Open Side Menu Go to the Top
FAQ Today's Posts Search Twitter Discord
Register
Nasty position from my match with HowardZinn Nasty position from my match with HowardZinn
Post Reply Subscribe
...
08-20-2009 , 03:13 AM
#1
ChrisV's Avatar
ChrisV
View Profile Send Message Find Posts By ChrisV Find Threads By ChrisV
Carpal \'Tunnel
Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 40,336
Match score 4-5, match to 15, Black owns the 2-cube and must play 5-5:



"Pretend I've already moved" is not a legal move.
Nasty position from my match with HowardZinn Quote
08-20-2009 , 04:05 AM
#2
pineapple888
View Profile Send Message Find Posts By pineapple888 Find Threads By pineapple888
Carpal \'Tunnel
Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 13,111
You are well and truly F'd and the only possible consideration is to minimize shots and loose checkers, then try to save the gammon later.

So 6/1(3) 13/8.

Something like slotting every home board point is just suicidal IMO.
Last edited by pineapple888; 08-20-2009 at 04:14 AM.
Nasty position from my match with HowardZinn Quote
08-20-2009 , 06:25 AM
#3
mute's Avatar
mute
View Profile Send Message Find Posts By mute Find Threads By mute
Carpal \'Tunnel
Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 11,815
Fun position. I slot everything. You're in gammon trouble no matter what you do, and getting hit could be a good thing. It gives you a better chance to make the 21-point and if you're ever gonna have a chance at winning this game then burying too many checkers on the ace point is not the way to go. It's probably still gonna be difficult to keep your timing, but I think it's worth a try.
Nasty position from my match with HowardZinn Quote
08-20-2009 , 10:08 AM
#4
ChrisV's Avatar
ChrisV
View Profile Send Message Find Posts By ChrisV Find Threads By ChrisV
Carpal \'Tunnel
Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 40,336
Solution in spoiler below:

Spoiler:
In the actual game I played pineapple's suggestion. I felt everything else was too dangerous, not just in terms of gammons but in terms of backgammons. However mute's suggestion is the right idea. GNU rollouts have slotting every home board point as the winner:



Backgammons are indeed through the roof, but gammons don't really shift. This is because unless I get a hit on him, I'm pretty much getting gammoned already. Having extra checkers back or on the bar won't change whether I get the hit. Sure, if I do get the hit, there's more to bring home, but I'll also have more ammo for re-hitting his checker as it tries to escape.

Meanwhile, winning chances are up quite a bit. Partly this will be timing, so at some point I can establish a board without crunching it. Partly also it's the chance of establishing a third anchor on his four point, which would be a big headache for him. I think I had a bit of a psychological thing going on here. Getting backgammoned sounds bad, but if things go that badly for me, I'll be getting gammoned already, so it's not as bad as it sounds. Increasing winning chances should still be my priority.

Interestingly, 2-ply analysis identified this error (hence why I was able to post about it) but 3-ply analysis preferred pineapple's suggestion. Not sure why that would be.
Nasty position from my match with HowardZinn Quote
08-20-2009 , 11:18 AM
#5
ferrengi
View Profile Send Message Find Posts By ferrengi Find Threads By ferrengi
grinder
Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 683
Yeah,
I was thinking that your only chance is to make the 21 point and the best chance of doing that is to slot your entire board.
Slotting also prevents you from piling up a lot of checkers on your 2 point and creating a bad structure.
I'm surprised that slotting everything raising the backgammon percentage so much. It looks like your opponent is going to have so many problems with bearing off that you should have no problems hitting him.

How much the backgammon percentage increase as a result of doing this?
Nasty position from my match with HowardZinn Quote
08-20-2009 , 11:45 AM
#6
ChrisV's Avatar
ChrisV
View Profile Send Message Find Posts By ChrisV Find Threads By ChrisV
Carpal \'Tunnel
Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 40,336
It's in the rollout - Lose (bg)
Nasty position from my match with HowardZinn Quote
08-20-2009 , 11:54 AM
#7
Aaron W.
View Profile Send Message Find Posts By Aaron W. Find Threads By Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel
Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 30,132
Quote:
Originally Posted by mute
I slot everything.
This. You're desperate for timing, and you need to keep your checkers in play if you have any chance of winning. Dumping checkers takes away your winning chances, so that the only thing left to play for is not getting gammoned. (And good luck with that since you've got 5 checkers stuck behind a massive wall.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple888
Something like slotting every home board point is just suicidal IMO.
That's why this game is so much fun!
Nasty position from my match with HowardZinn Quote
08-20-2009 , 09:14 PM
#8
pineapple888
View Profile Send Message Find Posts By pineapple888 Find Threads By pineapple888
Carpal \'Tunnel
Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 13,111
Huh. Looking at this more, I guess there are occasional scenarios you will get real lucky (e.g. make the 4-point) and/or he gets real unlucky (e.g. crunches when your 7-6-2 monster somehow holds him back for two or three rolls, or after you make another home board point somehow.)

