USBGF OLM 2018-01-20

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 9
pip: 157
             
11 point match
              pip: 155
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=--aaB-C-C-ABdB---bbe---AA-:0:0:1:00:6:9:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF Members vote:
[18] No Double
[12] Double


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 9
pip: 157
             
11 point match
              pip: 155
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=--aaB-C-C-ABdB---bbe---AA-:0:0:1:54:6:9:0:11:10
to play 54

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

Make Your Play!
Enter Your Checker Play or Cube Decision
Please do not include comments in your submission.

Voting to close no earlier than Sun 1/21 530p Eastern time.

USBGF OLM 2018-01-19

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 9
pip: 151
             
11 point match
              pip: 159
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-a--B-C-C-aBdC---bbe----B-:0:0:1:31:6:9:0:11:10
to play 31

1.playedRollout124/23 13/10*eq: +0.507
Player:
Opponent:
57.63% (G:18.21% B:0.76%)
42.37% (G:12.37% B:1.46%)
Conf.: ± 0.011 (+0.496...+0.518) - [100.0%]
Duration: 3 hours 29 minutes
2.Rollout113/10* 10/9eq: +0.481 (-0.026)
Player:
Opponent:
56.53% (G:18.92% B:0.77%)
43.47% (G:13.24% B:1.85%)
Conf.: ± 0.011 (+0.470...+0.492) - [0.0%]
Duration: 3 hours 28 minutes
3.Rollout124/21 11/10*eq: +0.459 (-0.049)
Player:
Opponent:
56.73% (G:17.64% B:0.68%)
43.27% (G:12.67% B:1.57%)
Conf.: ± 0.012 (+0.447...+0.470) - [0.0%]
Duration: 3 hours 21 minutes
4.Rollout113/10* 11/10eq: +0.430 (-0.077)
Player:
Opponent:
55.82% (G:18.24% B:0.72%)
44.18% (G:13.32% B:2.20%)
Conf.: ± 0.011 (+0.419...+0.441) - [0.0%]
Duration: 3 hours 38 minutes
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 96525189
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[24] 24/23 13/10*
[ 4] 13/10* 11/10
[ 3] 13/10*/9
[ 1] 24/21 11/10*
[ 1] 8/5 6/5


Grant Hoffman (grant@hoffman.kiwi)
and
Steve Sax (backgammonplayer@msn.com)
teach at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Grant Hoffman recommends: 24/23 13/10*

It seems very clear to hit, and with Neil having made his 7 point we should split, but do we hit and split with 24/23 13/10* or 24/21 11/10*? The Danish players have a saying ‘Where is the game?’, this means focus on where the action is. Here if we play 24/23 13/10*, we bring another checker into the zone while retaining our 11 point so this has to be the correct move.


Steve Sax recommends: 24/23 13/10*

The USBGF Members don’t need to improve very much to reach a double at 5-away 2-away, so we don’t have to do anything dramatic or risky to reach that goal.

After 24/23 13/10*, will have a double on nearly half of Neil’s numbers, so the extra aggressive 24/21 11/10* isn’t an appropriate risk to achieve a doubling position.

The problem with the second play is that Neil can return with 22, 33 and 56, which he wouldn’t have if we had made a more disciplined move.

That might not seem like very much, but four rolls which would be far less effective had we played the more conservative move are too much in a case where we are nearing a cube in many cases anyway.


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 9
pip: 161
             
11 point match
              pip: 155
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=aa--B-C-C-ABdB---bbe---AA-:0:0:-1:31:6:9:0:11:10
to play 31

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

Neil Kazaross plays b/22 24/23.

I need an anchor somewhere other than my ace point, since I’ll likely be soon nearly primed in that corner. Therefore I should advance both back checkers, noting that neither comes under the guns of my opponents 10 and 11 point outfield builders. Double hitting rolls like 31 and 51 are somewhat duplicated, as I’d expect the 5 point to be made with those rolls.


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 9
pip: 157
             
11 point match
              pip: 155
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=--aaB-C-C-ABdB---bbe---AA-:0:0:1:00:6:9:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2018-01-18

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 9
pip: 160
             
11 point match
              pip: 167
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-b----E-C---dE---bbe----B-:0:0:1:22:6:9:0:11:10
to play 22

1.playedRollout113/11(2) 6/4(2)eq: +0.322
Player:
Opponent:
53.83% (G:16.80% B:0.73%)
46.17% (G:14.92% B:2.33%)
Conf.: ± 0.012 (+0.311...+0.334) - [100.0%]
Duration: 3 hours 21 minutes
2.Rollout124/22(2) 6/4(2)eq: +0.266 (-0.056)
Player:
Opponent:
53.03% (G:14.84% B:0.48%)
46.97% (G:12.66% B:1.27%)
Conf.: ± 0.012 (+0.255...+0.278) - [0.0%]
Duration: 3 hours 19 minutes
3.Rollout124/22 13/11 6/4(2)eq: +0.255 (-0.067)
Player:
Opponent:
53.01% (G:15.30% B:0.64%)
46.99% (G:15.23% B:1.77%)
Conf.: ± 0.012 (+0.243...+0.268) - [0.0%]
Duration: 3 hours 21 minutes
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 33289663
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[19] 13/11(2) 6/4(2)
[ 9] 24/22(2) 6/4(2)
[ 6] 24/20(2)
[ 1] 24/20 6/4(2)
[ 1] 24/22 13/11 6/4(2)


Grant Hoffman (grant@hoffman.kiwi)
teaches at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Grant Hoffman recommends: 13/11(2) 6/4(2)

At a normal match score or for money I would play 13/11(2) 6/4(2). At this score when I am Gammon hungry, I would definitely make that move rather than the more defensive 24/22(2) 6/4(2).


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 9
pip: 160
             
11 point match
              pip: 159
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-b--B-C-C--BdC---bbe----B-:0:0:-1:54:6:9:0:11:10
to play 54

1.playedRollout124/15eq: -0.374
Player:
Opponent:
45.69% (G:13.46% B:2.25%)
54.31% (G:17.95% B:0.60%)
Conf.: ± 0.011 (-0.385...-0.363) - [100.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 46 minutes
2.Rollout124/20 13/8eq: -0.470 (-0.096)
Player:
Opponent:
43.34% (G:14.33% B:2.16%)
56.66% (G:18.72% B:0.73%)
Conf.: ± 0.011 (-0.481...-0.458) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 30 minutes
3.Rollout113/9 13/8eq: -0.522 (-0.148)
Player:
Opponent:
42.40% (G:14.63% B:2.29%)
57.60% (G:18.70% B:1.06%)
Conf.: ± 0.012 (-0.534...-0.511) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 34 minutes
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 24/15.

It is good to know the third roll follow ups to your common opening plays. I’d misplayed this by splitting a couple of times over the years but then learned that the best play is a distraction play running into a double shot with 24/15. If I stay on the 20 point, I initiate a battle that I am too likely to lose, noting 10 rolls point on me. Pulling two builders down strips the midpoint and leaves me front loaded. It will only work out if I am able to close a good point next turn with a small number.

Running out duplicates 1’s and 3’s, which are needed to close their 5 point.

24/15 is best for money and should also be clear at the score. Running is also the best play with a 63 here.


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 9
pip: 151
             
11 point match
              pip: 159
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-a--B-C-C-aBdC---bbe----B-:0:0:1:31:6:9:0:11:10
to play 31

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2018-01-17

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 66
             
11 point match
              pip: 83
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-CBBCBA------a---c--cBbcc-:0:0:-1:00:6:8:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in RolloutNo doubleDouble/Take
  Player Winning Chances:78.66% (G:1.28% B:0.01%)78.81% (G:1.18% B:0.00%)
  Opponent Winning Chances:21.34% (G:0.36% B:0.00%)21.19% (G:0.39% B:0.01%)
  Cubeless Equities+0.585+1.309
Cubeful Equities
     No double:+0.901 (-0.099)±0.003 (+0.898..+0.904)
xg Double/Take:+1.082 (+0.082)±0.006 (+1.076..+1.088)
played Double/Pass:+1.000
 
Best Cube action: Double / Pass
Rollout details
1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+
 
Double Decision confidence:100.0%
Take Decision confidence:100.0%
Duration: 5 minutes 32 seconds

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[32] Pass
[ 5] Take


Grant Hoffman (grant@hoffman.kiwi)
and
Steve Sax (backgammonplayer@msn.com)
teach at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Grant Hoffman recommends: Pass

If this were a straight race, Neil would win about 87% of the time. There is contact so that would amount to about 9% winning chances. But we have an open high point so even then we are not guaranteed to win. I just cannot see us winning enough to take here even at this score. I would let this one go and drop.


Steve Sax recommends: Pass

Neil is ahead 17 pips in the race but has to clear an outside blot and his eight point. However, he may be assisted in his goal as we could be forced to break our anchor with a six or may elect to run off the anchor with different numbers.

In either case, Neil will have 4’s and 1’s to hit our trailing checker which could further assist his effort to get home safely.

Still, we can win the game with a big double and then potentially outrace Neil as well as hitting a shot.

How often will those happen? Well first of all, White will get a fly shot when Black rolls 21, 32 and 53 which accounts for 6/36 x 4/36. That’s nearly 2% right away, but we have no guarantee to win the game as Neil still has one roll to enter before getting cubed out.

Additionally Neil will get a direct shot when Black rolls 55 or 66 which occurs another 23/1296, still just shy of 2%.

So the immediate hits equal 3.6% which probably equates to just under 3% since we own the cube.

We could also hit a later shot but that is much more difficult to determine because it’s unclear how long we will be able to or desire to stay on the 21 point.

We could also roll a big double (55 or 66) and contend in the race giving us three different ways to win the game.

How often that all happens isn’t too easy to determine, but given the race, our timing, and the fact that our board isn’t closed, I would estimate this is a drop, even at the score.


Neil Kazaross comments on the cube:

I have a 17 pip lead and can play most rolls safely this turn and my opponents have broken their closed board. While I am not a lock to win this game, this is a very strong cube.


Neil Kazaross wins one point, and leads 2-away/5-away



Neil Kazaross: 61 13/7 8/7


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 9
pip: 160
             
11 point match
              pip: 167
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-b----E-C---dE---bbe----B-:0:0:1:22:6:9:0:11:10
to play 22

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2018-01-16

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 66
             
11 point match
              pip: 88
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-BBBCBB------a---c--cBbcc-:0:0:1:41:6:8:0:11:10
to play 41

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF Members vote:
[15] 6/1
[11] 6/5 6/2
[ 3] 6/2 4/3
[ 1] 5/1 4/3
[ 1] 5/4 5/1


Steve Sax (backgammonplayer@msn.com)
teaches at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Steve Sax recommends: 6/5 6/2

If we owned the cube it might matter what we do, but Neil rates to double here and it’s a difficult take at best.

If we change the state of the question and assume we already own the cube, then it’s a question of playing 6/1 and saving a five or breaking the six point 6/5 6/2.

Both plays have their gains and drawbacks. By saving a five, we can maintain the 21 point anchor on their next roll if we roll 51, 52, or 53. If we roll 55 or 56 we must run, and if we roll 54, we should run and maintain our five point board.

And truthfully if we rolls 51, 52, or 53, after Neil safeties with 43, for example, running out is a pretty close alternative over staying back.

That being said, it’s probably better to simply clear the six point because if we can’t safety our back checker and Neil is able to hit, we would be better off without a blot on our six point, since that leads to more losses for us and a few more gammons.

This is indicated in a rollout with the simulated cube on our side, although the results are very close.


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 66
             
11 point match
              pip: 83
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-CBBCBA------a---c--cBbcc-:0:0:-1:00:6:8:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

Neil Kazaross doubles to 2.


USBGF OLM 2018-01-15

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 73
             
11 point match
              pip: 98
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-BBBBAB--AA--b---c--bBbcc-:0:0:1:64:6:8:0:11:10
to play 64

1.xgRollout121/15 9/5eq: -0.500
Player:
Opponent:
36.53% (G:4.98% B:0.08%)
63.47% (G:4.54% B:0.06%)
Conf.: ± 0.005 (-0.505...-0.495) - [100.0%]
Duration: 10 minutes 22 seconds
2.playedRollout110/4 9/5eq: -0.554 (-0.054)
Player:
Opponent:
36.05% (G:2.72% B:0.05%)
63.95% (G:1.40% B:0.01%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.561...-0.548) - [0.0%]
Duration: 9 minutes 18 seconds
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[28] 10/5 9/4
[ 5] 21/15 9/5
[ 1] 21/11


Grant Hoffman (grant@hoffman.kiwi)
teaches at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Grant Hoffman recommends:

We need to play 9/5 giving us the strongest board.

After that how do play the 6? 10/4 is solid but we need to ask ourselves “how do we intend to win this game?” We are not priming, attacking or racing so we have to be ambushing or going for contact. This works with our current position, we have a strong board and should be able to double Neil out if we hit a shot. So in order to hit a shot, we need to get a shot, so let’s play 21/15 now. I know we will not be happy if Neil rolls 11, 22, 33 or 44, but we will be happy if a number that leaves a shot – 66, 65, 64, 63, 54 and 53. If Neil rolls 65 for example after we play 21/15 9/5, I would be doubling.


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 73
             
11 point match
              pip: 88
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-BBBCBB------b---c--bBbcc-:0:0:-1:61:6:8:0:11:10
to play 61

1.playedRollout112/5eq: +0.675
Player:
Opponent:
66.18% (G:1.30% B:0.01%)
33.82% (G:2.06% B:0.02%)
Conf.: ± 0.005 (+0.670...+0.680) - [100.0%]
Duration: 3 minutes 33 seconds
2.Rollout18/1eq: +0.446 (-0.229)
Player:
Opponent:
62.27% (G:1.86% B:0.02%)
37.73% (G:3.54% B:0.08%)
Conf.: ± 0.006 (+0.439...+0.452) - [0.0%]
Duration: 8 minutes 37 seconds
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 12/5.

I’m happy to play 12/5 here, leaving only a 4 number shot as 44 and 22 are blocked. This also gives me a builder on my 5 point to help handle a subsequent bad roll and also to serve as a threat to any blot left on my 4 point, since my opponents will usually have to break either board or anchor with their next roll.


