FIBS Board backgammon forum

The default thing to do with early double fours  is to make the opponent's 5 point and bring two down from the midpoint. 

However, at DMP the running play is attractive.  If we can then move the runners into our outfield and stay 20 pips ahead we should be in good shape to win.

Since we've already made the three, the nine point is not useful towards making a prime.  This is what sways me towards the running play.  But I don't have a strong sense which is better.

Well, it's a great roll either way we play it, I don't think we want to give it back.

I feel strongly we should make the 20 and 9 points. Our position is formidable, but the game isn't over. If a hitting contest ensues I much prefer the anchor on his 5 point. At the same time making the 9 point gives us a lot more wood to make our 4 and 7 points.

If I've learned anything from the bots, it's that the best moves involve checker play on BOTH sides of the board. Making the 2 points clearly ( to me, anyway ) seems the more powerful play.

In our long-ago chouettes, if a player strongly opposed the captain's proposed play, he could buy the game for half the cube, sit down, and play it out himself. I'm pretty sure I'd buy the game here to make the 2 points.

I would buy half of *that* game, I hope that move to 19 isn't still in the lead tomorrow!!  :wacko:

I'm pretty sure that 24/20(2), 13/9(2) is best, as NIHI says making progress on both sides of the board is usually right. Also, the stack on the 13pt with the blot on the 8pt is a notoriously weak and inflexible combination, so we need to grab this golden chance to correct such a glaring structual weakness. Note too how staying back on the 20pt exerts pressure on White's awkward stacks. If we step out to the 16pt White can start to build a prime by slotting the bar, 5 an 4pts.

Since I don't have a strong sense of which is better, I'm going to defer to Bob and Dorbel and change my vote.

I have lots of experience losing games while ahead in the match by playing too safe.  The running play fits that pattern.

We all have plenty of that kind of experience.

Erm, I said that too  :wacko:    :laugh: :laugh:

I've included both analysis and rollout as they differ.    The "standard" play is a slight favorite over the running play according to the rollout, but not by a statistically significant amount.  Both plays are sound. 





    1. Cubeful 2-ply    24/16(2)                     Eq.:  +0.371
       0.685 0.180 0.009 - 0.315 0.069 0.001
        2-ply cubeful prune [world class]
    2. Cubeful 2-ply    24/20(2) 13/9(2)             Eq.:  +0.369 ( -0.001)
       0.685 0.212 0.012 - 0.315 0.063 0.002
        2-ply cubeful prune [world class]
    3. Cubeful 2-ply    24/20(2) 13/5                Eq.:  +0.368 ( -0.003)
       0.684 0.222 0.013 - 0.316 0.059 0.001
        2-ply cubeful prune [world class]
    4. Cubeful 2-ply    24/20(2) 13/9 8/4            Eq.:  +0.324 ( -0.046)
       0.662 0.222 0.012 - 0.338 0.067 0.002
        2-ply cubeful prune [world class]


    1. Rollout          24/20(2) 13/9(2)             Eq.:  +0.371
       0.685 0.339 0.055 - 0.315 0.075 0.009 CL  +0.371 CF  +0.371
      [0.003 0.007 0.004 - 0.003 0.004 0.002 CL   0.005 CF   0.005]

    2. Rollout          24/16(2)                     Eq.:  +0.362 ( -0.009)
       0.681 0.290 0.039 - 0.319 0.084 0.007 CL  +0.362 CF  +0.362
      [0.002 0.007 0.003 - 0.002 0.004 0.001 CL   0.005 CF   0.005]

    3. Rollout          24/20(2) 13/5                Eq.:  +0.347 ( -0.024)
       0.673 0.346 0.052 - 0.327 0.082 0.008 CL  +0.347 CF  +0.347
      [0.002 0.007 0.004 - 0.002 0.004 0.002 CL   0.005 CF   0.005]

    4. Rollout          24/20(2) 13/9 8/4            Eq.:  +0.300 ( -0.071)
       0.650 0.315 0.049 - 0.350 0.114 0.012 CL  +0.300 CF  +0.300
      [0.002 0.007 0.004 - 0.002 0.005 0.002 CL   0.005 CF   0.005]
        Full cubeful rollout with var.redn.
        1296 games, Mersenne Twister dice gen. with seed 869790528 and quasi-random dice
        Play: 0-ply cubeful prune [expert]
        Cube: 0-ply cubeful prune [expert]