Plus, as the rollouts show, it's not necessarily disastrous gammon-wise to have more checkers back. You are going to have to hit anyway to save it, and more back = more defenders as you try to make your way home, and more chances to pick up a second checker (not to try to win, but to make a gammon far less likely), and maybe you can hold the 6-point or whatever through the chaos as well.

Interesting position.
Nasty position from my match with HowardZinn Quote
08-21-2009 , 05:08 AM
#9
pineapple888
View Profile Send Message Find Posts By pineapple888 Find Threads By pineapple888
Carpal \'Tunnel
Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 13,111
I think it's also worth noting that the "mistake" of playing safe isn't that big an error here (assuming the rollouts are correct and it IS an error), whereas stringing out the blots in a position that's even a little better for Villain is likely to be a huge mistake.

While that's no excuse for not seeking the best play, if you're not real sure about your evaluation, it's hard to go far wrong by just playing safe in these types of positions.
Nasty position from my match with HowardZinn Quote
08-21-2009 , 12:19 PM
#10
Aaron W.
View Profile Send Message Find Posts By Aaron W. Find Threads By Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel
Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 30,132
Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple888
While that's no excuse for not seeking the best play, if you're not real sure about your evaluation, it's hard to go far wrong by just playing safe in these types of positions.
I disagree. Screwing up your timing in a back game by playing safe can lead you far wrong and it can be very costly. When you lose a backgame, you are very often losing by getting gammoned (and sometimes backgammoned). When you win one, you usually DON'T win by a gammon. This means that you can be leaking away all sorts of equity by just playing safe. (In general, dumping checkers onto the ace point when there is lots of game left is going to be a mistake.)

The hard part about backgames is that your "big" mistake can be a large number of rolls ago, perhaps at a spot where you should have tried to win going forward (breaking an anchor and trying to free up those checkers).
Nasty position from my match with HowardZinn Quote
08-21-2009 , 01:36 PM
#11
pineapple888
View Profile Send Message Find Posts By pineapple888 Find Threads By pineapple888
Carpal \'Tunnel
Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 13,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W.
I disagree. Screwing up your timing in a back game by playing safe can lead you far wrong and it can be very costly. When you lose a backgame, you are very often losing by getting gammoned (and sometimes backgammoned). When you win one, you usually DON'T win by a gammon. This means that you can be leaking away all sorts of equity by just playing safe. (In general, dumping checkers onto the ace point when there is lots of game left is going to be a mistake.)

The hard part about backgames is that your "big" mistake can be a large number of rolls ago, perhaps at a spot where you should have tried to win going forward (breaking an anchor and trying to free up those checkers).
Whatever. The point is, stringing out a bunch of blots hardly ever works. A good player won't just automatically hit them all and let you maintain your timing. He will hit just enough to maximize his equity, which generally leads to you getting crushed even harder.

This position is the exception, not the rule. And it's not an exception by very much.
Nasty position from my match with HowardZinn Quote
08-21-2009 , 01:39 PM
#12
HowardZinn's Avatar
HowardZinn
View Profile Send Message Find Posts By HowardZinn Find Threads By HowardZinn
journeyman
Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 200
Lol that was sick!

Btw, what did gnu have to say about (my) the worst double of the century?
Nasty position from my match with HowardZinn Quote
08-21-2009 , 02:09 PM
#13
Aaron W.
View Profile Send Message Find Posts By Aaron W. Find Threads By Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel
Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 30,132
Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple888
Whatever. The point is, stringing out a bunch of blots hardly ever works. A good player won't just automatically hit them all and let you maintain your timing. He will hit just enough to maximize his equity, which generally leads to you getting crushed even harder.

This position is the exception, not the rule. And it's not an exception by very much.
*shrug*

There are actually a large number of backgame positions where you leave blots out there to be scooped up to preserve your timing. There are a lot of players out there who won't know whether hitting or not hitting is better for them, so that they will be exposing themselves to making large errors as well.

Simply saying that "you cannot go far wrong by just playing safe" is a good way to go far wrong because it fails to develop any reasoning to support the rule of thumb, and therefore blinding you to the exceptions.
Nasty position from my match with HowardZinn Quote
08-21-2009 , 11:41 PM
#14
ChrisV's Avatar
ChrisV
View Profile Send Message Find Posts By ChrisV Find Threads By ChrisV
Carpal \'Tunnel
Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 40,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple888
Whatever. The point is, stringing out a bunch of blots hardly ever works. A good player won't just automatically hit them all and let you maintain your timing. He will hit just enough to maximize his equity, which generally leads to you getting crushed even harder.

This position is the exception, not the rule. And it's not an exception by very much.
It is actually a pretty big error. The numbers in the rollout are MWC, not equity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardZinn
Lol that was sick!

Btw, what did gnu have to say about (my) the worst double of the century?
Hated it, don't remember the numbers.
Nasty position from my match with HowardZinn Quote
Post Reply Subscribe
...
      
Feedback is used for internal purposes. LEARN MORE
Contact Us Privacy Statement TOS
Top
Powered by:  Hand2Note
Copyright ©2008-2022, Hand2Note Interactive LTD
m