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 66
             
11 point match
              pip: 88
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-BBBCBB------a---c--cBbcc-:0:0:1:41:6:8:0:11:10
to play 41

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2018-01-14

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 79
             
11 point match
              pip: 102
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-BBBB-AB--B--b---d--bBbbc-:0:0:1:11:6:8:0:11:10
to play 11

1.playedRollout110/9 7/6 7/5eq: -0.714
Player:
Opponent:
31.15% (G:2.17% B:0.02%)
68.85% (G:2.07% B:0.05%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.720...-0.707) - [100.0%]
Duration: 14 minutes 37 seconds
2.Rollout17/5(2)eq: -0.733 (-0.020)
Player:
Opponent:
30.29% (G:1.90% B:0.02%)
69.71% (G:1.84% B:0.07%)
Conf.: ± 0.006 (-0.740...-0.727) - [0.0%]
Duration: 13 minutes 19 seconds
3.Rollout110/8 7/6(2)eq: -0.738 (-0.024)
Player:
Opponent:
29.71% (G:1.77% B:0.02%)
70.29% (G:1.76% B:0.03%)
Conf.: ± 0.006 (-0.744...-0.732) - [0.0%]
Duration: 12 minutes 01 second
4.Rollout110/9 7/5 6/5eq: -0.741 (-0.027)
Player:
Opponent:
29.50% (G:1.57% B:0.02%)
70.50% (G:1.67% B:0.08%)
Conf.: ± 0.006 (-0.747...-0.735) - [0.0%]
Duration: 11 minutes 55 seconds
5.Rollout110/9 10/8 7/6eq: -0.748 (-0.035)
Player:
Opponent:
29.23% (G:1.69% B:0.02%)
70.77% (G:1.86% B:0.03%)
Conf.: ± 0.006 (-0.755...-0.742) - [0.0%]
Duration: 11 minutes 49 seconds
6.Rollout110/6eq: -0.748 (-0.035)
Player:
Opponent:
29.19% (G:1.66% B:0.02%)
70.81% (G:1.69% B:0.02%)
Conf.: ± 0.006 (-0.754...-0.742) - [0.0%]
Duration: 12 minutes 34 seconds
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[19] 10/9 7/6 7/5
[ 5] 10/6
[ 4] 7/5(2)
[ 2] 10/9 7/5 6/5
[ 1] 10/9 10/8 7/6
[ 1] 10/8 7/6(2)


Grant Hoffman (grant@hoffman.kiwi)
and
Steve Sax (backgammonplayer@msn.com)
teach at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Grant Hoffman recommends: 10/9 7/6 7/5

In these positions, I like to “make a point, slot a point.” 7/6 is mandatory, as it improves our board. We would like to have a really killer board so that when we hit, we can double Neil out. So let’s slot the 5 point with 7/5. That leaves only one remaining 1, which should be played 10/9 to we maximize our builders aimed at our slotted 5 point.


Steve Sax recommends: 10/9 7/6 7/5

We are far down in the race here, but can win with a large double or by hitting one of Neil’s checker.

If we do hit a checker, we would like to have a closed board — so what is the best way to achieve that goal?

In my opinion it would be to make a fifth point, slot the sixth point and create maximum builders to cover that sixth point.

On “Play A,” we can achieve that goal only by playing 7/6 (making a fifth point), 7/5 (slotting a sixth point), and 10/9 (creating the second builder to make the sixth point).

We could make “Play B” with one fewer blot and simply make the five point by playing 7/5(2), but that only gives us fours to close the board plus 55 from the 21 point giving us a total of 16 board closing numbers.

However by playing 10/9 7/6 7/5 (Play A), we have a second checker to close the board and a total of 26 board closing numbers. All fours and fives plus 31, 22, 11 and 32.

The benefit is clear since we can close our board on their next roll 62.5% more often when giving us double coverage rather than single coverage.

Is there risk involved in making Play A? The only risk I see is that after Play A, we will have two extra blots.

And that will only cost us when Neil leaves an eight shot on the next roll if four conditions are met.

How often will all of that happen anyway?

First of all, Neil has to leave a fly shot on the next roll (16/36). Secondly we must hit (4/36). Thirdly, Neil must come in on White’s board (11/36) and finally, we must hit an extra checker (3/36).

How often that fourth part occurs is a little less clear as Neil would hit two checkers immediately with 54 and 55 but can also hit a second checker with any five and depending on whether we came in or not and then whether Neil hit any additional checker we couldn’t safety.

How often that will happen is a little more murky, so disregarding that additional element the four pronged parlay where Neil “immediately” picks up two checkers occurs (16x4x11x3 over 1.69 million).

That is equivalent to one time in 795 — not a very high price to pay. And let’s assume that with the extra times Neil hits one checker and subsequently hits an additional checker happens twice as often (which I think is generous) that would still occur only one time in about 400.

Given that, I would opt for the additional opportunity to close the board on my next roll, I would opt for Play A: 10/9 7/6 7/5, which closes the board on the next roll vastly more often.


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 79
             
11 point match
              pip: 98
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-BBBBAB--AA--b---d--bBbbc-:0:0:-1:00:6:8:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in RolloutNo doubleDouble/Take
  Player Winning Chances:68.81% (G:2.14% B:0.09%)69.29% (G:2.08% B:0.15%)
  Opponent Winning Chances:31.19% (G:2.30% B:0.02%)30.71% (G:2.36% B:0.04%)
  Cubeless Equities+0.383+0.890
Cubeful Equities
played No double:+0.714±0.007 (+0.707..+0.721)
     Double/Take:+0.642 (-0.071)±0.009 (+0.633..+0.651)
     Double/Pass:+1.000 (+0.286)
 
Best Cube action: No double / Take
Percentage of wrong pass needed to make the double decision right: 16.6%
Rollout details
1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+
 
Double Decision confidence:100.0%
Take Decision confidence:100.0%
Duration: 19 minutes 51 seconds

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross does not double.

I have quite an awkward outfield position here, and many rolls play awkwardly and/or leave an indirect shot with more chances to blot on subsequent rolls. I just don’t think that I can win this game often enough to double for money or match.



Neil Kazaross: 42 8/2


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 73
             
11 point match
              pip: 98
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-BBBBAB--AA--b---c--bBbcc-:0:0:1:64:6:8:0:11:10
to play 64

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2018-01-13

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 95
             
11 point match
              pip: 114
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-BB-B-CB-b---B--bd---Bbbc-:0:0:1:33:6:8:0:11:10
to play 33

1.playedRollout113/10(2) 6/3(2)eq: -0.031
Player:
Opponent:
48.26% (G:9.92% B:0.12%)
51.74% (G:3.52% B:0.11%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.038...-0.023) - [100.0%]
Duration: 26 minutes 18 seconds
2.Rollout113/10(2) 7/4 6/3eq: -0.067 (-0.036)
Player:
Opponent:
47.45% (G:8.89% B:0.12%)
52.55% (G:3.73% B:0.18%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.075...-0.060) - [0.0%]
Duration: 25 minutes 00 second
3.Rollout17/1 6/3(2)eq: -0.117 (-0.086)
Player:
Opponent:
45.71% (G:7.16% B:0.09%)
54.29% (G:5.62% B:0.12%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.125...-0.110) - [0.0%]
Duration: 25 minutes 01 second
4.Rollout113/10(2) 7/1eq: -0.125 (-0.094)
Player:
Opponent:
46.05% (G:7.15% B:0.09%)
53.95% (G:3.49% B:0.08%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.132...-0.117) - [0.0%]
Duration: 24 minutes 28 seconds
5.Rollout17/4 7/1 6/3eq: -0.137 (-0.107)
Player:
Opponent:
45.14% (G:7.17% B:0.10%)
54.86% (G:5.45% B:0.10%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.145...-0.130) - [0.0%]
Duration: 23 minutes 35 seconds
6.Rollout113/10(2) 7/4(2)eq: -0.143 (-0.112)
Player:
Opponent:
45.43% (G:6.52% B:0.09%)
54.57% (G:3.02% B:0.07%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.150...-0.136) - [0.0%]
Duration: 22 minutes 37 seconds
7.Rollout17/4 6/3(3)eq: -0.166 (-0.135)
Player:
Opponent:
44.43% (G:5.49% B:0.08%)
55.57% (G:5.23% B:0.17%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.173...-0.159) - [0.0%]
Duration: 23 minutes 15 seconds
8.Rollout17/4(2) 6/3(2)eq: -0.182 (-0.152)
Player:
Opponent:
44.10% (G:5.40% B:0.06%)
55.90% (G:4.97% B:0.09%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.190...-0.175) - [0.0%]
Duration: 20 minutes 53 seconds
9.Rollout113/10 13/4eq: -0.196 (-0.165)
Player:
Opponent:
43.73% (G:7.50% B:0.13%)
56.27% (G:3.73% B:0.09%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.204...-0.188) - [0.0%]
Duration: 24 minutes 22 seconds
10.Rollout113/10 13/7 6/3eq: -0.209 (-0.178)
Player:
Opponent:
43.54% (G:8.22% B:0.16%)
56.46% (G:4.49% B:0.16%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.216...-0.201) - [0.0%]
Duration: 19 minutes 21 seconds
11.Rollout17/1(2)eq: -0.210 (-0.179)
Player:
Opponent:
43.25% (G:5.38% B:0.06%)
56.75% (G:4.98% B:0.13%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.218...-0.202) - [0.0%]
Duration: 25 minutes 06 seconds
12.Rollout113/10(2) 6/3 4/1eq: -0.228 (-0.197)
Player:
Opponent:
43.32% (G:6.56% B:0.08%)
56.68% (G:5.91% B:0.20%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.236...-0.220) - [0.0%]
Duration: 18 minutes 47 seconds
13.Rollout121/15(2)eq: -0.232 (-0.201)
Player:
Opponent:
42.61% (G:2.68% B:0.12%)
57.39% (G:2.34% B:0.05%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.239...-0.225) - [0.0%]
Duration: 33 minutes 24 seconds
14.Rollout113/4 6/3eq: -0.247 (-0.216)
Player:
Opponent:
42.27% (G:7.11% B:0.10%)
57.73% (G:4.82% B:0.10%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.255...-0.239) - [0.0%]
Duration: 23 minutes 09 seconds
15.Rollout113/7(2)eq: -0.258 (-0.227)
Player:
Opponent:
42.94% (G:4.65% B:0.06%)
57.06% (G:2.16% B:0.04%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.265...-0.251) - [0.0%]
Duration: 18 minutes 34 seconds
16.Rollout121/18(2) 13/10(2)eq: -0.262 (-0.231)
Player:
Opponent:
41.17% (G:3.28% B:0.09%)
58.83% (G:1.76% B:0.03%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.269...-0.255) - [0.0%]
Duration: 28 minutes 14 seconds
17.Rollout121/18(2) 7/4 6/3eq: -0.293 (-0.262)
Player:
Opponent:
40.11% (G:3.64% B:0.11%)
59.89% (G:3.26% B:0.08%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.300...-0.287) - [0.0%]
Duration: 26 minutes 44 seconds
18.Rollout113/7 6/3(2)eq: -0.293 (-0.263)
Player:
Opponent:
41.22% (G:5.75% B:0.08%)
58.78% (G:4.82% B:0.12%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.301...-0.285) - [0.0%]
Duration: 22 minutes 25 seconds
19.Rollout113/1eq: -0.313 (-0.283)
Player:
Opponent:
40.51% (G:5.85% B:0.10%)
59.49% (G:4.95% B:0.06%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.321...-0.305) - [0.0%]
Duration: 24 minutes 46 seconds
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[13] 13/10(2) 6/3(2)
[ 4] 21/15(2)
[ 4] 21/18(2) 13/10(2)
[ 3] 13/4 6/3
[ 1] 13/10(2) 7/4(2)
[ 1] 13/10(2) 7/4 6/3
[ 1] 21/18(2) 7/4 6/3
[ 1] 7/4 6/3(3)
[ 1] 7/1 6/3(2)
[ 1] 7/1(2)
[ 1] 13/7 6/3(2)


Grant Hoffman (grant@hoffman.kiwi)
teaches at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Grant Hoffman recommends: 13/10(2) 6/3(2)

After the roll we will still be behind in the race by 7 pips with Neil on roll. Therefore we should keep our back anchor as far back as possible – meaning we should leave it where it is.

If we are leaving our back anchor where it is, we should be playing 13/10(2) then decide how to play the last 2 threes. If we play 7/4 6/3, we create a semi dead checker on our 4 point. Yes, we could roll a 1 but if we are forced to cover our 3 point blot with another checker, then the extra checker on our 4 point will become a dead checker. I would rather play 6/3(2), which leaves the 6 point slotted but potentially creates no semi dead checkers.



Neil Kazaross: 44 16/12(2) 9/5(2)


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 79
             
11 point match
              pip: 102
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-BBBB-AB--B--b---d--bBbbc-:0:0:1:11:6:8:0:11:10
to play 11

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2018-01-12

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 104
             
11 point match
              pip: 119
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-BA-B-CC-b---B--bd-b-Bbab-:0:0:1:41:6:8:0:11:10
to play 41

1.xgRollout17/3 6/5eq: -0.331
Player:
Opponent:
40.17% (G:6.95% B:0.12%)
59.83% (G:7.88% B:0.37%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.335...-0.328) - [66.9%]
Duration: 3 hours 12 minutes
2.playedRollout17/2eq: -0.332 (-0.001)
Player:
Opponent:
40.15% (G:5.98% B:0.12%)
59.85% (G:6.04% B:0.22%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.336...-0.329) - [33.1%]
Duration: 3 hours 03 minutes
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[32] 7/2


Grant Hoffman (grant@hoffman.kiwi)
and
Steve Sax (backgammonplayer@msn.com)
teach at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Grant Hoffman recommends: 7/2

It is tempting to just try to build the best possible board with 7/3 6/5. This slots the most important points. If we could not get a shot next turn this would be my choice. But we could get a shot next turn if Neil tries to clear his 16 point, so I will play 7/2, covering my blot and giving us a 4 point board.


Steve Sax recommends: 7/2

I would make the two point and not triple slot.

My reason is that I don’t want Neil to make a break for it while we have three blots in my board. However, I looked at Neil’s responses after the slot play and he doesn’t run much more often than if we had made our two point which sort of refutes my concern for the breakaway.

The benefit for the slotting play is that we can make one of three different points with numbers ranging from ones through fives. A pretty diverse collection of numbers to make a new point. However, by making the two point immediately already achieves one of your goals as a fourth point is made in your board.

What is at the center of contention on the move is what happens a few rolls down the road where we will either be able to efficiently make a 4th and then 5th point in our board, or be forced to put pieces out of play.

By playing conservative and making the two point, we still have one’s through fours that either slot or potentially make a new point in our board, whereas by triple slotting only sixes don’t play.

Let’s take a closer look at how many points we make after each play in a total of two rolls. I’ll point out where one side gains or loses after a given roll.

We make an extra point after triple slotting on 42, 52 and 54 and doesn’t put a piece out of play with 51. Other than that there’s a lot of relative transposition in that the positions might be slightly different but the nature of them stays somewhat the same. That is an argument in favor of the triple slot play.

Can we come up with any benefit for just making the two point? Well if Neil rolls 43, 53, 54 and 64 and we roll an indirect combination to hit the newly produced blot, then we will be at a disadvantage in the hitting contest by a longshot.

