| |
BGonline.org Forums
Qarey Quiz No QF required
Posted By: Bill Calton In Response To: Qarey Quiz No QF required (Steven E. Carey)
Date: Tuesday, 10 July 2018, at 6:22 p.m.
Good problems. Sure I will get many wrong. Hoping people contribute explanations so I can learn something :)
1. 24/20, 21/20. Nine not well diversified men in zone looks like blitz structure rather than prime structure. Let's make defensive point to blunt the opponent's attacking formation. Score to the extent it makes a difference argues for making the anchor to cut down gammon losses.
2. 9/5, 8/5. I don't see the urgency to make an anchor here. A small detail might be the opponent's split back men, which hit the blot more often. Trailing in the score also argues offense to juice up the gammon wins.
3. 8/5, 6/5. Only eight men in the zone so I am not afraid. let's make our offensive five point, especially considering we trail by a bunch in the match.
4. 8/5, 6/5. Compared to last position, making the offensive 5 point seems more clear. The alternative is stacky and no structure. Still only 8 men in the zone so I am not too afraid of opponent's attacking potential.
5. 11/5, 6/5. Not sure what I would do for money, but trailing I make the 5 point all day long, all day strong.
6. 8/4, 6/4. I read a rule of thumb that either 5 point is better than either 4 point. Not sure if that comes from Nack Ballard or from Bill Robertie. Since we trail by a lot in the match, I am guessing this is an exception. Go for offense to tilt towards gammonish game.
7. 8/5, 6/5. Going against the rule of thumb (either 5 point better than either 4 point) on same logic as last problem. let's go defense first to cut down on the gammon losses.
8. 9/7, 8/7. I don't like the lame 3 point anchor no matter what the score. Let's make the bar point, which is constructive.
9. 9/7, 8/7. I like the bar point even more in this position. The opponen't 4 point is less prime-dangerous. Also, we the score deficit is more dramatic here than in the last problem.
10. Bar/20, 13/9* Only one point board, don't we almost always hit in these type of positions? perhaps the score argues for securing an anchor, but I can't bring myself to do it. Hit please.
11. 8/4, 6/4. We are leaving blot or two no matter what we do, so let's make an offensive point. This will lock up an asset, which could be valuable in a hitting contest. Sixes are duplicated. Trailing in score, to the extent that matters, makes offensive play more attractive.
12. 24/21, 13/8. When opponent has escaped a man, this increases the need for an advanced anchor (or at least I think it does). This looks like a normal play. I think the anchor and outfield control takes priority over making another point.
13. 24/18, 6/5. Low confidence on this one. I like trying to go for the anchor, and/or contact while we have him outboarded. Making the bar is not actually a new point, and we are not trying to prime a single checker anyway.
14. 24/13. If you knew you were not going to be hit, you would run right? 8's and 9's hit, but opponent is an underdog to roll it. If opponent misses, we are well positioned to make a nice point next time. In making a home board point, ideally we would unstack the six point at the same time. 65 doesn't allow you to do this, another reason why I like escaping.
15. 24/13. Same reasoning as last play. Score argues avoid getting gammoned. I am not sure if escaping or making the point gets gammoned less often so I will just run.
16. 13/11, 13/10. Michy in opening concepts suggests don't split if 10 men in the zone. On the other hand, bringing the 2 down for midpoint isn't so effective since you already have the 5 point made. Still, I like my priming chances here so I will pull down.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.