BGonline.org Forums

63S-43W-41?

Posted By: Chuck Bower
Date: Saturday, 13 February 2010, at 4:05 p.m.

In Response To: 63S-43W-41? (Ian Shaw)

I've now also learnt that, in contrast, 63S-32W is correct.

IMO, the word 'correct' doesn't accurately describe the current stat-of-the-art data. Both split+down plays are, statistically speaking, also 'correct', or more specifically "in the running". (That is, if you're looking at Stick's 2nd roll rollout table on this site, as I am.)

But back to the position. I gotta hit, and continuing to the acepoint (doubling your pleasure :) gives more opportunities to pick up the third opp checker. 9(2) doesn't seem to extract the max out of White's vulnerability and the pure plays that involve stopping on the 5-point seem to give opp too many opportunities to return hit (sometimes twice) and get right back in the contest.

6/5*/1*.

Messages In This Thread

• 63S-43W-41?
  Ian Shaw -- Saturday, 13 February 2010, at 1:15 p.m.
  • 63S-43W-41?
    Chuck Bower -- Saturday, 13 February 2010, at 4:05 p.m.
    • state-of the state-of-the-art
      Chuck Bower -- Saturday, 13 February 2010, at 4:29 p.m.
  • 63S-43W-41?
    Stick -- Saturday, 13 February 2010, at 4:06 p.m.
    • Wild
      David Rockwell -- Saturday, 13 February 2010, at 4:23 p.m.
  • 63S-43E-41?
    Nack Ballard -- Saturday, 13 February 2010, at 4:52 p.m.