And even if we directly hit a blot, we might hit with a “six” which will not make a new point in their board. Additionally, even if we hit and cover one of our blots they will still have one or two blots in their board for us to hit them with.

The relative timing is in question after the 51 as Neil still has two spare pieces on his eight point (which might not move efficiently) and we have two spare checkers on our seven point which might be put out of play on certain numbers.

In any case where either side might leave a shot you don’t want to be too flippant on where you play your pieces in that you might incur additional risk where it is not necessary.

In the end the plays are extremely close with an inconclusive “triple slot play” being correct by the tiniest margin.

The lesson here is to monitor any position with respect to how numbers play with respect to flexibility and board making opportunity and see if your opponent will be either forced to, or elect to run and take a risk. If they should make a break for it then you should seriously question whether you want to leave all that mess behind in your board.


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 104
             
11 point match
              pip: 114
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-BB-B-CB-b---B--bd-b-Bbab-:0:0:-1:54:6:8:0:11:10
to play 54

1.playedRollout16/2 6/1eq: +0.006
Player:
Opponent:
51.86% (G:4.82% B:0.26%)
48.14% (G:10.12% B:0.15%)
Conf.: ± 0.009 (-0.003...+0.015) - [100.0%]
Duration: 28 minutes 57 seconds
2.Rollout18/3 6/2eq: -0.104 (-0.110)
Player:
Opponent:
48.99% (G:5.58% B:0.16%)
51.01% (G:11.85% B:0.16%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.111...-0.096) - [0.0%]
Duration: 27 minutes 15 seconds
3.Rollout19/5 8/3eq: -0.788 (-0.794)
Player:
Opponent:
39.53% (G:7.01% B:0.24%)
60.47% (G:26.78% B:0.47%)
Conf.: ± 0.010 (-0.797...-0.778) - [0.0%]
Duration: 21 minutes 58 seconds
4.Rollout116/7eq: -0.825 (-0.831)
Player:
Opponent:
39.63% (G:9.03% B:0.60%)
60.37% (G:29.03% B:0.60%)
Conf.: ± 0.009 (-0.834...-0.815) - [0.0%]
Duration: 20 minutes 51 seconds
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 6/2 6/1.

I think this was my worst roll! The problem is the 4. If I play 16/7 that’s two blots and many shots and a cube coming my way. 9/5 is also unthinkable and will earn me the cube. So the 4 must be 6/2 and along with that I have to play 6/1. Backgammon is NOT a beauty contest, and I have to hope for something better next roll and also that my opponents may have to weaken somewhere.

I gag and play 6/2 6/1.


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 95
             
11 point match
              pip: 114
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-BB-B-CB-b---B--bd---Bbbc-:0:0:1:33:6:8:0:11:10
to play 33

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2018-01-11

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 120
             
11 point match
              pip: 125
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=--B-BbDC----bB---d-b-Bbab-:0:0:1:51:6:8:0:11:10
to play 51

1.xgRollout17/1eq: +0.052
Player:
Opponent:
50.95% (G:9.05% B:0.22%)
49.05% (G:8.98% B:0.38%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (+0.044...+0.060) - [100.0%]
Duration: 38 minutes 23 seconds
2.playedRollout16/1 2/1eq: +0.033 (-0.020)
Player:
Opponent:
50.53% (G:8.35% B:0.19%)
49.47% (G:8.76% B:0.18%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (+0.025...+0.040) - [0.0%]
Duration: 36 minutes 59 seconds
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[19] 6/1 2/1
[11] 7/1
[ 1] 13/7


Grant Hoffman (grant@hoffman.kiwi)
teaches at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Grant Hoffman recommends: 7/1

The choice is between 7/1 and 6/1 2/1.

6/1 2/1 seems to be the more flexible with a spare on both the 7 and 6 points, but I would prefer to have the made point the 2 point rather than the 1 point so I will go with 7/1.


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 120
             
11 point match
              pip: 119
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-BA-BbCC----bB---d-b-Bbab-:0:0:-1:44:6:8:0:11:10
to play 44

1.playedRollout120/16(2) 13/9(2)eq: +0.332
Player:
Opponent:
59.72% (G:6.13% B:0.28%)
40.28% (G:5.51% B:0.15%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (+0.325...+0.340) - [100.0%]
Duration: 34 minutes 00 second
2.Rollout113/5(2)eq: +0.242 (-0.091)
Player:
Opponent:
57.66% (G:9.60% B:0.32%)
42.34% (G:6.22% B:0.17%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (+0.234...+0.249) - [0.0%]
Duration: 29 minutes 31 seconds
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 20/16(2) 13/9(2).

After this nice roll, I am ahead 15 pips, so I should try to get all my checkers home and reasonably together. 20/16(2) 13/9(2) looks to be best for that plan, as if I make my 5 point, I leave my back checkers alone back on the 20 point.


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 104
             
11 point match
              pip: 119
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-BA-B-CC-b---B--bd-b-Bbab-:0:0:1:41:6:8:0:11:10
to play 41

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2018-01-10

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 133
             
11 point match
              pip: 155
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=----aaEBC---cCa--b-c--bAbA:0:0:1:44:6:8:0:11:10
to play 44

1.playedRollout1Bar/21 8/4*(3)eq: +0.142
Player:
Opponent:
50.82% (G:16.21% B:0.69%)
49.18% (G:16.33% B:0.83%)
Conf.: ± 0.010 (+0.131...+0.152) - [100.0%]
Duration: 51 minutes 35 seconds
2.Rollout1Bar/21 13/5* 8/4*eq: -0.043 (-0.184)
Player:
Opponent:
47.39% (G:16.10% B:0.94%)
52.61% (G:25.62% B:3.01%)
Conf.: ± 0.012 (-0.055...-0.030) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 06 minutes
3.Rollout1Bar/21 8/4* 6/2(2)eq: -0.048 (-0.189)
Player:
Opponent:
46.61% (G:14.20% B:0.72%)
53.39% (G:20.47% B:1.68%)
Conf.: ± 0.011 (-0.059...-0.036) - [0.0%]
Duration: 57 minutes 31 seconds
4.Rollout1Bar/21 13/9 8/4*(2)eq: -0.066 (-0.208)
Player:
Opponent:
46.75% (G:16.49% B:0.90%)
53.25% (G:22.95% B:3.27%)
Conf.: ± 0.012 (-0.078...-0.054) - [0.0%]
Duration: 52 minutes 49 seconds
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[21] b/21 8/4*(3)
[10] b/21 13/9 8/4*(2)
[ 4] b/21 13/5* 8/4
[ 1] b/21 13/5*/1


Grant Hoffman (grant@hoffman.kiwi)
and
Steve Sax (backgammonplayer@msn.com)
teach at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Grant Hoffman recommends: b/21 8/4*(3)

Manna from heaven. After we enter bar/21, I would hit 8/4*(2). This puts Neil on the bar and us in control. The question is how do we play our last 4?

One thing that I’ve been noticing when I’ve been reviewing my matches, is my tendency to be a little bit too aggressive when I am attacking. Here my natural instinct is to play 13/9, but this is just too risky. It would have been my choice six months ago, but now I would play 8/4 with the remaining 4. This makes it hard for Neil to return hit.


Steve Sax recommends: b/21 8/4*(3)

The “Double Tiger” is all the rage but I think we’ll keep him in his cage. (Can I can even say such a thing in this day and age).

After entering I would play 8/4*(3). While there is a temptation to hit twice, we’re out-boarded three to one, so leaving two blots isn’t ideal. Additionally we can do something constructive in making our four point in addition to hitting.

One of the reasons making the four point is so appealing is that we entered on Neil’s four point so Neil’s counterattack doesn’t even include diversified sixes, which would be the case if Neil had a checker on his ten point.

Since Neil’s checker is on the 11 point it isn’t an asset to him in a counterattack, although it could be used to make his five point or an outfield blocking point in some cases.

So after our 44, the position is up for grabs as we will only have a double if Neil fails to enter.

Currently Neil is ahead two pips and on the bar against a two point board and has a slight advantage in the number of home board points. However, the additional point is his ace point, so that mutes the relative strength of the position.

Still, as the game goes forward, be aware that our ambition will be to send a double fairly briskly as a doubled gammon win will take us from 35.2% to 75%. A pretty healthy promotion in match winning chances.


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 137
             
11 point match
              pip: 139
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=a---CaEB----cCa--b-c-AbAb-:0:0:-1:54:6:8:0:11:10
to play 54

1.playedRollout1Bar/20 6/2*eq: +0.047
Player:
Opponent:
51.66% (G:17.20% B:0.49%)
48.34% (G:10.56% B:0.37%)
Conf.: ± 0.004 (+0.044...+0.051) - [100.0%]
Duration: 6 hours 02 minutes
2.Rollout1Bar/20 8/4*eq: +0.036 (-0.011)
Player:
Opponent:
51.58% (G:20.41% B:0.66%)
48.42% (G:13.44% B:0.57%)
Conf.: ± 0.004 (+0.032...+0.041) - [0.0%]
Duration: 6 hours 08 minutes
3.Rollout2Bar/20 11/7eq: +0.015 (-0.032)
Player:
Opponent:
50.38% (G:16.11% B:0.44%)
49.62% (G:9.73% B:0.42%)
Conf.: ± 0.009 (+0.006...+0.024) - [0.0%]
Duration: 50 minutes 20 seconds
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

2 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays b/20 6/2*.

I have no safe 4 and want to retain my points, so 6/2* it is.



USBGF Members: 64 b/21 13/7


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 128
             
11 point match
              pip: 131
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=----CbEC----cBa--b-b-Bbab-:0:0:-1:21:6:8:0:11:10
to play 21

1.Rollout113/11 3/2eq: -0.090
Player:
Opponent:
47.99% (G:8.75% B:0.30%)
52.01% (G:9.04% B:0.26%)
Conf.: ± 0.004 (-0.094...-0.087) - [70.0%]
Duration: 5 hours 02 minutes
2.playedRollout111/8eq: -0.091 (-0.001)
Player:
Opponent:
47.80% (G:8.31% B:0.28%)
52.20% (G:8.67% B:0.22%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.095...-0.088) - [30.0%]
Duration: 4 hours 52 minutes
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 11/8.

There are two choices here. 11/8, giving me a direct 6 to close my 2 point, and 13/11 3/2 making a new but 7th point. I prefer not to have four stripped outfield points under contact, so 11/8 it is.



USBGF Members: 42 6/2 4/2


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 125
             
11 point match
              pip: 125
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=--B-BbDC----cB---c-b-Bbab-:0:0:-1:41:6:8:0:11:10
to play 41

1.playedRollout113/8eq: -0.107
Player:
Opponent:
47.16% (G:7.75% B:0.34%)
52.84% (G:8.80% B:0.21%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.115...-0.099) - [100.0%]
Duration: 44 minutes 56 seconds
2.Rollout18/3eq: -0.174 (-0.067)
Player:
Opponent:
45.65% (G:8.05% B:0.46%)
54.35% (G:10.29% B:0.24%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.183...-0.166) - [0.0%]
Duration: 45 minutes 33 seconds
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 13/8.

I’ll play 13/8, as I don’t want to bury a checker. I may have to blot next turn regardless of what I play. In this type of mutual holding game, one often worries about next turn, next turn, so I will hope for something better.


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 120
             
11 point match
              pip: 125
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=--B-BbDC----bB---d-b-Bbab-:0:0:1:51:6:8:0:11:10
to play 51

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2018-01-09

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 63
             
11 point match
              pip: 43
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=-ABBCD-------------ddcb-a-:0:0:1:00:5:8:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in RolloutNo doubleDouble/Take
  Player Winning Chances:94.90% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)94.82% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
  Opponent Winning Chances:5.10% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)5.18% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
  Cubeless Equities+0.898+1.794
Cubeful Equities
     No double:+0.995 (-0.005)±0.000 (+0.994..+0.995)
     Double/Take:+1.787 (+0.787)±0.001 (+1.786..+1.787)
played Double/Pass:+1.000
 
Best Cube action: Double / Pass
Rollout details
1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+
 
Double Decision confidence:100.0%
Take Decision confidence:100.0%
Duration: 1 minute 11 seconds

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[34] Double
[ 0] No Double


Grant Hoffman (grant@hoffman.kiwi)
and
Steve Sax (backgammonplayer@msn.com)
teach at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Grant Hoffman recommends: Double

Again I would just use the Benjamin count and for 43 to 63 and get 580/81 = 7.2. 6.7 is 96% therefore this has to be a double and a pass.


Steve Sax recommends: Double

I’m here just to tell you that now we will be 5 away to Neil’s 3 away after we double and Neil drops.


Neil Kazaross passes.


USBGF Members win one point. Neil leads 3-away/5-away.



USBGF Members: 61 13/7 8/7

Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 167
             
11 point match
              pip: 160
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-b----EBB---eD---c-e----B-:0:0:-1:54:6:8:0:11:10
to play 54

1.playedRollout124/20 13/8eq: -0.347
Player:
Opponent:
44.58% (G:11.64% B:1.32%)
55.42% (G:16.14% B:0.61%)
Conf.: ± 0.005 (-0.352...-0.342) - [98.9%]
Duration: 8 hours 44 minutes
2.Rollout124/15eq: -0.355 (-0.008)
Player:
Opponent:
44.90% (G:11.06% B:1.28%)
55.10% (G:17.46% B:0.59%)
Conf.: ± 0.005 (-0.359...-0.350) - [1.1%]
Duration: 9 hours 33 minutes
3.Rollout213/9 13/8eq: -0.400 (-0.053)
Player:
Opponent:
42.97% (G:13.44% B:1.52%)
57.03% (G:16.74% B:0.88%)
Conf.: ± 0.012 (-0.412...-0.387) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 40 minutes
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

2 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 24/20 13/8.

For money, splitting is very slightly better than running. At this score, since I’d love an advanced anchor, I see no reason to deviate from my usual play.



USBGF Members: 52 24/22 13/8
Neil Kazaross: 55 8/3*(2) 6/1*(2)
USBGF Members: 21 b/23


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 138
             
11 point match
              pip: 155
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-a---aEBC---dC---b-c--bAbA:0:0:-1:00:6:8:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in RolloutNo doubleDouble/Take
  Player Winning Chances:61.28% (G:31.82% B:0.76%)61.61% (G:33.04% B:1.32%)
  Opponent Winning Chances:38.72% (G:8.88% B:0.52%)38.39% (G:9.17% B:0.61%)
  Cubeless Equities+0.523+0.939
Cubeful Equities
played No double:+0.481±0.010 (+0.471..+0.491)
     Double/Take:+0.257 (-0.224)±0.015 (+0.242..+0.272)
     Double/Pass:+1.000 (+0.519)
 
Best Cube action: No double / Take
Percentage of wrong pass needed to make the double decision right: 23.2%
Rollout details
1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+
 
Double Decision confidence:100.0%
Take Decision confidence:100.0%
Duration: 2 hours 05 minutes

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross does not double.

