XGID=dABBABC--a--dB-----d-bA-A-:0:0:1:54:0:1:1:2:10

Score is X:0 O:1 2 pt.(s) match.
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X | | O O X X |
| X | | O O |
| | | O |
| | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | O | |
| O | O | |
| O | O | X |
| O | O | X X X X |
| O O | | X X X X X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 115 O: 200 X-O: 0-1/2 Crawford
Cube: 1
X to play 54

---
Tim Chow

On Friday, December 16, 2022 at 3:10:14 PM UTC, Tim Chow wrote:
> XGID=dABBABC--a--dB-----d-bA-A-:0:0:1:54:0:1:1:2:10
>
> Score is X:0 O:1 2 pt.(s) match.
> +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> | X | | O O X X |
> | X | | O O |
> | | | O |
> | | | O |
> | | | |
> | |BAR| |
> | | O | |
> | O | O | |
> | O | O | X |
> | O | O | X X X X |
> | O O | | X X X X X X |
> +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count X: 115 O: 200 X-O: 0-1/2 Crawford
> Cube: 1
> X to play 54

I know I often end up foolish when I say these things, but my first impression is that
this really is a beginner's problem.
Here, we have no interest in the backgammon, and four on the bar is plenty for the gammon.
Piling too many on the bar just gives our opponent more counter-chances by increasing the contact.
Of course, we cover our 4 point, but we don't hit while we do this.

Paul

> I know I often end up foolish when I say these things, but my first impression is that
> this really is a beginner's problem.
> Here, we have no interest in the backgammon, and four on the bar is plenty for the gammon.
> Piling too many on the bar just gives our opponent more counter-chances by increasing the contact.
> Of course, we cover our 4 point, but we don't hit while we do this.
What would you say if after 13-8,8-4 the opponent rolls a 11? What if you played 13-9,9-4?
Usually when you are hit in the bear off your opponent has some structure to contain the hit piece, but the 2-pt board doesn't impress me and if the opponent hits and has still checker on thee bar you can move freely in exchange for a little higher probability to be hit.

On Friday, December 16, 2022 at 10:10:14 AM UTC-5, Tim Chow wrote:
> XGID=dABBABC--a--dB-----d-bA-A-:0:0:1:54:0:1:1:2:10
>
> Score is X:0 O:1 2 pt.(s) match.
> +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> | X | | O O X X |
> | X | | O O |
> | | | O |
> | | | O |
> | | | |
> | |BAR| |
> | | O | |
> | O | O | |
> | O | O | X |
> | O | O | X X X X |
> | O O | | X X X X X X |
> +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count X: 115 O: 200 X-O: 0-1/2 Crawford
> Cube: 1
> X to play 54
>
> ---
> Tim Chow

Just make the dmp play.

Stick

On Friday, December 16, 2022 at 11:39:17 PM UTC, bgbl...@googlemail.com wrote:
> > I know I often end up foolish when I say these things, but my first impression is that
> > this really is a beginner's problem.
> > Here, we have no interest in the backgammon, and four on the bar is plenty for the gammon.
> > Piling too many on the bar just gives our opponent more counter-chances by increasing the contact.
> > Of course, we cover our 4 point, but we don't hit while we do this.
> What would you say if after 13-8,8-4 the opponent rolls a 11? What if you played 13-9,9-4?
> Usually when you are hit in the bear off your opponent has some structure to contain the hit piece, but the 2-pt board doesn't impress me and if the opponent hits and has still checker on thee bar you can move freely in exchange for a little higher probability to be hit.

Ok, great! You have found a 1/36 parlay where your play works marginally better than mine. But so what?
Our winning chances and gammon chances are huge of course, but we're not close to gin. Our opponent has contact
opportunities to hit back, and it's our job to minimize these. Of course, the 2 point board of the opponent means that
the opponent can hit back and still lose, but we mustn't be complacent.
Of course, intuition is used here -- the position is not amenable to exact calculation. But I think the desire to hit
is based on faulty intuition, derived from the experience of similar positions where backgammons count.
Of course, my play is a big blunder if backgammons count. But backgammon don't count here.

Paul

On Saturday, December 17, 2022 at 9:51:59 AM UTC, Stick Rice wrote:
> On Friday, December 16, 2022 at 10:10:14 AM UTC-5, Tim Chow wrote:
> > XGID=dABBABC--a--dB-----d-bA-A-:0:0:1:54:0:1:1:2:10
> >
> > Score is X:0 O:1 2 pt.(s) match.
> > +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> > | X | | O O X X |
> > | X | | O O |
> > | | | O |
> > | | | O |
> > | | | |
> > | |BAR| |
> > | | O | |
> > | O | O | |
> > | O | O | X |
> > | O | O | X X X X |
> > | O O | | X X X X X X |
> > +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> > Pip count X: 115 O: 200 X-O: 0-1/2 Crawford
> > Cube: 1
> > X to play 54
> >
> > ---
> > Tim Chow
> Just make the dmp play.
>
> Stick
Yes, that's what I did.

