BGonline.org Forums
44 to play vs potential backgame
Posted By: Matt Cohn-Geier
Date: Sunday, 20 December 2009, at 1:21 a.m.
In Response To: 44 to play vs potential backgame (Adam Versaw)
9pt with two is more or less automatic. After that the five point is pretty strong but it leaves a bunch of ways to get hit and few ways to improve the prime. I'll try the somewhat unusual play of unstacking on the deuce and note that 65 66 don't make the bar, although I will hate it if Blue makes the 20.
Messages In This Thread
- 44 to play vs potential backgame
Adam Versaw -- Sunday, 20 December 2009, at 12:52 a.m.
- 44 to play vs potential backgame
Matt Cohn-Geier -- Sunday, 20 December 2009, at 1:21 a.m.
- 44 to play vs potential backgame
Timothy Chow -- Sunday, 20 December 2009, at 1:28 a.m.
- 44 to play vs potential backgame
John O'Hagan -- Sunday, 20 December 2009, at 2:00 a.m.
- 44 to play vs potential backgame
Nack Ballard -- Sunday, 20 December 2009, at 4:32 a.m.
- 44 to play vs potential backgame
Keene -- Sunday, 20 December 2009, at 4:43 a.m.
- rollout, not that i agree
Adam Versaw -- Sunday, 20 December 2009, at 2:08 p.m.
- Since you don't seem to mind points 6 apart...
Chuck Bower -- Sunday, 20 December 2009, at 3:15 p.m.
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.