Possibly having my 8 point closed and a 9th checker in the attack zone could make this a close double for money. But at the score, I most certainly don’t want the USBGF Members holding the cube with this much potential counterplay and when lots of my wins are gammons creating overage. My opponents would be quick to send back a 4 cube. This is a typical 3-away position where you simply don’t cube yet.


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 138
             
11 point match
              pip: 155
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=-a---aEBC---dC---b-c--bAbA:0:0:-1:32:6:8:0:11:10
to play 32

1.Rollout124/22 13/10eq: +0.295
Player:
Opponent:
57.61% (G:25.32% B:1.47%)
42.39% (G:10.44% B:0.55%)
Conf.: ± 0.005 (+0.290...+0.300) - [70.6%]
Duration: 6 hours 26 minutes
2.playedRollout124/21 13/11eq: +0.293 (-0.002)
Player:
Opponent:
57.74% (G:23.38% B:1.20%)
42.26% (G:10.12% B:0.49%)
Conf.: ± 0.004 (+0.289...+0.298) - [29.4%]
Duration: 6 hours 09 minutes
3.Rollout213/8eq: +0.255 (-0.040)
Player:
Opponent:
57.01% (G:23.78% B:1.19%)
42.99% (G:10.80% B:0.48%)
Conf.: ± 0.010 (+0.245...+0.265) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 01 minute
4.Rollout213/11 13/10eq: +0.240 (-0.055)
Player:
Opponent:
56.29% (G:25.78% B:1.89%)
43.71% (G:11.48% B:0.69%)
Conf.: ± 0.012 (+0.228...+0.253) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 06 minutes
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

2 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 24/21 13/11.

With my race lead, I think that I should advance my back checker and bring down a builder. 13/8 doesn’t accomplish enough noting that my opponents will anchor 36% of the time. Bringing down 2 builders seems a bit too loose.

So I need to compare 24/22 13/10 with 24/21 13/11. 13/10 seems to duplicate quite a few numbers, but this builder aims at my open 4 point. 13/11 is a less useful builder, but doesn’t leave them a great 55. However, 24/21 walks into a nasty 22 joker. But it feels best to me to come as far forward as possible and I have decent diversification and sometimes can end up making a point in my opponents outerboard.

So 24/21 13/11 it is.


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 133
             
11 point match
              pip: 155
score: 6

is USBGF Members
XGID=----aaEBC---cCa--b-c--bAbA:0:0:1:44:6:8:0:11:10
to play 44

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2018-01-08

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 84
             
11 point match
              pip: 80
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=--BBBBBBB-A-a----c-ccbaaa-:0:0:1:00:5:8:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in RolloutNo doubleDouble/Take
  Player Winning Chances:67.35% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)67.34% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
  Opponent Winning Chances:32.65% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)32.66% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
  Cubeless Equities+0.347+0.647
Cubeful Equities
played No double:+0.571 (-0.001)±0.001 (+0.570..+0.573)
     Double/Take:+0.573±0.001 (+0.572..+0.574)
     Double/Pass:+1.000 (+0.427)
 
Best Cube action: Double / Take
Rollout details
7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+
 
Double Decision confidence:95.4%
Take Decision confidence:100.0%
Duration: 2 hours 05 minutes

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[24] No Double
[15] Double


Grant Hoffman (grant@hoffman.kiwi)
and
Steve Sax (backgammonplayer@msn.com)
teach at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Grant Hoffman recommends: Double

Should we Double and should Neil take? Here’s how I would calculate this over the board.

Neil’s live cube take point is 22%. This corresponds to 78% for us. I normally double at 6% from the Live cube take point so I would be doubling at 72%. But here I would subtract another 2% as Neil will not be wanting to redouble us as we would be very keen to take the 4 cube and instantly recube to 8 putting the match on the line. So we are now at 70%. I would subtract another 2% due to Neil’s significant lead, putting our doubling point at 68%.

I use Arthur Benjamin’s modified Kleinman count which from this point on I will simply call the Benjamin count. A pip count of 80 to 84: 65/140 = 0.46 As 0.42 corresponds to 67% game winning chances, and we need 68% to double, I would then consider my opponent and double if I thought he was a better player than me. Here I do and so would double. If I thought my opponent was a weaker player I would think about how well I was playing and whether I was tired or not.

My calculations say this is very close to a double so I will double against Neil.


Steve Sax:

The USBGF Members trail “six away-three away” and can consider doubling here.

The benefit of doubling from this score is that Neil has to be nearing 88% before he can redouble as our take point is just over 11%.

The drawback of doubling is that if Neil somehow manages to overshoot his market, he will reach Crawford/6-away which means that we will have to win a gammon in one of the next three games or we will have to win a total of four games to win the match.

As far as the race and crossover counts go, at an even score we would be far from doubling as we would need to lead by about 8% at many scores so in the case of a race about this length six pips wouldn’t do it, but seven would.

In this case we are only up four pips but have an advantage in crossovers. That is because with normal rolls, we will have their first checker off in three rolls, whereas Neil won’t get his first checker off for four rolls if he manages to roll an ace in any of his first three shakes.

While that might not seem like a big deal it’s enough to potentially swing a marginal “no double” to a “double”.

Since this is an active cube situation, advice here might impact future decisions so I won’t say whether it’s a double or not but I will say the answer is somewhat interesting.



USBGF Members: 43 10/6 8/5
Neil Kazaross: 65 13/7 8/3
USBGF Members: 42 8/4 7/5
Neil Kazaross: 31 8/5 7/6
USBGF Members: 66 7/1 6/0(3)
Neil Kazaross: 42 8/4 2/0


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 63
             
11 point match
              pip: 43
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=-ABBCD-------------ddcb-a-:0:0:1:00:5:8:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2018-01-07

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 99
             
11 point match
              pip: 124
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=--ABBBB-A---bB--AdBdba-aa-:0:0:1:66:5:8:0:11:10
to play 66

1.playedRollout116/10 13/7(2) 8/2eq: -0.282
Player:
Opponent:
40.16% (G:1.22% B:0.04%)
59.84% (G:0.88% B:0.02%)
Conf.: ± 0.002 (-0.285...-0.280) - [73.9%]
Duration: 2 hours 05 minutes
2.xgRollout113/7 13/1 8/2eq: -0.283 (-0.001)
Player:
Opponent:
39.95% (G:1.59% B:0.05%)
60.05% (G:1.67% B:0.04%)
Conf.: ± 0.002 (-0.286...-0.281) - [23.3%]
Duration: 2 hours 06 minutes
3.Rollout116/10 13/7 13/1eq: -0.285 (-0.003)
Player:
Opponent:
40.05% (G:1.13% B:0.03%)
59.95% (G:0.87% B:0.02%)
Conf.: ± 0.002 (-0.288...-0.283) - [2.2%]
Duration: 1 hour 50 minutes
4.Rollout116/4 13/7(2)eq: -0.286 (-0.004)
Player:
Opponent:
40.09% (G:1.13% B:0.03%)
59.91% (G:0.92% B:0.02%)
Conf.: ± 0.002 (-0.288...-0.283) - [0.7%]
Duration: 1 hour 39 minutes
5.Rollout116/4 13/7 8/2eq: -0.289 (-0.007)
Player:
Opponent:
40.00% (G:1.63% B:0.04%)
60.00% (G:1.26% B:0.03%)
Conf.: ± 0.002 (-0.291...-0.286) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 38 minutes
6.Rollout116/10 13/1 8/2eq: -0.293 (-0.011)
Player:
Opponent:
39.79% (G:1.57% B:0.04%)
60.21% (G:1.36% B:0.04%)
Conf.: ± 0.002 (-0.296...-0.291) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 41 minutes
7.Rollout213/1(2)eq: -0.294 (-0.012)
Player:
Opponent:
39.62% (G:1.52% B:0.04%)
60.38% (G:1.75% B:0.09%)
Conf.: ± 0.006 (-0.300...-0.289) - [0.0%]
Duration: 26 minutes 44 seconds
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

2 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[27] 16/10 13/7(2) 8/2
[ 3] 13/7 13/1 8/2
[ 1] 16/4 13/7(2)
[ 1] 13/1(2)


Grant Hoffman (grant@hoffman.kiwi)
and
Steve Sax (backgammonplayer@msn.com)
teach at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Grant Hoffman recommends: 13/7 13/1 8/2

I would play the first six 8/2, giving us a five-point board. The next 6 has to be 13/7.

We now have 2 choices: –

  • 16/10 13/7, creating a 6 prime and duplicating Neil’s 1’s,
  • 13/1, slotting the final point in our board and duplicating Neil’s 4’s.

We can play quite loose here, as Neil has 3 inner board blots. So how to decide between the above 2 options? I have found that when duplicating numbers, if everything else is equal I will choose to duplicate the larger number. The reason for this is that you usually have fewer choices with the larger numbers – compare having to play a 6 to having to play a 1. The larger the number, the more forced it is.

So I will go with 13/7 13/1 8/2.


Steve Sax recommends: 13/7 13/1 8/2

I would play two checkers off the mid-point, make the deuce and slot the ace. That way if Neil rolls 44 (and to a lesser extent 22), he can’t get home freely without leaving a shot or maintaining contact.

The drawback of my play is that since boxes brought us so close in the race, if it does indeed become a straight race it isn’t quite as efficient to play checkers to our ace and deuce points rather than bringing the checker in from the 16 to the four point.

Part of the reason there is little difference in the choice of moves is that the general nature of the position is volatile, since the race is so close and there isn’t a great chance of either side leaving a shot in the near future.


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 99
             
11 point match
              pip: 100
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=--BBBBBB--A-b----dBdba-aa-:0:0:-1:43:5:8:0:11:10
to play 43

1.playedRollout18/4 6/3eq: +0.263
Player:
Opponent:
59.25% (G:1.16% B:0.04%)
40.75% (G:1.37% B:0.04%)
Conf.: ± 0.006 (+0.257...+0.269) - [100.0%]
Duration: 16 minutes 13 seconds
2.Rollout18/5 6/2eq: +0.231 (-0.032)
Player:
Opponent:
58.22% (G:0.95% B:0.02%)
41.78% (G:1.30% B:0.06%)
Conf.: ± 0.006 (+0.225...+0.236) - [0.0%]
Duration: 15 minutes 49 seconds
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 8/4 6/3.

Now the race is close, and my opponents are held on a point that gives them 10 pips of timing less than I have: 13 point for me vs. 18 point for them. Therefore, they could be the ones to be forced to leave a direct shot first, so I really want a strong board. I also need to consider wastage for the race. All this makes the natural looking 8/4 6/3 seem best to me.



USBGF Members: 55 18/8(2)


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 92
             
11 point match
              pip: 80
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=--BBBBBBB-A-b----c-cbbaaa-:0:0:-1:62:5:8:0:11:10
to play 62

1.playedRollout113/5eq: -0.570
Player:
Opponent:
32.64% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
67.36% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Conf.: ± 0.001 (-0.571...-0.569) - [95.6%]
Duration: 1 hour 32 minutes
2.Rollout113/7 8/6eq: -0.572 (-0.001)
Player:
Opponent:
32.59% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
67.41% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Conf.: ± 0.001 (-0.573...-0.571) - [3.2%]
Duration: 1 hour 14 minutes
3.Rollout113/11 13/7eq: -0.572 (-0.002)
Player:
Opponent:
32.58% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
67.42% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Conf.: ± 0.001 (-0.573...-0.571) - [1.1%]
Duration: 1 hour 23 minutes
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 13/5.

What happened to my race lead? Anyhow, 13/5 puts a checker where it belongs for the bearoff.


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 84
             
11 point match
              pip: 80
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=--BBBBBBB-A-a----c-ccbaaa-:0:0:1:00:5:8:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2018-01-05

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 108
             
11 point match
              pip: 132
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=---ABBCAA---bB--AeBeb--a--:0:0:1:53:5:8:0:11:10
to play 53

1.playedRollout17/2 6/3eq: -0.555
Player:
Opponent:
30.43% (G:1.94% B:0.08%)
69.57% (G:2.36% B:0.06%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.558...-0.552) - [97.3%]
Duration: 5 hours 24 minutes
2.Rollout113/8 6/3eq: -0.560 (-0.004)
Player:
Opponent:
30.35% (G:1.93% B:0.09%)
69.65% (G:2.13% B:0.05%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.563...-0.557) - [2.5%]
Duration: 5 hours 25 minutes
3.Rollout18/3 7/4eq: -0.561 (-0.006)
Player:
Opponent:
30.29% (G:1.90% B:0.08%)
69.71% (G:2.45% B:0.07%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.564...-0.558) - [0.2%]
Duration: 4 hours 36 minutes
4.Rollout116/13 8/3eq: -0.565 (-0.010)
Player:
Opponent:
29.76% (G:1.90% B:0.08%)
70.24% (G:1.28% B:0.06%)
Conf.: ± 0.004 (-0.569...-0.561) - [0.0%]
Duration: 4 hours 18 minutes
5.Rollout18/3 5/2eq: -0.565 (-0.010)
Player:
Opponent:
30.49% (G:2.38% B:0.09%)
69.51% (G:4.63% B:0.36%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.568...-0.562) - [0.0%]
Duration: 4 hours 38 minutes
6.Rollout116/11 6/3eq: -0.566 (-0.011)
Player:
Opponent:
29.78% (G:1.84% B:0.09%)
70.22% (G:1.25% B:0.06%)
Conf.: ± 0.004 (-0.570...-0.563) - [0.0%]
Duration: 3 hours 36 minutes
7.Rollout18/3 6/3eq: -0.567 (-0.011)
Player:
Opponent:
30.20% (G:1.88% B:0.07%)
69.80% (G:2.37% B:0.06%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.570...-0.564) - [0.0%]
Duration: 4 hours 27 minutes
8.Rollout216/8eq: -0.573 (-0.018)
Player:
Opponent:
29.68% (G:1.81% B:0.15%)
70.32% (G:1.23% B:0.04%)
Conf.: ± 0.009 (-0.582...-0.565) - [0.0%]
Duration: 33 minutes 08 seconds
9.Rollout216/11 8/5eq: -0.581 (-0.026)
Player:
Opponent:
29.58% (G:1.81% B:0.15%)
70.42% (G:1.35% B:0.05%)
Conf.: ± 0.009 (-0.590...-0.573) - [0.0%]
Duration: 31 minutes 07 seconds
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

2 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[17] 7/2 6/3
[10] 16/11 6/3
[ 6] 16/13 8/3
[ 2] 13/8 6/3
[ 1] 8/3 6/3
[ 1] 8/3 7/4


Grant Hoffman (grant@hoffman.kiwi)
and
Steve Sax (backgammonplayer@msn.com)
teach at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Grant Hoffman recommends: 7/2 6/3

After the roll we will be 16 pips behind in the race. Our best chance of winning is to hit a blot. To win once we have hit a blot, we need a strong board (or prime). So we should ‘cover a point, slot a point’ with 7/2 6/3.


