| |
BGonline.org Forums
Catchup #4 - Picking on MCG
Posted By: Matt Cohn-Geier In Response To: Catchup #4 - Picking on MCG (Stick)
Date: Tuesday, 2 December 2008, at 12:03 a.m.
I am not picking on Stick here, I've done enough of that and I'll have plenty more opportunities in the future. I'm just clarifying where I see the need.
Where's my issue? Seems the take is clear cut and the double borderline. Can't argue with that, my issue is with MCG says: We're not getting crushed. Any position where my opponent is over 70% and easily wins over twice as many gammons as I do fits in to the category of getting crushed.
Not me. We are losing, yes, our game is unpleasant, but we aren't getting crushed/destroyed, Kit/Tami's position is good but not overwhelming. That points to D/T IMO.
There's also a loooooot of variance left in that rollout, though I'm not arguing it's not a take, I think it's a must double even though the immediate volatility isn't all that high.
I'm not sure about whether the double is technically correct or not, I agree that it is a must double in practice, but must take also.
The plays meet the *tied* criteria after a measley 1700 trials and you're dismissing it as a misplay, shame!
Tied = misplay.
I was shocked to see so many people misplay these positions.
Blah, I don't like my non-hit now, but I figured OTB just holding my position was better than it really was. Unhappy that I misplayed this, didn't quite see how good his outfield prime would be.
So you're assuming if you pass this (and you're not sure it's a take anyway) that Kit will be doubling you early the rest of the match and that somehow that wouldn't be a good thing? I'm confused, if you can make a possible small or non existant error (again, you weren't sure if it was a take) in a position where there is no skill left in it and it garners you easy cube decisions in the future because Kit will be doubling early thinking you may again drop, it seems to me that should pass you into pass territory?
OK, maybe my claim that I had no idea how to evaluate the position was not entirely true...I thought it was a take. I took after about 4-5 seconds. I certainly spent more time on other decisions throughout that match. I didn't know whether it was a clear take or a close one, or whether it was a double or not, but I noted the closeness of the race & Kit's wrecked board, and determined take was probably right. Rollout says clear double, clear take. But I have never studied that position-type before so I had no idea what the really relevant factors were other than the raw pip count and crossovers.
My claim was that all else being equal I would rather take than drop, particularly early in a match. I am not claiming that this is mathematically or even practically technically correct, it's just my style. I like to be able to time good recubes. It seems to work.
Kit is a good enough player that I don't think he will be doubling me super-early and giving me cubes to scoop greedily. Just slightly earlier than he usually would. Other things being equal, I would rather get a free roll than get the cube a roll early later in the match.
The "when you have no idea take!" theory isn't a terrible thing to follow when you're learning how to play, but as good as certain players are supposed to be (MCG)
Whoever reputed that I was good was definitely lying.
61P-22E-33?
Still oodles & oodles of variance left in the rollout and I would honestly play 5(2) 4(2) OtB 8 days a week.
I'm well aware that the plays are wayyy TCTC, but 10(2) 5(2) is probably not a .047 error. I just hate the stackiness and inflexibility of two inside points, if I can't run a back checker next time it looks too inflexible. But I think it is probably the right play.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.