Paul

I think the far more interesting question than hitting on the 9 is whether you cover the 4 or the 1. Your builders are closer to the 4, if the magic happens (11 or 44 or otherwise making the point) the 4 is easier to overcome. But from the 21 checkers are easier to recirculate. Difficult.
@Paul: if everything else is the same, a 1/36 joker is not to take into account? And I don't think it is marginally. With 4 checkers the opponent is into play, with 5 he needs on avg another 3 rolls, where I can bring my back checkers home.

On Saturday, December 17, 2022 at 12:49:16 PM UTC, bgbl...@googlemail.com wrote:
> I think the far more interesting question than hitting on the 9 is whether you cover the 4 or the 1. Your builders are closer to the 4, if the magic happens (11 or 44 or otherwise making the point) the 4 is easier to overcome. But from the 21 checkers are easier to recirculate. Difficult.
> @Paul: if everything else is the same, a 1/36 joker is not to take into account? And I don't think it is marginally. With 4 checkers the opponent is into play, with 5 he needs on avg another 3 rolls, where I can bring my back checkers home.

It might not surprise you that I haven't changed my mind.
Anyway, besides being a world-class player, one of the facts about
Stick is that he doesn't get these problems wrong (regardless of
the reasons for his almost perfect accuracy).
From his post, we know it's the DMP play.
Any idea what the DMP play is?

Paul

On Saturday, December 17, 2022 at 12:49:16 PM UTC, bgbl...@googlemail.com wrote:
> I think the far more interesting question than hitting on the 9 is whether you cover the 4 or the 1. Your builders are closer to the 4, if the magic happens (11 or 44 or otherwise making the point) the 4 is easier to overcome. But from the 21 checkers are easier to recirculate. Difficult.
> @Paul: if everything else is the same, a 1/36 joker is not to take into account? And I don't think it is marginally. With 4 checkers the opponent is into play, with 5 he needs on avg another 3 rolls, where I can bring my back checkers home.

It's not at all "Everything else is the same". Those opponent's checkers on the bar are threats. I'd rather have one fewer, please.
I'd agree that covering the ace instead of the four can't be rejected out of hand. It doesn't look right (to me), though.

Paul

On 12/17/2022 7:54 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
> From his post, we know it's the DMP play.
> Any idea what the DMP play is?

Without giving everything away, let me show you my DMP rollout
of the top 4 plays below, with the actual plays deleted.

XGID=dABBABC--a--dB-----d-bA-A-:0:0:1:54:0:0:0:1:10

Score is X:0 O:0 1 pt.(s) match.
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X | | O O X X |
| X | | O O |
| | | O |
| | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | O | |
| O | O | |
| O | O | X |
| O | O | X X X X |
| O O | | X X X X X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 115 O: 200 X-O: 0-0/1
Cube: 1
X to play 54

1. Rollout¹ eq:+0.881
2. Rollout¹ eq:+0.865 (-0.016)
3. Rollout¹ eq:+0.861 (-0.020)
4. Rollout¹ eq:+0.855 (-0.026)

¹ 2592 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.211.pre-release, MET: Kazaross XG2

---
Tim Chow

On Saturday, December 17, 2022 at 9:48:56 PM UTC, Tim Chow wrote:
> On 12/17/2022 7:54 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
> > From his post, we know it's the DMP play.
> > Any idea what the DMP play is?
> Without giving everything away, let me show you my DMP rollout
> of the top 4 plays below, with the actual plays deleted.

And is Stick correct that the DMP play is correct here?

Paul

On 12/16/2022 10:10 AM, Timothy Chow wrote:
> XGID=dABBABC--a--dB-----d-bA-A-:0:0:1:54:0:1:1:2:10
>
> Score is X:0 O:1 2 pt.(s) match.
>  +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
>  | X                |   | O     O  X     X |
>  | X                |   | O     O          |
>  |                  |   | O                |
>  |                  |   | O                |
>  |                  |   |                  |
>  |                  |BAR|                  |
>  |                  | O |                  |
>  | O                | O |                  |
>  | O                | O | X                |
>  | O                | O | X  X     X  X    |
>  | O        O       |   | X  X  X  X  X  X |
>  +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count  X: 115  O: 200 X-O: 0-1/2 Crawford
> Cube: 1
> X to play 54

Four on the bar is usually enough, so 13/4 for me.