Steve Sax recommends: 7/2 6/3

We should play 7/2 6/3, improving our home board position and leaving a checker on the 16 point as a deterrent to Neil escaping with 44 and to some extent with 22.

I saw Mary’s suggestion of 13/8 6/3, and it’s not bad either, as it leaves our bar point slotted, and gives us a better chance of making a six prime without undue risk. Neil won’t double hit with 41 as he has a large race lead and is outboarded, so any theoretical risk of contact at this time is unwarranted.

Also, double aces for Neil doesn’t serve him well as he can’t move off of the mid-point due to the blot on his two-point.

Either play is reasonable at this point in time. If Neil makes another point or two in his board, then the risk of leaving a checker on the 16 point will be too great, but by that time several rolls will have taken place and we will have to give something up by then, either our midpoint or the blot on the 16 point.


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 108
             
11 point match
              pip: 124
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=--ABBBB-A---bB--AeBeb--a--:0:0:-1:00:5:8:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in RolloutNo doubleDouble/Take
  Player Winning Chances:69.59% (G:2.37% B:0.05%)69.64% (G:2.43% B:0.05%)
  Opponent Winning Chances:30.41% (G:1.99% B:0.08%)30.36% (G:2.00% B:0.09%)
  Cubeless Equities+0.399+0.881
Cubeful Equities
played No double:+0.557±0.003 (+0.554..+0.560)
     Double/Take:+0.546 (-0.011)±0.004 (+0.541..+0.550)
     Double/Pass:+1.000 (+0.443)
 
Best Cube action: No double / Take
Percentage of wrong pass needed to make the double decision right: 2.4%
Rollout details
7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+
 
Double Decision confidence:100.0%
Take Decision confidence:100.0%
Duration: 8 hours 27 minutes

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross does not double.

I remain with about a 70% win position and have been close to cubing this for several turns. Now I can hold out a few turns while hoping to clear with a double. However, I only lead by 16 pips and my opponents’ board is shaping up very nicely. At this score, the extra point to get to Crawford is quite valuable, and in a gammonless game I can cube basically as if for money in spite of my opponents’ extra recube vig. However, this isn’t completely gammonless.

I think this position falls into the holding game category of close double for money, but at the score, I will be cautious and just roll. I’d cube if I lead by a few more pips and I’d also cube if there were any flaws in their home board.

An issue with cubing here occurs after the take if I roll the horrid blotting 66. Now I will be recubed in the match, but for money I’d have a Beaver!

If I had a larger race lead, I’d be less likely to face a strong recube if they roll a couple of joker doubles.


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 108
             
11 point match
              pip: 124
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=--ABBBB-A---bB--AeBeb--a--:0:0:-1:54:5:8:0:11:10
to play 54

1.Rollout18/3 6/2eq: +0.552
Player:
Opponent:
69.18% (G:2.34% B:0.05%)
30.82% (G:2.01% B:0.08%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (+0.549...+0.555) - [63.6%]
Duration: 3 hours 50 minutes
2.playedRollout18/4 6/1eq: +0.551 (-0.001)
Player:
Opponent:
69.14% (G:1.96% B:0.04%)
30.86% (G:1.97% B:0.07%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (+0.548...+0.555) - [36.4%]
Duration: 3 hours 53 minutes
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 8/4 6/1.

This type of play comes up often and it is important to realize that my 6’s will be forced 8/2 for some time. Thus, I don’t have to play 6/2 and can just spread out flexibly in my inner board and try to avoid a big stack on my 2 point. This means 8/4 6/1. Now 66 won’t blot although certainly I don’t want to roll it. If my opponents decide to leave that blot on my 9 point again, it isn’t much of a nuisance and if I roll 44 next, I will happily attack and make a 4 point board.


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 99
             
11 point match
              pip: 124
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=--ABBBB-A---bB--AdBdba-aa-:0:0:1:66:5:8:0:11:10
to play 66

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2018-01-04

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 116
             
11 point match
              pip: 135
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=---AB-DBA---bBb-AdBdb--a--:0:0:1:21:5:8:0:11:10
to play 21

1.playedRollout17/5 6/5eq: -0.600
Player:
Opponent:
29.91% (G:2.26% B:0.03%)
70.09% (G:3.47% B:0.30%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.607...-0.594) - [100.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 11 minutes
2.Rollout16/3eq: -0.615 (-0.015)
Player:
Opponent:
29.42% (G:2.02% B:0.00%)
70.58% (G:2.87% B:0.21%)
Conf.: ± 0.006 (-0.622...-0.609) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 11 minutes
3.Rollout116/13eq: -0.643 (-0.043)
Player:
Opponent:
28.27% (G:1.84% B:0.08%)
71.73% (G:1.49% B:0.02%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.652...-0.635) - [0.0%]
Duration: 58 minutes 43 seconds
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[31] 7/5 6/5
[ 6] 6/3
[ 2] 16/13


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 116
             
11 point match
              pip: 132
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=---ABBCAA---bBb-AdBdb--a--:0:0:-1:00:5:8:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in RolloutNo doubleDouble/Take
  Player Winning Chances:70.23% (G:3.66% B:0.18%)70.44% (G:3.52% B:0.15%)
  Opponent Winning Chances:29.77% (G:2.18% B:0.07%)29.56% (G:2.20% B:0.10%)
  Cubeless Equities+0.427+0.925
Cubeful Equities
played No double:+0.604±0.003 (+0.601..+0.607)
     Double/Take:+0.586 (-0.018)±0.005 (+0.581..+0.590)
     Double/Pass:+1.000 (+0.396)
 
Best Cube action: No double / Take
Percentage of wrong pass needed to make the double decision right: 4.2%
Rollout details
7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+
 
Double Decision confidence:100.0%
Take Decision confidence:100.0%
Duration: 11 hours 09 minutes

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross does not double.

Other than a couple of joker doubles, I don’t have any serious market losers. However, as the turns go by, I continue to have these market losers so these chances add up. However, I still have two difficult points to clear and my opponents board is shaping up nicely. As my pip count lead increases their timing increases. I don’t have to be very cautious cubing at the score when gammons are few, but if I make some kind of hit and cover play to try to get home, and end up getting hit back, I could be looking at a 4 cube. It seems prudent to roll.


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 116
             
11 point match
              pip: 132
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=---ABBCAA---bBb-AdBdb--a--:0:0:-1:53:5:8:0:11:10
to play 53

1.playedRollout111/8 11/6eq: +0.561
Player:
Opponent:
69.37% (G:2.38% B:0.06%)
30.63% (G:1.93% B:0.08%)
Conf.: ± 0.004 (+0.558...+0.565) - [99.5%]
Duration: 6 hours 32 minutes
2.Rollout18/3 6/3eq: +0.556 (-0.006)
Player:
Opponent:
68.76% (G:2.59% B:0.07%)
31.24% (G:2.38% B:0.07%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (+0.553...+0.558) - [0.5%]
Duration: 5 hours 45 minutes
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 11/8 11/6.

My 11 point looks like a liability to me, whereas the 9 point would be an asset and the 10 point OK until I get really stripped of spares. Here I can happily shed the 11 point.


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 108
             
11 point match
              pip: 132
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=---ABBCAA---bB--AeBeb--a--:0:0:1:53:5:8:0:11:10
to play 53

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2018-01-03

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 123
             
11 point match
              pip: 141
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=----B-DCA---bBc--dCe---a--:0:0:1:42:5:8:0:11:10
to play 42

1.playedRollout118/16 7/3eq: -0.562
Player:
Opponent:
31.89% (G:2.03% B:0.07%)
68.11% (G:3.28% B:0.16%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.565...-0.559) - [75.7%]
Duration: 7 hours 28 minutes
2.Rollout17/5 7/3eq: -0.564 (-0.002)
Player:
Opponent:
31.46% (G:1.74% B:0.05%)
68.54% (G:2.06% B:0.10%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.566...-0.561) - [19.3%]
Duration: 6 hours 39 minutes
3.Rollout118/16 6/2eq: -0.565 (-0.003)
Player:
Opponent:
31.63% (G:2.01% B:0.07%)
68.37% (G:3.12% B:0.19%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.568...-0.563) - [2.9%]
Duration: 7 hours 16 minutes
4.Rollout213/9 7/5eq: -0.570 (-0.008)
Player:
Opponent:
31.36% (G:1.69% B:0.06%)
68.64% (G:2.01% B:0.04%)
Conf.: ± 0.006 (-0.576...-0.564) - [0.7%]
Duration: 1 hour 09 minutes
5.Rollout27/5 6/2eq: -0.571 (-0.009)
Player:
Opponent:
31.34% (G:1.71% B:0.03%)
68.66% (G:1.91% B:0.09%)
Conf.: ± 0.006 (-0.577...-0.564) - [0.6%]
Duration: 1 hour 08 minutes
6.Rollout218/16 13/9eq: -0.571 (-0.009)
Player:
Opponent:
31.80% (G:2.07% B:0.07%)
68.20% (G:3.79% B:0.14%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.578...-0.564) - [0.5%]
Duration: 1 hour 09 minutes
7.Rollout218/16 8/4eq: -0.573 (-0.011)
Player:
Opponent:
31.40% (G:1.80% B:0.10%)
68.60% (G:2.74% B:0.09%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.580...-0.566) - [0.2%]
Duration: 1 hour 01 minute
8.Rollout213/11 7/3eq: -0.576 (-0.014)
Player:
Opponent:
31.14% (G:1.78% B:0.03%)
68.86% (G:2.16% B:0.09%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.583...-0.569) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 05 minutes
9.Rollout28/4 7/5eq: -0.579 (-0.017)
Player:
Opponent:
31.07% (G:1.62% B:0.08%)
68.93% (G:1.83% B:0.03%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.585...-0.572) - [0.0%]
Duration: 55 minutes 50 seconds
10.Rollout27/3 6/4eq: -0.581 (-0.019)
Player:
Opponent:
30.99% (G:1.52% B:0.04%)
69.01% (G:1.81% B:0.16%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.588...-0.574) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 14 minutes
11.Rollout213/11 13/9eq: -0.582 (-0.020)
Player:
Opponent:
31.10% (G:1.60% B:0.07%)
68.90% (G:1.72% B:0.08%)
Conf.: ± 0.006 (-0.588...-0.576) - [0.0%]
Duration: 53 minutes 59 seconds
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

2 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[22] 18/16 7/3
[ 8] 7/5 7/3
[ 2] 13/11 13/9
[ 2] 13/9 7/5
[ 2] 8/4 7/5
[ 1] 18/16 13/9
[ 1] 7/3 6/4
[ 1] 7/5 6/2


Grant Hoffman (grant@hoffman.kiwi)
and
Steve Sax (backgammonplayer@msn.com)
teach at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Grant Hoffman recommends: 7/5 7/3

Our most likely way to win is to get a shot, then hit the blot. To make this work we also need a good board to contain the checker we hit, so I would slot the points in order now.


Steve Sax recommends: 18/16 7/3

Again there’s not a lot of difference in how we play this. I personally would play 18/16 7/3. That way our 64 and 61 play better and Neil’s 44 doesn’t just get to coast home for free.

Another suggested play of 18/16 13/9 gives up the midpoint but isn’t really that risky as Neil doesn’t have an incentive to hit at this time and allows us to play more freely in our subsequent rolls.

In moves like this where there isn’t a big equity swing there still can be some significant conceptual differences in the moves.

Rembrandt’s “Pendant Portals” is currently valued at 186 million whereas Picasso’s “Les Femmes d’Alger” is valued at 185.2 million. Which painting is better? Well that is for you to decide.


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 123
             
11 point match
              pip: 135
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=---AB-DBA---bBc-AdBe---a--:0:0:-1:61:5:8:0:11:10
to play 61

1.playedRollout111/5 6/5eq: +0.511
Player:
Opponent:
66.95% (G:3.60% B:0.23%)
33.05% (G:2.33% B:0.08%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (+0.507...+0.514) - [100.0%]
Duration: 6 hours 58 minutes
2.Rollout111/5 2/1eq: +0.495 (-0.016)
Player:
Opponent:
66.46% (G:3.19% B:0.12%)
33.54% (G:2.27% B:0.07%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (+0.492...+0.498) - [0.0%]
Duration: 6 hours 12 minutes
3.Rollout211/4eq: +0.494 (-0.016)
Player:
Opponent:
66.59% (G:3.09% B:0.22%)
33.41% (G:2.10% B:0.08%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (+0.487...+0.501) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 04 minutes
4.Rollout28/2 6/5eq: +0.489 (-0.021)
Player:
Opponent:
66.10% (G:2.95% B:0.23%)
33.90% (G:2.40% B:0.07%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (+0.483...+0.496) - [0.0%]
Duration: 58 minutes 13 seconds
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

2 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 11/5 6/5.

Here I can make my 5 point and also prepare to clear my 11 point which I will happily do next turn if possible.


