I'm very puzzled by the loss in equity when I make the hitting move, see below.

I am only dropping the winning chances by 0.5% while increasing the gammon chances by 6.6%, and my opponent only gains extra 2.4% gammons, so why is it such a huge blunder?

I thought it might be due to the match score (trailing 0-2 up to 7p) and this being a normalised equity, but I gain 13x more gammons than games I lose, so it doesn't make sense to me.

It's due to the cube. If you had already cubed, 6/1* would be correct. But XG is thinking you should just play safe and get value from the cube by cashing next turn. It's worth giving up cubeless equity sometimes to get in an efficient cube.

You might find my posts in this thread helpful:

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/1...40/?highlight=

Z is right. There's a name for this situation: "phantom gammons". You'll win the gammons at DMP or if the cube is already on White's side and the game will mostly be played to a conclusion. But with the cube in the middle, you'll reach positions where Black is better off cashing the game, which in turn eliminates some of the gammons that could potentially be won.

My link is broken.

This is what I meant to point to:

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/1...40/?highlight=

OHHH I think I understand!! So you mean that a position may promise more cubeless gammons, but when playing cubeful, too many of the paths to those gammons will stumble into a Double/Pass point and not actually get realised? I can understand that. Thanks a lot!
(BTW Z, the link you posted seems invalid, if you have some reading on the topic I'd be very interested. I'll also look up "phatom gammons" in the meantime.)

Then I'm left wondering what kind of trained human logic can we apply in such positions in order to understand that more gammons aren't always better?

How would you analyse the position I've shown when choosing between hitting and not hitting? Are there other strategic indicators that can help us choose the right move?