| |
|---|---|
| 32S-33B-32S-63 | |
- N (Near, 13/7 6/3)
o (outer, 13/10 8/2)
A (Attack, 8/2 6/3)
P (Point, 13/7 10/7)
For me, the easiest play to eliminate is P, in direct comparison to N. After 13/7, I think I would rather not play the 3 than to inflexibly shift off the higher blocking point with 10/7 (or at least it's close to being a preferred no-3), while 6/3 is a clear gain. Therefore, P is out.
Between the other three plays, I'm not sure. In the mid 1990s, in the midst of compiling the path-breaking book New Ideas in Backgammon (with coauthor Hal Heinrich), Kit Woolsey told me that, "In mutual holding games, leaving a shot is more costly than people think."
Frequently, I translate such a statement to mean that it is more costly than Kit used to think, but I believe he nailed the trend here. Indeed, his book (aided by Jellyfish rollouts at a time when relatively few people had bots) did an excellent job of exposing and correcting the misconceptions of the 70s and 80s.
Kit's admonition doesn't mean that it is always wrong to leave a blot in holding games. Rather it means that one should be willing to take semi-extraordinary measures to avoid doing so; just putting the checkers where they appear to belong is not automatic (as it was perceived to be thirty years ago).
In this exact situation, after 63N, I think White should hit with all her 3s (probably even 31), because Blue's 3pt blot weakens his counterplay. Even so, N (my choice, though without high confidence) leads to a considerably prettier position than o or A if White misses. It looks to me that it goes a bit too far to strip the 8pt with 8/2 (regardless of the 3), though I wouldn't be stunned if it's right anyway. Kit's axiom (avoid leaving shots in mutual holding positions) is apropos enough that one of the safe dumping plays (o or A) should at least be close here.
Nack