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 116
             
11 point match
              pip: 135
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=---AB-DBA---bBb-AdBdb--a--:0:0:1:21:5:8:0:11:10
to play 21

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2018-01-02

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 130
             
11 point match
              pip: 147
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=------ECB---dBb--cCe---a--:0:0:1:42:5:8:0:11:10
to play 42

1.Rollout118/16 7/3eq: -0.507
Player:
Opponent:
33.41% (G:2.54% B:0.08%)
66.59% (G:5.11% B:0.32%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.511...-0.504) - [76.5%]
Duration: 8 hours 26 minutes
2.Rollout118/16 6/2eq: -0.509 (-0.002)
Player:
Opponent:
33.29% (G:2.60% B:0.10%)
66.71% (G:5.35% B:0.34%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.513...-0.506) - [22.3%]
Duration: 7 hours 57 minutes
3.playedRollout18/4 6/4eq: -0.512 (-0.004)
Player:
Opponent:
32.90% (G:1.91% B:0.07%)
67.10% (G:2.52% B:0.12%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.515...-0.509) - [1.0%]
Duration: 7 hours 47 minutes
4.Rollout17/3 6/4eq: -0.514 (-0.007)
Player:
Opponent:
32.84% (G:1.92% B:0.06%)
67.16% (G:2.75% B:0.13%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.517...-0.511) - [0.0%]
Duration: 7 hours 09 minutes
5.Rollout18/4 7/5eq: -0.515 (-0.007)
Player:
Opponent:
32.78% (G:1.85% B:0.07%)
67.22% (G:2.47% B:0.11%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.518...-0.512) - [0.0%]
Duration: 6 hours 18 minutes
6.Rollout118/16 13/9eq: -0.516 (-0.008)
Player:
Opponent:
33.51% (G:2.90% B:0.12%)
66.49% (G:6.49% B:0.41%)
Conf.: ± 0.004 (-0.519...-0.512) - [0.0%]
Duration: 8 hours 18 minutes
7.Rollout17/5 7/3eq: -0.517 (-0.010)
Player:
Opponent:
32.75% (G:1.84% B:0.06%)
67.25% (G:2.56% B:0.13%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.520...-0.515) - [0.0%]
Duration: 6 hours 31 minutes
8.Rollout17/5 6/2eq: -0.518 (-0.011)
Player:
Opponent:
32.62% (G:1.88% B:0.07%)
67.38% (G:2.58% B:0.13%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.521...-0.515) - [0.0%]
Duration: 6 hours 51 minutes
9.Rollout218/16 8/4eq: -0.519 (-0.011)
Player:
Opponent:
33.11% (G:2.34% B:0.07%)
66.89% (G:4.78% B:0.18%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.526...-0.512) - [0.1%]
Duration: 1 hour 05 minutes
10.Rollout26/4 6/2eq: -0.520 (-0.013)
Player:
Opponent:
32.57% (G:1.99% B:0.05%)
67.43% (G:2.90% B:0.23%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.527...-0.513) - [0.0%]
Duration: 57 minutes 50 seconds
11.Rollout213/9 6/4eq: -0.523 (-0.015)
Player:
Opponent:
32.87% (G:2.05% B:0.05%)
67.13% (G:3.12% B:0.09%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.531...-0.515) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 01 minute
12.Rollout213/11 8/4eq: -0.524 (-0.017)
Player:
Opponent:
32.78% (G:2.71% B:0.10%)
67.22% (G:4.92% B:0.24%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.533...-0.516) - [0.0%]
Duration: 59 minutes 57 seconds
13.Rollout213/11 7/3eq: -0.525 (-0.017)
Player:
Opponent:
32.88% (G:2.38% B:0.11%)
67.12% (G:4.20% B:0.26%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.532...-0.517) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 03 minutes
14.Rollout213/11 13/9eq: -0.525 (-0.018)
Player:
Opponent:
32.74% (G:1.93% B:0.06%)
67.26% (G:2.84% B:0.14%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (-0.532...-0.518) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 06 minutes
15.Rollout213/9 7/5eq: -0.528 (-0.020)
Player:
Opponent:
32.77% (G:2.11% B:0.07%)
67.23% (G:3.49% B:0.26%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.535...-0.520) - [0.0%]
Duration: 58 minutes 58 seconds
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

2 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[28] 8/4 6/4
[ 3] 8/4 7/5
[ 1] 7/3 6/4


Steve Sax (backgammonplayer@msn.com)
teaches at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Steve Sax recommends: 8/4 6/4

To me making the four point is automatic. We’re down 11 in the race after playing, but we can’t do anything constructive but make an innerboard point.

To my amazement it’s close between making the four-point and playing 18/16 13/9.

I guess 18/16 13/9 makes it hard for Neil to move his 44 as a pure winner, since he can’t afford to play four checkers from the mid-point had you not harassed him with the 18/16 move.

Another reason 18/16 move is reasonable is that since Black will probably not hit us, we can play rolls like 61 64 more efficiently.

All in all I don’t think it’s a big deal. Just interesting to note another tactic (leaving two blots in Black’s way) as a reasonable choice in moves.

Happy New Year, everyone.


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 130
             
11 point match
              pip: 141
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=----B-DCA---dBb--cCe---a--:0:0:-1:52:5:8:0:11:10
to play 52

1.playedRollout113/11 13/8eq: +0.508
Player:
Opponent:
66.69% (G:2.31% B:0.05%)
33.31% (G:1.80% B:0.07%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (+0.501...+0.515) - [100.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 14 minutes
2.xgRollout113/8 6/4eq: +0.488 (-0.020)
Player:
Opponent:
66.31% (G:2.83% B:0.17%)
33.69% (G:1.98% B:0.06%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (+0.481...+0.496) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 16 minutes
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 13/11 13/8.

I’m ahead 18 pips, and the plan to beat this holding game remains the same, just try to get home.


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 123
             
11 point match
              pip: 141
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=----B-DCA---bBc--dCe---a--:0:0:1:42:5:8:0:11:10
to play 42

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2018-01-01

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 139
             
11 point match
              pip: 154
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=-----aECB---dBa--cBe---a-A:0:0:1:61:5:8:0:11:10
to play 61

1.xgRollout1Bar/24 13/7eq: +0.034
Player:
Opponent:
47.85% (G:12.25% B:0.46%)
52.15% (G:13.84% B:1.00%)
Conf.: ± 0.010 (+0.024...+0.044) - [100.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 11 minutes
2.Rollout1Bar/24 7/1eq: -0.018 (-0.052)
Player:
Opponent:
45.93% (G:13.05% B:0.40%)
54.07% (G:14.26% B:1.12%)
Conf.: ± 0.010 (-0.029...-0.008) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 08 minutes
3.playedRollout1Bar/18eq: -0.059 (-0.093)
Player:
Opponent:
44.97% (G:8.05% B:0.24%)
55.03% (G:6.31% B:0.36%)
Conf.: ± 0.010 (-0.069...-0.050) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 24 minutes
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[29] b/18
[ 8] b/24 13/7
[ 1] b/24 7/1


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 139
             
11 point match
              pip: 147
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=-----aECB---dBa--cCe---a--:0:0:-1:63:5:8:0:11:10
to play 63

1.playedRollout120/11eq: +0.454
Player:
Opponent:
65.23% (G:3.31% B:0.18%)
34.77% (G:2.09% B:0.08%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (+0.447...+0.461) - [100.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 25 minutes
2.Rollout120/14 11/8eq: +0.084 (-0.370)
Player:
Opponent:
55.81% (G:5.74% B:0.49%)
44.19% (G:7.04% B:0.17%)
Conf.: ± 0.009 (+0.075...+0.093) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 25 minutes
3.Rollout111/5 8/5eq: -0.096 (-0.550)
Player:
Opponent:
50.82% (G:11.30% B:0.72%)
49.18% (G:10.52% B:0.27%)
Conf.: ± 0.009 (-0.106...-0.087) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 14 minutes
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 20/11.

Great roll for me, as I play 20/11 with a nice advantage and a position that rarely loses a gammon.


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 130
             
11 point match
              pip: 147
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=------ECB---dBb--cCe---a--:0:0:1:42:5:8:0:11:10
to play 42

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2017-12-31

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 139
             
11 point match
              pip: 154
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=-----aECB---dBa--cBe---a-A:0:0:1:00:5:8:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in RolloutNo doubleDouble/Take
  Player Winning Chances:55.48% (G:15.39% B:0.60%)55.69% (G:15.51% B:0.60%)
  Opponent Winning Chances:44.52% (G:11.15% B:0.90%)44.31% (G:12.04% B:1.35%)
  Cubeless Equities+0.128+0.365
Cubeful Equities
played No double:+0.372±0.011 (+0.361..+0.383)
     Double/Take:+0.274 (-0.098)±0.013 (+0.261..+0.287)
     Double/Pass:+1.000 (+0.628)
 
Best Cube action: No double / Take
Percentage of wrong pass needed to make the double decision right: 11.9%
Rollout details
1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+
 
Double Decision confidence:100.0%
Take Decision confidence:100.0%
Duration: 2 hours 26 minutes

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[24] No Double
[14] Double


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 139
             
11 point match
              pip: 154
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=-----aECB---dBa--cBe---a-A:0:0:1:61:5:8:0:11:10
to play 61

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2017-12-30

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 145
             
11 point match
              pip: 143
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=-a----EBC---eC---cBe---a--:0:0:1:63:5:8:0:11:10
to play 63

1.xgRollout113/10 13/7eq: +0.509
Player:
Opponent:
58.80% (G:15.84% B:0.43%)
41.20% (G:8.33% B:0.67%)
Conf.: ± 0.004 (+0.505...+0.513) - [66.0%]
Duration: 7 hours 13 minutes
2.playedRollout113/7 8/5eq: +0.508 (-0.001)
Player:
Opponent:
58.48% (G:16.09% B:0.42%)
41.52% (G:8.92% B:0.70%)
Conf.: ± 0.004 (+0.504...+0.512) - [34.0%]
Duration: 7 hours 22 minutes
3.Rollout213/7 6/3eq: +0.483 (-0.026)
Player:
Opponent:
58.66% (G:14.39% B:0.34%)
41.34% (G:8.39% B:0.59%)
Conf.: ± 0.010 (+0.474...+0.493) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 16 minutes
4.Rollout213/4eq: +0.451 (-0.058)
Player:
Opponent:
57.56% (G:14.88% B:0.42%)
42.44% (G:8.60% B:0.73%)
Conf.: ± 0.010 (+0.441...+0.461) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 18 minutes
5.Rollout218/9eq: +0.408 (-0.101)
Player:
Opponent:
57.70% (G:12.07% B:0.45%)
42.30% (G:9.62% B:0.63%)
Conf.: ± 0.009 (+0.399...+0.418) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 22 minutes
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

2 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[21] 13/7 8/5
[ 5] 13/10 13/7
[ 5] 13/7 6/3
[ 2] 18/9


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 145
             
11 point match
              pip: 134
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=-a---AECB---eB---cBe---a--:0:0:-1:42:5:8:0:11:10
to play 42

1.playedRollout124/20* 13/11eq: -0.366
Player:
Opponent:
44.58% (G:11.36% B:0.88%)
55.42% (G:15.22% B:0.61%)
Conf.: ± 0.004 (-0.370...-0.361) - [100.0%]
Duration: 8 hours 25 minutes
2.Rollout124/20* 8/6eq: -0.379 (-0.013)
Player:
Opponent:
44.68% (G:10.70% B:0.81%)
55.32% (G:15.71% B:0.50%)
Conf.: ± 0.004 (-0.383...-0.374) - [0.0%]
Duration: 8 hours 05 minutes
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 24/20* 13/11.

This game has a long way to go and my opponents have only a 1 point board, so I still have to play constructively. This means 24/20* 13/11.


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 139
             
11 point match
              pip: 154
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=-----aECB---dBa--cBe---a-A:0:0:1:00:5:8:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2017-12-29

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 145
             
11 point match
              pip: 143
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=-a----EBC---eC---cBe---a--:0:0:1:00:5:8:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in RolloutNo doubleDouble/Take
  Player Winning Chances:62.54% (G:16.95% B:0.37%)62.67% (G:17.65% B:0.38%)
  Opponent Winning Chances:37.46% (G:6.88% B:0.56%)37.33% (G:7.26% B:0.79%)
  Cubeless Equities+0.337+0.763
Cubeful Equities
played No double:+0.673 (-0.009)±0.004 (+0.669..+0.677)
     Double/Take:+0.682±0.005 (+0.677..+0.686)
     Double/Pass:+1.000 (+0.318)
 
Best Cube action: Double / Take
Rollout details
7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+
 
Double Decision confidence:99.8%
Take Decision confidence:100.0%
Duration: 11 hours 41 minutes

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[29] No Double
[ 5] Double


Jason Lee (Online Match Editor) recommends: Double

This is the first time I’ve written something in this space. I’m not an expert, although perhaps I’m close, but I felt the need to speak up.

This position, and the resulting vote and commentary by the USBGF Members (or lack thereof), really struck me. The vote was a landslide in favor of not doubling, and with the exception of one person, the commentary was in favor of not doubling, and nobody thought it was close.

I think the group collective has made a big mistake in analyzing this position. Everybody sees the power of the second roll 66, making both bar points. This puts the USBGF Members side a solid boost in development. Neil has escaped a checker, and his last move was ineffective, dumping a blot onto his two point.

The USBGF Members have not made an inside point, and doesn’t really have a very flexible position. At first glance, this doesn’t look very close to a double. On one hand, that’s right — let’s look at an XGR++ analysis of the same position for money.

is Player 2

score: 0
pip: 145

             
Unlimited Game
Jacoby Beaver
              pip: 143
score: 0

is Player 1

XGID=-a—-EBC—eC—cBe—a–:0:0:1:00:0:0:3:0:10
on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in XG Roller++No doubleDouble/Take
  Player Winning Chances:62.79% (G:16.06% B:0.32%)62.97% (G:16.06% B:0.30%)
  Opponent Winning Chances:37.21% (G:5.97% B:0.18%)37.03% (G:5.89% B:0.19%)
  Cubeless Equities+0.358+0.725
Cubeful Equities
No double:+0.542
Double/Take:+0.460 (-0.082)
Double/Pass:+1.000 (+0.458)
 
Best Cube action: No double / Take
Percentage of wrong pass needed to make the double decision right: 13.2%

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

As we see, definitely not a double, close to a whopper to do so.

What about the position we have? What’s different? The match score.

When you play backgammon, you have to be aware of many facets of the game that make your current position different from “normal play.” Two important factors that should change your evaluation include the strength of your opponent and the match score.

In this position, it’s the match score that makes the big difference. The USBGF Members are trailing 6-away/3-away. When the game starts, you should be looking for more than the usual amount of excuse to turn the cube, and that thought should be coloring your thoughts throughout the game.

Let’s look at the good things that happen when the USBGF Members turn the cube to 2. I’m going to refer to gammon prices, which you can compute for yourself, or you can get from Extreme Gammon (Analyze -> Cube Information).

  • The USBGF Members gammon price with the cube at 1 is 0.51, and at 2 it’s 0.54 — a slight increase. Increasing our own gammon price is a good thing.
  • Neil’s gammon price with the cube at 1 is 0.58 (this is higher than the usual 0.5 because Neil would like to win an undoubled gammon to get to the Crawford game), and at 2 it’s 0.36. Decreasing our opponent’s gammon price is a good thing.
  • Note that in this position, the USBGF Members will win more gammons than Neil.
  • Should Neil later redouble to 4, he would be doing so for the match, so our take point is our match equity when we are 6-away/1-away, or 11%. Therefore, Neil will be sitting on a cube at 2 which will be practically dead. Making your opponent’s cube power useless is a good thing.

There is also the effect that has been discussed a lot — Neil is stronger than the collective mind of the USBGF Members. This is another small effect that has to be added to the lot.

How do we put this all together to make a decision? If you’ve played backgammon long enough, you should know that for money, the position is not a double. But it’s not so terribly far off. That early 66 is REALLY powerful. That means that we really should be thinking seriously about the cube.

You might ask where the market losers are — we don’t need so many, because (apparently surprisingly), we are inside the market window already!

