BGonline.org Forums

51$-43H-44?

Posted By: Nack Ballard
Date: Monday, 27 December 2010, at 11:13 p.m.

In Response To: 51$-43H-44? (Casper van der Tak)

51$-43H-44

In the 1970s and early 80s, the typical approach was Bar/21, then automatically hit on the 5pt with two more 4s, and 24/20 or 13/9 for the last 4 (loathing to put a checker on the ace point). In the late 80s or early 90s, the double-hit tempo play became more popular in these situations, and I think it is still somewhat routine for many experts today.

I suppose the double hit is best for tempo reasons, denying opp a full roll, setting up good numbers next, etc. But I like also the structural B/21 24/20(2) 13/9. Creating a good defensive point should also have a lot of value with three checkers back. Structural plays are undervalued, I read somewhere.

Most recently I think that would be here (below the 41S-54S-42 diagram). I realize that you usually choose the right play and are likely to do so without benefit of my comments, Casper, but it's gratifying to know that someone is paying attention.

I did a trunc rollout of 51$-43S-44 long ago. As I recall, S (Split, Bar/21 24/20(2) 13/9) easily topped the rollout, while K (kill, Bar/21 13/5*/1*) and c (cross, Bar/21 24/20(2) 8/4) were about tied with each other in distant second place (around –.05). The better of the two 1970s plays, Y (Yoga split, Bar/21 24/20 13/5*) was a blunder and in sixth place (I believe).

At gammon go, the double-hitting K came out on top, but the non-hitting M (Mayfair split, Bar/21 13/9 8/4(2), not previously mentioned) was a somewhat close rival.

You can see a vaguely related trio of positions here. Even with a blot on the ace point, structure can play a key role.

Nack

Messages In This Thread

• 51$-43H-44?
  mtuhtan -- Monday, 27 December 2010, at 6:25 p.m.
  • 51$-43H-44?
    Dmitriy Obukhov -- Monday, 27 December 2010, at 7:10 p.m.
  • 51$-43H-44?
    Timothy Chow -- Monday, 27 December 2010, at 7:26 p.m.
  • 51$-43H-44?
    garyo -- Monday, 27 December 2010, at 8:18 p.m.
    • 51$-43H-44?
      neilkaz -- Monday, 27 December 2010, at 8:55 p.m.
  • 51$-43H-44?
    Casper van der Tak -- Monday, 27 December 2010, at 9:17 p.m.
    • 51$-43H-44?
      Nack Ballard -- Monday, 27 December 2010, at 11:13 p.m.
      • 51$-43H-44?
        Casper van der Tak -- Monday, 27 December 2010, at 11:32 p.m.
        • 61P-54S-51H-53H-44?
          Petter Bengtsson -- Tuesday, 28 December 2010, at 12:10 a.m.
          • 61P-54S-51H-53H-44?
            Casper van der Tak -- Tuesday, 28 December 2010, at 12:22 a.m.
          • 61P-54S-51H-53H-44?
            Nack Ballard -- Tuesday, 28 December 2010, at 12:27 a.m.
          • 61P-54S-51H-53H-44?
            Nack Ballard -- Tuesday, 28 December 2010, at 12:35 a.m.
          • Rollouts
            Petter Bengtsson -- Tuesday, 28 December 2010, at 3:56 p.m.
        • 51$-43H-44?
          Nack Ballard -- Tuesday, 28 December 2010, at 12:24 a.m.
          • 51$-43H-44?
            Casper van der Tak -- Tuesday, 28 December 2010, at 12:35 a.m.
  • 51$-43H-44?
    Sebastiaan Kuijs -- Wednesday, 29 December 2010, at 9:32 a.m.
  • 51$-43H-44 - Rollout
    mtuhtan -- Wednesday, 29 December 2010, at 10:48 p.m.
    • 51$-43H-44, Snowie trunc
      Nack Ballard -- Thursday, 30 December 2010, at 3:46 a.m.
    • 61P-54S-51H-53S-44, Snowie trunc
      Nack Ballard -- Thursday, 30 December 2010, at 3:46 a.m.
    • 51$-43H-44 - Rollout
      Nack Ballard -- Thursday, 30 December 2010, at 4:18 a.m.
      • 51$-42H-44
        Matt Cohn-Geier -- Thursday, 30 December 2010, at 7:24 a.m.
        • 51$-42H-44
          Nack Ballard -- Thursday, 30 December 2010, at 7:40 a.m.