| |
BGonline.org Forums
54S-63 and 43Z-64
Posted By: Nack Ballard In Response To: 43Z-64 and 43S-64 (David Rockwell)
Date: Friday, 3 December 2010, at 12:50 a.m.
Would H even be better than X...?
54S-63
43Z-64
Consider the related position on the left, 54S-63. We have no real gammon go rollout for it. However, comparing apples to apples, Snowie's money rollout is [H X7 R8] whereas its fake gammon go rollout is [H X31 R69], suggesting that (1) H may be a standout play at ganmmon go, and that (2) H gains greatly on X at that score.
Now consider the right-hand position, 43Z-64. It's not nearly as strong to hit on the 4pt as the 5pt; OTOH, it is better to hit against the 9pt builder than the 8pt builder, which partially compensates. Granted, 43Z-64H is a money error of about .050 according to Snowie/Gnu agg, but it's conceptually similar to 54S-63H, which is best.
Regardless of whether Blue should hit, if he does hit, then coming down vs splitting with the 6 is a similar type of decision, yes? After H, White misses with 31 21 11 in the left-hand position, or she misses with 51 21 11 in the right-hand position. That's a major reason to play H rather than X -- to give White those misses. The presence of White's outfield blot might see X recouping some ground on H, but I'd be surprised if that causes it to close the expected gap at gammon go, a score that courts offensive near-side plays.
That said, thanks for being willing to roll 43Z-64-g on XG.
Nack
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.