Danny Kleinman labeled this an "Anti-Anchor-Bear-Off". We are facing four dangers:
Gaps. If we are forced to break our highest point bearing off one man, then we can also be forced to move into the gap instead to an occupied point.
Third man. If we have a third man on our highest point, then a pair of large numbers will blot, but not, if we have another third man on the next point.
Fifth man. If we have five men on the highest point doubles to play from here will blot, also 2 men and 3 men on the next point.
Stripped. If we are stripped on a key point, no spares having there, we may be forced to leave blots on two different points. Danny extrapolate this: “The anti-acepoint bear-off provides the harshest test. You still want to avoid gaps. You still want to prepare to clear your highest remaining point, far preferring to have just 2 men there instead of three. But now you have another strong priority: you want to keep spares on your next-highest points, avoiding “strippage”. This principle overrides the avoidance of the fith man on your two highest points. Of course, you would rather have 2 men onyour highest point and 4 on the next; but having the third man on your second-highest point is far better than having just 2 on each of your highest points.”
He illustrates:
                       |
| ||||
| XGID=-bBDDB------b----bbcbb----:1:-1:1:41:0:0:3:0:10 | |||||
| Blue to play 41 | |||||
eXtreme Gammon Version: 1.21
“By moving 4-off, 3-2 I order to keep your spare, you expose yourself to single shots on 6-6, 5-5, and 3-3 instead of 4-3. But now 6-4 and 5-4 leave only single shots instead of a double. Thus you figure to get hit only 7x11 times, or 77times in 1296 games. The extra constraining influence of an opposing anchor makes the anti-anchor bear off different from the anti-bar bear off. So much so you must reverse one of the principles you may have learned for “contact bear-offs”. In the anti-bar bear-off, the third man on your next-to-highest point is aliability when you have just two men on your highest. In the anti-anchor bear-off, in contrast, it is an asset. Espacially when your opponent holds his most valuable anchor in these situations, the acepoint.”
You showed with your two RO’s, that this isn’t the whole truth, and that there is much more investigation necessary. Would you like to perform a RO for the illustration above :-)?