,89% (G:12,52% B:0,84%) 65,11% (G:25,64% B:2,03%) | |
|
| |
1 324 Games rolled with Variance Reduction. Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
|