Hello,
I made analysis with XG+ for each of this score.
You see the correct decision chosen by XG, and then how much it is the best in equity.
I think i understand the tendancy :
0-0 in a 7 pointer in match play or MG (== money game), the game is not too bad to pass the cube (68 % WC and 24% GM). You have two BCKs weak, OP has golden point + good offensive game (Priming game and blitz game).
But race is close, 7 pt 4pt are missing for opponent, and you have a 3-inner board.
Some match scores are more sensitive to gammons : 4-4 a of course, even 3-3 a.
We know that at 3-3 a the double point is lower and take point higher, no surprise for me given the position that is double/pass.
At 2-2 (5a-5a),a gammon doubled gives 4-0 crawford, different situation than 4-0 in a 7 pointer. But an contrary phenomena also gives you reason to take : the recube equity, if you double to 4 and wins, that is 6-2 for you (1-5 crawford). The risk is Opponent gammons you, but with 24 % GM, it's ok for XG. The important thing to remember i think is equity recube to 4, and which match score it gives if you win (Crawford game or not).
1-1 (6-6 away) : borderline decision (1% pass). If OP goes from 1-1 to 5-1 (2-6a), that's better than 4-0 (3-7a), a little difference. Also the recube equity doesn't put you in a score where you get crawford game ( if you recube to 4 and win, that will be 5-1).
5-5 (2-2 away): TP is 32%, GMs have no interests. With 31% WC, you have to pass.
I didn't want to be pedantic with my modest level, but just share how i tried to analyze the position, without assurance to be right.
I think its important not just to see correct decisions but how much its better in terms in equity, see global tendencies.
But clearly there are not blunder for me, i like to try to understand each position of backgammon, but you should not worry of not taking always the best decisions when its not so big equity lost and difficult positions.