Quote:
Originally Posted by peachpie
That much is obvious, but I don't think this was the real intent of a question.
I would say that when finding alternatives that seem close to equal, choose the one that leads to the more complex positions. This gives the weaker player more chances for errors. For example, slot with opening ones.
Also keep an eye out for trends in the opponents errors and prefer close alternatives that lead to such positions. (this applies to any opponent really)
This sounds plausible but in reality it's very hard to do.
What you need to keep in mind is this: simply playing the best backgammon you can, i.e. technically correct moves, is both difficult to achieve and completely adequate for crushing a much weaker player. Trying to find moves that are 'close to optimal' but which also lead to very complex games is much harder. What you'll end up doing is making a lot of plays which look complex but which are in fact serious blunders. The net result is you'll eliminate most, if not all, of your edge, and then you'll scratch your head wondering why you have such trouble beating weak players.
By the way, I fell into this trap myself in for a couple of years in mid-career. When I returned to just trying to play well, my results got better again.