| |
BGonline.org Forums
Hows your checkerplay in Prime games? 3 Positions
Posted By: Nack Ballard In Response To: Hows your checkerplay in Prime games? 3 Positions (Adam Versaw)
Date: Sunday, 13 December 2009, at 8:28 p.m.
I'd be a bit surprised if I saw anyone makes a play other than 8/7 8/1* in the first problem or 10/7 6/5 in the last one, regardless of score or cube placement. I'll let others supply the analysis.
In the third position, I don't double. Opp has too much counter-priming potential even if I roll a number that runs. Even if it turns out to be a technical double it's hard to imagine my opponent passing here, whereas if I can improve some (e.g., 41 met by 43, or 42 met by 21, or 65 met by 52 or 53, or 52 met by non-descript), I can imagine a lot of wrong passes.
The second problem is interesting. Sometimes giving opp a 6 for one roll is right (e.g., 8/3 8/7 or even 8/3 5/4) but that looks like more than opp deserves here. And running without hitting gives opp too many good numbers, so 3/2* is half of my play.
At a less desperate score, I'd cover with P (Point-on-head, 3/2* 7/2). At the actual score (-5-3 and having turned the cube) I'm not sure but I'll keep the prime and try X (hit-and-split, 20/15 3/2*). If opp enters and hits loose on her 5pt (or rolls 61), I have a decent shot at a gammon (while gammons for opp are overkill), and if she escapes with 63 I get a direct 6 shot.
Like Chuck, I would prefer to see separate posts for multiple positions. I very nearly replied to the wrong score a couple of times (and perhaps still did). Optimal, I think, for this set, would have been three posts, with the cube decision and checker play for the final position combined.
(I prefer to respond only to problems for which I think the decision is close or IMO other respondents have a misconception. For the most part, you won't see me respond to nexts.)
Nack
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.