I think the mistake that many people made was not looking at the match score. I think a lot of people looked at the position, and recalled their years of backgammon experience and knowledge to say “This is not a position I should cube” without making an adjustment for the score.

The point of the OLM is to learn something. Now be honest with yourself —


When you voted on this position yesterday, did you consider the score?

If you did, then I’m satisfied — you may have just underestimated the degree to which the score changes a position like this, and after all, the rollout of this position shows that not doubling is a miniscule 0.009 error — that’s just noise and can’t really be called an error. But if you didn’t consider the match score, then it’s time to reevaluate the way you look at backgammon positions, because you DID make an error — an error in thinking. The score of a match can make a big difference to your play, and this is an example of a score (and a position) where “normal” backgammon play has to be adjusted.


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 145
             
11 point match
              pip: 143
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=-a----EBC---eC---cBe---a--:0:0:1:63:5:8:0:11:10
to play 63

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2017-12-28

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 108
             
11 point match
              pip: 126
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=--ABBBB-B---cBaa-b-bbb-Bb-:0:0:-1:00:5:7:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in RolloutNo doubleDouble/Take
  Player Winning Chances:74.34% (G:6.24% B:0.22%)74.99% (G:5.87% B:0.26%)
  Opponent Winning Chances:25.66% (G:2.53% B:0.07%)25.01% (G:2.52% B:0.08%)
  Cubeless Equities+0.542+1.307
Cubeful Equities
     No double:+0.970 (-0.030)±0.005 (+0.966..+0.975)
     Double/Take:+1.093 (+0.093)±0.009 (+1.084..+1.102)
played Double/Pass:+1.000
 
Best Cube action: Double / Pass
Rollout details
1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+
 
Double Decision confidence:100.0%
Take Decision confidence:100.0%
Duration: 33 minutes 01 second

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[22] Pass
[12] Take


Neil Kazaross wins one point and now leads 3-away/6-away.



Neil Kazaross: 65 24/13
USBGF Members: 66 24/18(2) 13/7(2)
Neil Kazaross: 65 13/2


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 8
pip: 145
             
11 point match
              pip: 143
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=-a----EBC---eC---cBe---a--:0:0:1:00:5:8:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2017-12-27

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 108
             
11 point match
              pip: 132
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=---ABCC-B---cBaa-b-bbb-Bb-:0:0:1:42:5:7:0:11:10
to play 42

1.playedRollout16/2 5/3eq: -1.000
Player:
Opponent:
25.22% (G:2.61% B:0.09%)
74.78% (G:5.84% B:0.18%)
Conf.: ± 0.005 (-1.005...-0.995) - [25.0%]
Duration: 35 minutes 39 seconds
2.Rollout18/4 5/3eq: -1.000
Player:
Opponent:
25.03% (G:2.56% B:0.09%)
74.97% (G:5.94% B:0.23%)
Conf.: ± 0.005 (-1.005...-0.995) - [25.0%]
Duration: 31 minutes 14 seconds
3.Rollout113/11 13/9eq: -1.000
Player:
Opponent:
23.49% (G:2.10% B:0.08%)
76.51% (G:5.46% B:0.18%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-1.003...-0.997) - [25.0%]
Duration: 35 minutes 02 seconds
4.Rollout18/2eq: -1.000
Player:
Opponent:
24.00% (G:2.34% B:0.06%)
76.00% (G:6.62% B:0.39%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-1.003...-0.997) - [25.0%]
Duration: 33 minutes 21 seconds
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Rolled for both No double and Double
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[23] 6/2 5/3
[ 9] 8/4 5/3
[ 1] 13/11 13/9
[ 1] 13/9 5/3


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 108
             
11 point match
              pip: 126
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=--ABBBB-B---cBaa-b-bbb-Bb-:0:0:-1:00:5:7:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

Neil Kazaross doubles to 2.


USBGF OLM 2017-12-26

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 113
             
11 point match
              pip: 140
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=----BBCBB---eB---b-bbb-AbA:0:0:1:22:5:7:0:11:10
to play 22

1.playedRollout1Bar/23 7/5 7/3eq: -0.840
Player:
Opponent:
29.63% (G:4.89% B:0.13%)
70.37% (G:8.31% B:0.42%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.843...-0.836) - [99.9%]
Duration: 3 hours 20 minutes
2.Rollout1Bar/23 13/11 13/9eq: -0.851 (-0.011)
Player:
Opponent:
29.33% (G:3.93% B:0.11%)
70.67% (G:6.01% B:0.22%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.854...-0.848) - [0.0%]
Duration: 3 hours 17 minutes
3.Rollout2Bar/23 7/3 6/4eq: -0.854 (-0.014)
Player:
Opponent:
29.54% (G:4.55% B:0.12%)
70.46% (G:8.41% B:0.53%)
Conf.: ± 0.009 (-0.863...-0.845) - [0.1%]
Duration: 30 minutes 48 seconds
4.Rollout1Bar/23 8/6 8/4eq: -0.855 (-0.016)
Player:
Opponent:
29.10% (G:4.45% B:0.14%)
70.90% (G:7.65% B:0.32%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (-0.859...-0.852) - [0.0%]
Duration: 3 hours 17 minutes
5.Rollout2Bar/23 7/3 5/3eq: -0.863 (-0.023)
Player:
Opponent:
29.48% (G:4.59% B:0.12%)
70.52% (G:8.95% B:0.66%)
Conf.: ± 0.009 (-0.872...-0.854) - [0.0%]
Duration: 27 minutes 42 seconds
6.Rollout2Bar/23 8/2eq: -0.863 (-0.023)
Player:
Opponent:
29.24% (G:4.56% B:0.11%)
70.76% (G:8.31% B:0.43%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.871...-0.855) - [0.0%]
Duration: 33 minutes 34 seconds
7.Rollout2Bar/23 8/4 7/5eq: -0.865 (-0.025)
Player:
Opponent:
28.89% (G:4.65% B:0.11%)
71.11% (G:8.46% B:0.50%)
Conf.: ± 0.008 (-0.873...-0.857) - [0.0%]
Duration: 32 minutes 08 seconds
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

2 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[16] b/23 7/5 7/3
[15] b/23 13/11 13/9
[ 5] b/23 7/3 6/4
[ 3] b/23 8/4 7/5


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 113
             
11 point match
              pip: 132
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=---ABCC-B---eB---b-bbb-Bb-:0:0:-1:00:5:7:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in RolloutNo doubleDouble/Take
  Player Winning Chances:70.37% (G:8.35% B:0.50%)70.64% (G:8.37% B:0.59%)
  Opponent Winning Chances:29.63% (G:4.93% B:0.14%)29.36% (G:4.99% B:0.15%)
  Cubeless Equities+0.466+1.122
Cubeful Equities
played No double:+0.840±0.003 (+0.837..+0.843)
     Double/Take:+0.820 (-0.020)±0.004 (+0.815..+0.824)
     Double/Pass:+1.000 (+0.160)
 
Best Cube action: No double / Take
Percentage of wrong pass needed to make the double decision right: 10.1%
Rollout details
7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+
 
Double Decision confidence:100.0%
Take Decision confidence:100.0%
Duration: 4 hours 40 minutes

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross does not double.

I think that the USBGF Members did well to retain the midpoint with a long term view. I have to leave a direct shot now with 65, 64, and 51. I will also likely have to leave a fly shot or two trying to come home, and I will face other chances to leave direct shots especially if I cannot close my 3 point. I could cube now, but I am really not threatening much, except a couple of joker doubles, until I can untangle some of that stack on my midpoint. There’s no chance of a majority vote to pass this cube so while I am unsure from a technical standpoint, the best practical move for me is to roll now, and reconsider the cube at each upcoming turn assuming I am not hit.


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 113
             
11 point match
              pip: 132
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=---ABCC-B---eB---b-bbb-Bb-:0:0:-1:32:5:7:0:11:10
to play 32

1.playedRollout113/11 13/10eq: +0.893
Player:
Opponent:
71.73% (G:8.43% B:0.32%)
28.27% (G:4.13% B:0.11%)
Conf.: ± 0.006 (+0.887...+0.899) - [100.0%]
Duration: 9 minutes 59 seconds
2.Rollout113/8eq: +0.858 (-0.035)
Player:
Opponent:
71.19% (G:6.59% B:0.36%)
28.81% (G:4.22% B:0.11%)
Conf.: ± 0.007 (+0.851...+0.866) - [0.0%]
Duration: 25 minutes 31 seconds
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 13/11 13/10.

If I play the pedestrian 13/8, I still have 6 direct shot rolls next turn and these will come vs. their repaired board and be nearly fatal when hit. It seems better to build now and leave 4 shots where I will have significant and gammonish counter chances from the bar if hit.

If I am not hit, my future rolls can play quite safely and I may be able to make a helpful new point. Note that had the USBGF Members chosen to keep the 5 prime, I’d play this 32 safely. This is because it would then be nearly fatal to be hit possibly costing a gammon if I dance. Also with their midpoint gone, my 51 plays well and later on I will face fewer problems coming home due to no outfield contact.

This type of play comes up quite often and is often missed in practice, especially by newer players who get stuck in the mode of “must play as safely as possible when trying to come home” and fail to take some small chances when it isn’t awful to be hit. The key is that I will be considerably better off when these 4 fly shots are missed and should be able to offer a strong cube as well.


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 108
             
11 point match
              pip: 132
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=---ABCC-B---cBaa-b-bbb-Bb-:0:0:1:42:5:7:0:11:10
to play 42

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2017-12-25

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 137
             
11 point match
              pip: 148
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=----BACAC---eC--bc-e---AA-:0:0:1:22:5:7:0:11:10
to play 22

1.xgRollout123/21 13/9 7/5eq: -0.390
Player:
Opponent:
39.99% (G:8.80% B:0.18%)
60.01% (G:7.96% B:0.42%)
Conf.: ± 0.004 (-0.394...-0.386) - [47.1%]
Duration: 6 hours 01 minute
2.Rollout123/21 8/4 7/5eq: -0.391 (0.000)
Player:
Opponent:
39.86% (G:8.78% B:0.16%)
60.14% (G:7.84% B:0.30%)
Conf.: ± 0.004 (-0.394...-0.387) - [38.3%]
Duration: 6 hours 12 minutes
3.Rollout123/21 13/11 8/6 7/5eq: -0.392 (-0.002)
Player:
Opponent:
39.77% (G:8.71% B:0.16%)
60.23% (G:7.83% B:0.32%)
Conf.: ± 0.004 (-0.396...-0.388) - [12.6%]
Duration: 5 hours 40 minutes
4.Rollout223/21 13/11 7/5 6/4eq: -0.400 (-0.010)
Player:
Opponent:
39.63% (G:8.32% B:0.16%)
60.37% (G:7.80% B:0.46%)
Conf.: ± 0.010 (-0.409...-0.390) - [2.0%]
Duration: 54 minutes 49 seconds
5.Rollout223/21 7/5 6/2eq: -0.426 (-0.036)
Player:
Opponent:
39.05% (G:8.22% B:0.19%)
60.95% (G:8.35% B:0.46%)
Conf.: ± 0.009 (-0.435...-0.418) - [0.0%]
Duration: 52 minutes 11 seconds
6.Rollout224/20 13/11 7/5eq: -0.427 (-0.037)
Player:
Opponent:
39.04% (G:6.96% B:0.10%)
60.96% (G:7.64% B:0.48%)
Conf.: ± 0.009 (-0.436...-0.418) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 11 minutes
7.Rollout223/21 8/6(2) 7/5eq: -0.434 (-0.044)
Player:
Opponent:
38.58% (G:8.47% B:0.15%)
61.42% (G:8.27% B:0.37%)
Conf.: ± 0.009 (-0.444...-0.425) - [0.0%]
Duration: 46 minutes 40 seconds
8.Rollout224/20 8/6 7/5eq: -0.437 (-0.047)
Player:
Opponent:
38.67% (G:7.24% B:0.13%)
61.33% (G:7.66% B:0.34%)
Conf.: ± 0.009 (-0.446...-0.428) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 03 minutes
9.Rollout223/21 13/7eq: -0.438 (-0.048)
Player:
Opponent:
39.10% (G:7.77% B:0.18%)
60.90% (G:8.47% B:0.49%)
Conf.: ± 0.010 (-0.448...-0.429) - [0.0%]
Duration: 55 minutes 42 seconds
10.Rollout213/9 8/6 7/5eq: -0.441 (-0.051)
Player:
Opponent:
38.97% (G:8.16% B:0.17%)
61.03% (G:8.04% B:0.41%)
Conf.: ± 0.010 (-0.451...-0.432) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 00 minute
11.playedRollout213/5eq: -0.448 (-0.058)
Player:
Opponent:
39.13% (G:7.84% B:0.17%)
60.87% (G:8.09% B:0.49%)
Conf.: ± 0.010 (-0.458...-0.439) - [0.0%]
Duration: 59 minutes 03 seconds
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

2 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[15] 13/5
[14] 23/21 13/9 7/5
[ 3] 24/20 13/11 7/5
[ 1] 13/9(2)


Grant Hoffman (grant@hoffman.kiwi)
and
Steve Sax (backgammonplayer@msn.com)
teach at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Steve Sax recommends: 23/21 13/9 7/5

In order to determine the right play here (or in any position) we need to assess what our priorities are.

In this position White should try to do all of the things that generally improve a position and those would be to hit, make points and escape.

Since we can only make a point and not achieve either of the assets, we should start by making our five point. After that, while we can’t escape or make a new point, we should prepare to make a new point (an advanced anchor) by moving one of our back pieces forward.

However, which one should White move forward?

Since after making our move, we will still be down three pips with Neil on roll, I would advocate attempting to make the 21 point. That rates to give Neil a harder time to bring his pieces home and simultaneously leaves a checker back on the 24-point for maximum harassment of Neil’s maneuverability.

So now we have played two of the four deuces. As far as the other two deuces, I simply play 13/9 to “prepare” to make a new point.

That might be the three point or the bar point but in either case, if one of those points is achieved, we will be better prepared to trap a Black checker should we get the chance.

And while it’s true that we are at risk of being pointed on, we are not a favorite to have that happen. Since the race is relatively close, if we can make the high anchor, we should do so, and if we can’t either if we are pointed on, or fail to roll a three (or 41) they could potentially end up in an ace or deuce-point game.

The suggested play achieves a lot in that it makes an inner board point, attempts to make an advanced anchor, and controls all quadrants with White spreading out our checkers.

You can’t ask for too much more than that in a backgammon move.