13/9* 6/1 is interesting, but the fifth checker on the roof seems to
accomplish less than making the solid five prime and forestalling O from
anchoring on the four point.

I don't think escaping the runners is right - it's a blitz so escaping
is not a priority.

--
Ah....Clem
The future is fun, the future is fair.

On 12/17/2022 4:48 PM, Timothy Chow wrote:
> On 12/17/2022 7:54 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
>>  From his post, we know it's the DMP play.
>> Any idea what the DMP play is?
>
> Without giving everything away, let me show you my DMP rollout
> of the top 4 plays below, with the actual plays deleted.

>
>     1. Rollout¹              eq:+0.881
>     2. Rollout¹              eq:+0.865 (-0.016)
>     3. Rollout¹              eq:+0.861 (-0.020)
>     4. Rollout¹              eq:+0.855 (-0.026)

Well, then, it's quite obvious!

--
Ah....Clem
The future is fun, the future is fair.

On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 1:41:47 AM UTC, ah....Clem wrote:
> On 12/16/2022 10:10 AM, Timothy Chow wrote:
> > XGID=dABBABC--a--dB-----d-bA-A-:0:0:1:54:0:1:1:2:10
> >
> > Score is X:0 O:1 2 pt.(s) match.
> > +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> > | X | | O O X X |
> > | X | | O O |
> > | | | O |
> > | | | O |
> > | | | |
> > | |BAR| |
> > | | O | |
> > | O | O | |
> > | O | O | X |
> > | O | O | X X X X |
> > | O O | | X X X X X X |
> > +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> > Pip count X: 115 O: 200 X-O: 0-1/2 Crawford
> > Cube: 1
> > X to play 54
> Four on the bar is usually enough, so 13/4 for me.
>
> 13/9* 6/1 is interesting, but the fifth checker on the roof seems to
> accomplish less than making the solid five prime and forestalling O from
> anchoring on the four point.
>
> I don't think escaping the runners is right - it's a blitz so escaping
> is not a priority.
>
> --
> Ah....Clem
> The future is fun, the future is fair.

ah...Clem has become a really shrewd analyst over the years.
It gives me a lot of confidence that he and I have picked the same play.

Paul

On 12/17/2022 6:11 PM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
> And is Stick correct that the DMP play is correct here?

As you know, that goes without saying.

---
Tim Chow

XGID=dABBABC--a--dB-----d-bA-A-:0:0:1:54:0:1:1:2:10

Score is X:0 O:1 2 pt.(s) match.
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X | | O O X X |
| X | | O O |
| | | O |
| | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | O | |
| O | O | |
| O | O | X |
| O | O | X X X X |
| O O | | X X X X X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 115 O: 200 X-O: 0-1/2 Crawford
Cube: 1
X to play 54

In a blitz, making a higher point isn't necessarily better than making
a lower point. You're aiming for a closeout, and making low points is
often harder than making high points, so on the principle that you
should do hard things before easy things, making the ace point takes
priority over making the 4pt here.

Even if you choose to make the 4pt, there's really no downside to
hitting. It's not going to improve O's timing or anything like that.
If O manages to anchor, X is not going to be able to get O to crunch.

Posing this problem at gammon go rather than for money simplifies it,
because backgammons are not a consideration. With five checkers on
the bar, a backgammon is a serious possibility. The backgammon chances
are lower if O manages to anchor on the 4pt (as opposed to the 1pt).
This factor is not quite enough to swing the decision, according to the
rollout below, but it's close.

Finally, at DMP, the ranking of the top four plays according to an XG
rollout is:

1. 13/9* 6/1
2. 13/9*/4
3. 24/20 6/1
4. 13/4

1. Rollout¹ 13/9* 6/1 eq:+2.669
Player: 94.24% (G:89.19% B:12.23%)
Opponent: 5.76% (G:0.41% B:0.03%)
Confidence: ±0.007 (+2.661..+2.676) - [100.0%]

2. Rollout¹ 13/9* 9/4 eq:+2.614 (-0.055)
Player: 93.45% (G:87.23% B:19.63%)
Opponent: 6.55% (G:0.29% B:0.02%)
Confidence: ±0.008 (+2.605..+2.622) - [0.0%]

3. Rollout¹ 13/4 eq:+2.579 (-0.090)
Player: 92.90% (G:86.05% B:17.69%)
Opponent: 7.10% (G:0.47% B:0.02%)
Confidence: ±0.009 (+2.570..+2.588) - [0.0%]

¹ 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.211.pre-release, MET: Kazaross XG2

