FIBS Board backgammon forum

Match to 5, factotum 0, FIBSBoard forum 2

Pipcount: factotum 138 FIBSBoard forum 116

GnuBG ID: aLfBDALumA0MQA:UgmmAAAAEAAA

FIBSBoard forum to play 4-1:

Spoiler

well, I wont spend too long on B-21  :laugh: :laugh:  The one - the only thing again I can see to do is stay safe - and hope our immediate future is filled with 11  ;)

[close]

I wouldnt block that move in a chouette.  PLaying safe is fine and reasonable.  But even if hit, an anchor would help save gammon also.  Im sorry I dont know how to do the spoiler thing.  I have things I want to say about this position..I have seen a snowie analysis and I dont know if im allowed to talk about it.  I see reasons for different things and the results for me are surprising.  My main reason for the 2-1 is that its just not that bad of a thing to get hit.  We get another checker in play and it will lead to more complicated poisitions.  We have to assume we can out play our opponent because we are several people..but again...someone tell me what im or not allowed to talk about..  thanks,

roadkillbooks

Spoiler

Knowing that GnuBg gave such a high valuation to 8/4 last time suggests that the attacking but risky 9/8 might also be smiled upon here. Bck-but I'm a chicken too. ;) bck-bar/21* 3/2

[close]

Spoiler

I'll admit I'm a bit influenced by GnuBG's verdict on the last play, where 8/4 was only a tiny error. This time, leaving a blot is even safer since we put factotum on the bar. My first instinct was still the safe play, but this is now very stripped! Suppose we do that and next roll can jump the backman over the prime, but then have to leave a blot with the other die? Or we leave a blot later because we hardly have any options? So I think it might be better to create some flexiblity now in relative safety, while factotum is on the bar. B/21 9/8 doesn't leave too many shots and looks like a good diversification as it also aims at homeboard points and is easy to clean-up.

[close]

Quote from: playBunny on May 31, 2009, 09:54:37 PM

Spoiler

Knowing that GnuBg gave such a high valuation to 8/4 last time suggests that the attacking but risky 9/8 might also be smiled upon here. Bck-but I'm a chicken too. ;) bck-bar/21* 3/2

[close]

bck :lol:

Spoiler

First, I'd like to say that bar/24 9/5* shold be a voting option. Not that I'd vote for it, but it's worth looking at.

As for my preference, after hitting with the 4, it's between 9/8 and 3/2.  The fromer gives more flexible position, but leaves a blot.  The latter is safe, but leads to a cramped position.  With a man onthe bar, let's go for flexible.

bar/21* 9/8

[close]

Spoiler

Bar-21, 2-1. Nothing is really safe here, it's a very stripped position. Playing 3-2 really makes it inflexible. I really dont want to leave an outer board blot here.

[close]

Bob

Spoiler

Quote from: roadkillbooks on May 31, 2009, 07:46:22 PM
Ok I figured out how to do spoiler. The Snowie analysis for this match score is very close for 9/8, 3/2 and 2/1

with 3/2 -.002 and 2/1 -.013

The surprise is that white only wins 1.4% more gammons and the win rate is virtuly igual at 46.4% for 9/8, 46.3% for 3/2 ande 46.2% for 2/1. Now this assumes perfect play.  2/1 clearly complicates the positition because the blot will be hit 11/36 times.  This means both complexity and flexibility are gained.  On a 4 cube in particular the opponent will always tend to play slightly more safe instead of going for all out gammon .  4-2 is a hefty advantage and not much reason to risk it.  We benifit in Complexity because we are many analyzing and thinking about each play.  I think 2/1 is superior in this situation to what Snowie has to offer.

saludos

[close]

I was initially drawn to the 2-1 because the strategist in me really doesnt want to do 3-2, but the chicken in me really doesnt want the 2-1.  I am becoming more persuaded that perhaps 2-1 isn't as frightening as it first seemed, but as the vote stands it will only complicate matters if I change my vote.  [we will end up with 3 votes for 3 moves - and flipping coins...]  If more want to change to , or vote for 2-1, I will change my vote to support that.

Quote from: roadkillbooks on June 01, 2009, 08:17:24 AM
The Snowie analysis for this match score is ...

Please don't post bot results until after the voting is over.  We're supposed to be figuring this out on our own and the entire exercise is pointless if all we do is punch the setting into snowie or gnu and read off the results.

Of course, bot rollouts are more than welcome after we've made our decision .

Thanks.

Quote from: ah_clem on June 01, 2009, 02:47:46 PM
Please don't post bot results until after the voting is over. 

That is why i asked before and I only put it on to enter into a more advanced discussion.  My point was that a certain move was clearly superior despite what the analysis said. But I understand.

I agree 2/1 adds complexity to the game when it gets hit; same for 9/8 but this gets hit less often.

However, it's not clear we'd gain from that, as factotum is a good player and so far, he is outplaying the team by a fair amount!

Hopefully this will change though  ;)

I can't say I'm too crazy about the 2-1 part of this move proposed. There doesn't seem much to gain there right now and there is a good chance of a double hit if factotum comes back in with a 1 and anything else than a 5 or 6. The 9-8 is a better move, IMHO, as the 9 point isn't doing much right now, but still can be useful in hitting the 5 if, as hoped, factotum does a Fred Astaire here.

Quote from: diane on June 01, 2009, 10:05:00 AM
I was initially drawn to the 2-1 because the strategist in me really doesnt want to do 3-2, but the chicken in me really doesnt want the 2-1.  I am becoming more persuaded that perhaps 2-1 isn't as frightening as it first seemed, but as the vote stands it will only complicate matters if I change my vote.  [we will end up with 3 votes for 3 moves - and flipping coins...]  If more want to change to , or vote for 2-1, I will change my vote to support that.

Had waffles for breakfast?

Quote from: lewscannon on June 01, 2009, 04:25:05 PM
I can't say I'm too crazy about the 2-1 part of this move proposed. There doesn't seem much to gain there right now and there is a good chance of a double hit if factotum comes back in with a 1 and anything else than a 5 or 6. The 9-8 is a better move, IMHO, as the 9 point isn't doing much right now, but still can be useful in hitting the 5 if, as hoped, factotum does a Fred Astaire here.

Agreed.  Factorum will think twice about hitting loose on his 4 pt with a 3 or a 4 unless it's part of a double hit.  That makes exposing a blot on our one-point more dangerous than usual.  A blot on the nine means he'll have to use both his numbers to hit it, and he'll probably only hit loose on his four-point if he can do it with his builder on the six.  So, 9/8 seems pretty clearly to be superior to 2/1.  Whether it's better than the super safe 3/2 is debatable, and I'm not sure that it is.

As an aside, the liklyhood of an exchange of hits here points out the wisdom of building the board a couple of moves ago when we had the double-fours.

Quote from: lewscannon on June 01, 2009, 04:26:32 PM
Had waffles for breakfast?

LOL  :giggle:

Quote from: lewscannon on June 01, 2009, 04:26:32 PM
Had waffles for breakfast?

:flipa:  I talk less than wot you do  :flipa:

Look like I might now have to have a complete change to 9-8 to break this deadlock  ;)