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 137
             
11 point match
              pip: 140
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=----BBCAC---eB--bc-e---AA-:0:0:-1:55:5:7:0:11:10
to play 55

1.xgRollout113/3(2)eq: +0.790
Player:
Opponent:
68.93% (G:8.72% B:0.39%)
31.07% (G:4.74% B:0.15%)
Conf.: ± 0.004 (+0.786...+0.794) - [99.9%]
Duration: 5 hours 08 minutes
2.playedRollout19/4(2) 6/1*(2)eq: +0.781 (-0.009)
Player:
Opponent:
67.34% (G:13.30% B:0.43%)
32.66% (G:5.84% B:0.20%)
Conf.: ± 0.004 (+0.778...+0.785) - [0.1%]
Duration: 3 hours 45 minutes
 
1 7776 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 9/4(2) 6/1*(2).

The choice between moving forward with 13/3(3), leaving me a decent position with a nice race lead and 12 checkers forward and blitzing seems quite close to me. Both plays can also lead to a cube turn soon. Noting that I can use all 4 points from a doubled gammon, I simply cannot resist the attacking play.



USBGF Members: 51 b/20 8/7


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 117
             
11 point match
              pip: 135
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=----BBCBB---eB---c-cAb-Ab-:0:0:-1:00:5:7:0:11:10
on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in RolloutNo doubleDouble/Take
  Player Winning Chances:67.39% (G:12.76% B:0.42%)67.48% (G:13.45% B:0.48%)
  Opponent Winning Chances:32.61% (G:5.71% B:0.16%)32.52% (G:5.82% B:0.18%)
  Cubeless Equities+0.454+1.110
Cubeful Equities
played No double:+0.759 (-0.029)±0.009 (+0.750..+0.768)
     Double/Take:+0.789±0.012 (+0.776..+0.801)
     Double/Pass:+1.000 (+0.211)
 
Best Cube action: Double / Take
Rollout details
1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+
 
Double Decision confidence:100.0%
Take Decision confidence:100.0%
Duration: 1 hour 06 minutes

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross does not double.

I’d have cubed here had they not been able to close their 5 prime which scares me, as I have quite a few blotting rolls.



Neil Kazaross: 11 8/5* 6/5


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 113
             
11 point match
              pip: 140
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=----BBCBB---eB---b-bbb-AbA:0:0:1:22:5:7:0:11:10
to play 22

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2017-12-24

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 147
             
11 point match
              pip: 155
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=----B-D-C-a-fD---c-e---AA-:0:0:1:61:5:7:0:11:10
to play 61

1.xgRollout113/7 8/7eq: -0.123
Player:
Opponent:
45.83% (G:11.30% B:0.27%)
54.17% (G:7.26% B:0.36%)
Conf.: ± 0.010 (-0.134...-0.113) - [99.6%]
Duration: 1 hour 16 minutes
2.playedRollout113/7 6/5eq: -0.144 (-0.020)
Player:
Opponent:
45.68% (G:11.71% B:0.27%)
54.32% (G:8.22% B:0.63%)
Conf.: ± 0.011 (-0.155...-0.132) - [0.4%]
Duration: 1 hour 15 minutes
3.Rollout123/22 13/7eq: -0.148 (-0.025)
Player:
Opponent:
45.72% (G:11.21% B:0.31%)
54.28% (G:8.23% B:0.49%)
Conf.: ± 0.010 (-0.159...-0.138) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 15 minutes
4.Rollout123/22 8/2eq: -0.210 (-0.087)
Player:
Opponent:
44.23% (G:11.08% B:0.23%)
55.77% (G:9.15% B:0.65%)
Conf.: ± 0.010 (-0.220...-0.200) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 14 minutes
5.Rollout113/6eq: -0.221 (-0.098)
Player:
Opponent:
43.91% (G:10.20% B:0.23%)
56.09% (G:8.20% B:0.57%)
Conf.: ± 0.010 (-0.231...-0.211) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 16 minutes
6.Rollout18/2 6/5eq: -0.250 (-0.126)
Player:
Opponent:
43.34% (G:10.90% B:0.25%)
56.66% (G:9.16% B:0.60%)
Conf.: ± 0.010 (-0.260...-0.240) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 12 minutes
7.Rollout124/18 6/5eq: -0.250 (-0.127)
Player:
Opponent:
43.41% (G:8.62% B:0.24%)
56.59% (G:7.98% B:0.52%)
Conf.: ± 0.011 (-0.261...-0.239) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 21 minutes
8.Rollout124/18 8/7eq: -0.263 (-0.140)
Player:
Opponent:
43.14% (G:8.26% B:0.23%)
56.86% (G:7.45% B:0.39%)
Conf.: ± 0.011 (-0.274...-0.252) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 hour 20 minutes
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[14] 13/7 6/5
[ 8] 13/7 8/7
[ 8] 24/18 6/5
[ 2] 23/22 13/7
[ 1] 24/18 8/7



Neil Kazaross: 64 15/9 13/9


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 137
             
11 point match
              pip: 148
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=----BACAC---eC--bc-e---AA-:0:0:1:22:5:7:0:11:10
to play 22

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2017-12-23

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 167
             
11 point match
              pip: 167
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=-b----E-C---eE---c-e----B-:0:0:1:41:5:7:0:11:10
to play 41

1.playedRollout124/23 13/9eq: +0.020
Player:
Opponent:
49.96% (G:14.84% B:0.55%)
50.04% (G:14.12% B:1.10%)
Conf.: ± 0.014 (+0.007...+0.034) - [98.3%]
Duration: 1 hour 28 minutes
2.Rollout113/9 6/5eq: -0.002 (-0.022)
Player:
Opponent:
49.86% (G:14.54% B:0.58%)
50.14% (G:15.18% B:2.23%)
Conf.: ± 0.015 (-0.017...+0.013) - [1.7%]
Duration: 1 hour 37 minutes
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[29] 24/23 13/9
[ 8] 13/9 6/5
[ 1] 13/8


Steve Sax (backgammonplayer@msn.com)
teaches at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Steve Sax recommends: 24/23 13/9

The default opening move for a 41 is to play 24/23 13/9. However, since White is trailing in the match, we may need to make a play that creates gammonish positions, even if for both sides.

In this case however Neil also needs four points, so he might want to play for gammons themselves as a doubled gammon will win him the match.

If you go to the most extreme example of “gammon go” for White at “four away-two away,” it’s right to slot the five-point with the ace, but at “six away-six away” it’s clearly right to split.

So at what point does your strategy switch from the splitting play to the slotting play?

There’s really no better way to determine this than to put this position in at the different scores and check which is right. Of course you don’t have that luxury in competitive play so you have to use your judgement.

However, you can study your openings at different scores which might seem like a large task but as long as you’re not looking into third roll positions for all tournament scores it really isn’t that involved.

Regarding the 41 specifically, it’s close at quite a few scores, most specifically when your opponent needs three or two points.

However the score at which it’s clearly correct to slot (by .02 or greater) include only the king of gammon go “four away-two away”. All other scores are close so by default it doesn’t matter a whole lot what you do.

As an aside, it’s also correct to slot 51 and 21 by more than .02 at that same score.

So while trailing in the match might encourage you to slot on some of your questionable openings as trailer, when your opponent simultaneously is four away you should be wary of taking additional risks to that end.



Neil Kazaross: 65 24/13
USBGF Members: 52 9/4 6/4
Neil Kazaross: 63 24/15


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 147
             
11 point match
              pip: 155
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=----B-D-C-a-fD---c-e---AA-:0:0:1:61:5:7:0:11:10
to play 61

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2017-12-22

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 87
             
11 point match
              pip: 49
score: 3

is USBGF Members
XGID=aCCBCBB----------a-dbbbc--:1:-1:1:42:3:7:0:11:10
to play 42

1.playedRollout14/Off 2/Offeq: +1.014
Player:
Opponent:
97.44% (G:5.59% B:0.05%)
2.56% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Conf.: ± 0.001 (+1.013...+1.015) - [100.0%]
Duration: 22.4 seconds
2.Rollout16/4 6/2eq: +1.000 (-0.014)
Player:
Opponent:
98.98% (G:1.73% B:0.01%)
1.02% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Conf.: ± 0.001 (+0.999...+1.001) - [0.0%]
Duration: 8.5 seconds
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[29] 4/0 2/0
[ 6] 6/4 6/2


Steve Sax (backgammonplayer@msn.com)
teaches at the Backgammon Learning Center, and can be contacted for lessons via email.

Steve Sax recommends: 4/0 2/0

We can play aggressively for a gammon or conservatively to secure the win.

To determine which play is correct you need to determine the “gammon price”. That is the ratio of additional gammons earned versus games lose.

In a money game the gammon price is 0.5, which means that you can risk half a game for every additional gammon earned. I personally like to look at it with the reciprocal of 0.5 which means that I need to earn twice as many extra gammons as games lost.

So what is the gammon price at “eight away-four away” with “eight away” having doubled “four away”?

Without going through all the math, it’s 0.614 so White only needs to win additional gammons at a 1.63/1 ratio because of the impact of winning a doubled gammon for the trailer at this score.

So how can we tell whether we are reaching this threshold of extra gammons earned?

Well, there are a lot of factors to consider here but the basic ones are how many immediate shots will we leave if we play aggressively versus how many gammons will White earn if they stay out one additional roll.

That is because if we play safe, Black can come in with a six immediately and presumably save the gammon. And if we plays aggressively, we will leave a shot on some two roll sequences.

So let’s attempt to determine how often we win a gammon if we play both conservatively and aggressively.

After the aggressive play, we will be left with a closed board and a spare on our ace-point. In the next two rolls, we will leave a shot 87/1296 and be hit 11/36 of those times.

That adds up to 2%, but if you jump forward to see how often Black wins after the aggressive play it has Black winning 3% of the time. This is of course because Black can win down the line and not just after two rolls.

So when doing your tabulation use the immediate shot percentage and just guess at the rest. You are going to be doing a lot of educated guesses when attempting to determine the value of your game in difficult to assess games.

If we play aggressively of course, Black will be denied an opportunity to enter for exactly one roll, so how much does that impact White’s ability to earn a gammon when White plays conservatively and allows Black an opportunity to enter immediately?

Again, that’s very difficult to determine, but keep in mind that as White bears his checkers off after the two options, White will maintain our board for a considerably longer time as each roll they rate to start with more points in their board.

That ratio starts out with a 30.55% advantage for the aggressive play and gets smaller each roll White proceeds through the bear-off. That is a clear advantage in terms of extra gammons earned, but I can’t honestly determine how much that extra shake is worth.

That isn’t a very satisfactory answer, but if you don’t have a reference position to compare your position with and going through the number tree is either too difficult or too time consuming then you’re just going to be forced to make a guess.

So since losses are increased by only one percent having made the aggressive play, it just feels like you can gain 1.6% additional gammons by playing aggressively.

This may be presumptions but sometimes you just have to go with your gut.



USBGF Members: 62 6/4 6/0
Neil Kazaross: 55 no play
USBGF Members: 62 5/3 5/0
Neil Kazaross: 61 b/18
USBGF Members: 63 4/0 3/0
Neil Kazaross: 43 18/11
USBGF Members: 43 4/0 3/0
Neil Kazaross: 32 11/6
USBGF Members: 54 4/0 3/0


USBGF Members win two points. Neil Kazaross leads 4-away/6-away.


Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 167
             
11 point match
              pip: 167
score: 5

is USBGF Members
XGID=-b----E-C---eE---c-e----B-:0:0:1:41:5:7:0:11:10
to play 41

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

USBGF OLM 2017-12-21

[Previous][Next]

Last vote on the OLM:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 108
             
11 point match
              pip: 63
score: 3

is USBGF Members
XGID=-BBbCCE------a---a-cbabc--:1:-1:1:54:3:7:0:11:10
to play 54

1.playedRollout16/2 6/1eq: +0.865
Player:
Opponent:
90.09% (G:6.61% B:0.03%)
9.91% (G:0.02% B:0.00%)
Conf.: ± 0.002 (+0.862...+0.867) - [100.0%]
Duration: 6 minutes 13 seconds
2.xgRollout16/2 5/Offeq: +0.859 (-0.005)
Player:
Opponent:
89.45% (G:7.44% B:0.04%)
10.55% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Conf.: ± 0.002 (+0.857...+0.861) - [0.0%]
Duration: 6 minutes 06 seconds
3.Rollout16/1 4/Offeq: +0.833 (-0.032)
Player:
Opponent:
88.16% (G:7.55% B:0.04%)
11.84% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Conf.: ± 0.002 (+0.831...+0.835) - [0.0%]
Duration: 5 minutes 37 seconds
4.Rollout15/Off 4/Offeq: +0.815 (-0.050)
Player:
Opponent:
86.80% (G:8.47% B:0.06%)
13.20% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Conf.: ± 0.003 (+0.812...+0.817) - [0.0%]
Duration: 5 minutes 20 seconds
5.Rollout16/1 5/1eq: +0.805 (-0.060)
Player:
Opponent:
88.28% (G:5.03% B:0.02%)
11.72% (G:0.10% B:0.00%)
Conf.: ± 0.002 (+0.803...+0.807) - [0.0%]
Duration: 5 minutes 37 seconds
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

USBGF Members vote:
[20] 6/2 6/1
[11] 6/1 4/0
[ 3] 6/2 5/0
[ 1] 6/1 5/1
[ 1] 5/0 4/0


Neil Kazaross to play:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 108
             
11 point match
              pip: 54
score: 3

is USBGF Members
XGID=-CCbCCC------a---a-cbabc--:1:-1:-1:66:3:7:0:11:10
to play 66

1.playedRollout122/4 12/6eq: -0.889
Player:
Opponent:
5.97% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
94.03% (G:1.48% B:0.01%)
Conf.: ± 0.002 (-0.891...-0.888) - [100.0%]
Duration: 2 minutes 11 seconds
2.Rollout122/4 8/2eq: -0.896 (-0.007)
Player:
Opponent:
6.06% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
93.94% (G:2.29% B:0.01%)
Conf.: ± 0.002 (-0.898...-0.895) - [0.0%]
Duration: 2 minutes 07 seconds
3.Rollout122/10 12/6 8/2eq: -0.904 (-0.015)
Player:
Opponent:
5.63% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
94.37% (G:2.11% B:0.02%)
Conf.: ± 0.002 (-0.906...-0.902) - [0.0%]
Duration: 1 minute 49 seconds
 
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 4-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller+

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Neil Kazaross plays 22/4 12/6.

If I play 22/4 12/6, I risk a very small chance to lose a gammon and retain several percent chances to win with a hit. I don’t risk all that much as certainly my opponents won’t point on me with 21 and probably not with 11 and they have a decision to make with 31.



USBGF Members: 32 6/3* 5/3

Today’s vote:

is Neil Kazaross

score: 7
pip: 87
             
11 point match
              pip: 49
score: 3

is USBGF Members
XGID=aCCBCBB----------a-dbbbc--:1:-1:1:42:3:7:0:11:10
to play 42

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10