BGonline.org Forums

Inefficiency of 10pt builder

Posted By: Nack Ballard
Date: Monday, 7 February 2011, at 7:02 p.m.

In Response To: Opening 32 XGR+ RO (neilkaz)

I believe the reason that opening 43Z outperforms 43S, and 32S outperforms 32Z, is not because playing to the 21pt has any special meaning but rather because (from the undeveloped opening position) the 10pt is a less efficient spot than the 9pt or 11pt to place a lone builder.

The 10pt builder is a bit less vulnerable (hit by 0, 1 or 2 fewer shots from Opp's 24pt) than the 9pt builder, but the 9pt builder is far more potent for making points.

The 10pt builder is more vulnerable (hit by 2 or 3 extra shots from Opp's 24pt) than the 11pt builder, while it has only a little more point-making power.

Nack

Messages In This Thread

• Opening 32 XGR+ RO
  neilkaz -- Sunday, 6 February 2011, at 1:43 a.m.
  • Opening 32 XGR+ RO
    Nack Ballard -- Sunday, 6 February 2011, at 3:18 a.m.
    • Opening 32 XGR+ RO
      neilkaz -- Sunday, 6 February 2011, at 6:26 a.m.
      • Opening 32 XGR+ RO
        Nack Ballard -- Sunday, 6 February 2011, at 11:09 a.m.
    • Opening 32 XGR+ RO
      David Rockwell -- Monday, 7 February 2011, at 4:21 a.m.
      • Opening 32 XGR+ RO
        Nack Ballard -- Monday, 7 February 2011, at 6:21 a.m.
  • Opening 32 XGR+ RO/43XGR+RO compared with prime field theory.
    higonefive -- Monday, 7 February 2011, at 11:17 a.m.
    • Opening 32 XGR+ RO/43XGR+RO compared with prime field theory.
      Nack Ballard -- Monday, 7 February 2011, at 7:16 p.m.
  • Inefficiency of 10pt builder
    Nack Ballard -- Monday, 7 February 2011, at 7:02 p.m.