-----
Money
-----

XGID=dABBABC--a--dB-----d-bA-A-:1:-1:1:54:0:0:0:0:10

Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X | | O O X X | +---+
| X | | O O | | 2 |
| | | O | +---+
| | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | O | |
| O | O | |
| O | O | X |
| O | O | X X X X |
| O O | | X X X X X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 115 O: 200 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 54

1. Rollout¹ 13/9* 6/1 eq:+1.998
Player: 93.14% (G:86.56% B:30.69%)
Opponent: 6.86% (G:0.64% B:0.03%)
Confidence: ±0.004 (+1.994..+2.003) - [99.8%]

2. Rollout¹ 13/9* 9/4 eq:+1.989 (-0.009)
Player: 92.34% (G:84.72% B:33.04%)
Opponent: 7.66% (G:0.27% B:0.01%)
Confidence: ±0.005 (+1.985..+1.994) - [0.2%]

3. Rollout² 13/4 eq:+1.961 (-0.038)
Player: 91.95% (G:84.09% B:32.06%)
Opponent: 8.05% (G:0.40% B:0.02%)
Confidence: ±0.009 (+1.952..+1.970) - [0.0%]

¹ 5184 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller

² 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.211.pre-release

---
Tim Chow

On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 2:51:12 PM UTC, Tim Chow wrote:
> XGID=dABBABC--a--dB-----d-bA-A-:0:0:1:54:0:1:1:2:10
>
> Score is X:0 O:1 2 pt.(s) match.
> +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> | X | | O O X X |
> | X | | O O |
> | | | O |
> | | | O |
> | | | |
> | |BAR| |
> | | O | |
> | O | O | |
> | O | O | X |
> | O | O | X X X X |
> | O O | | X X X X X X |
> +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count X: 115 O: 200 X-O: 0-1/2 Crawford
> Cube: 1
> X to play 54
> In a blitz, making a higher point isn't necessarily better than making
> a lower point. You're aiming for a closeout, and making low points is
> often harder than making high points, so on the principle that you
> should do hard things before easy things, making the ace point takes
> priority over making the 4pt here.
>
> Even if you choose to make the 4pt, there's really no downside to
> hitting. It's not going to improve O's timing or anything like that.
> If O manages to anchor, X is not going to be able to get O to crunch.
>
> Posing this problem at gammon go rather than for money simplifies it,
> because backgammons are not a consideration. With five checkers on
> the bar, a backgammon is a serious possibility. The backgammon chances
> are lower if O manages to anchor on the 4pt (as opposed to the 1pt).
> This factor is not quite enough to swing the decision, according to the
> rollout below, but it's close.
>
> Finally, at DMP, the ranking of the top four plays according to an XG
> rollout is:
>
> 1. 13/9* 6/1
> 2. 13/9*/4
> 3. 24/20 6/1
> 4. 13/4
>
> 1. Rollout¹ 13/9* 6/1 eq:+2.669
> Player: 94.24% (G:89.19% B:12.23%)
> Opponent: 5.76% (G:0.41% B:0.03%)
> Confidence: ±0.007 (+2.661..+2.676) - [100.0%]
>
> 2. Rollout¹ 13/9* 9/4 eq:+2.614 (-0.055)
> Player: 93.45% (G:87.23% B:19.63%)
> Opponent: 6.55% (G:0.29% B:0.02%)
> Confidence: ±0.008 (+2.605..+2.622) - [0.0%]
>
> 3. Rollout¹ 13/4 eq:+2.579 (-0.090)
> Player: 92.90% (G:86.05% B:17.69%)
> Opponent: 7.10% (G:0.47% B:0.02%)
> Confidence: ±0.009 (+2.570..+2.588) - [0.0%]
>
> ¹ 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
> Dice Seed: 271828
> Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
>
> eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.211.pre-release, MET: Kazaross XG2
> -----
> Money
> -----
>
> XGID=dABBABC--a--dB-----d-bA-A-:1:-1:1:54:0:0:0:0:10
>
> Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
> +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> | X | | O O X X | +---+
> | X | | O O | | 2 |
> | | | O | +---+
> | | | O |
> | | | |
> | |BAR| |
> | | O | |
> | O | O | |
> | O | O | X |
> | O | O | X X X X |
> | O O | | X X X X X X |
> +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count X: 115 O: 200 X-O: 0-0
> Cube: 2, O own cube
> X to play 54
>
> 1. Rollout¹ 13/9* 6/1 eq:+1.998
> Player: 93.14% (G:86.56% B:30.69%)
> Opponent: 6.86% (G:0.64% B:0.03%)
> Confidence: ±0.004 (+1.994..+2.003) - [99.8%]
>
> 2. Rollout¹ 13/9* 9/4 eq:+1.989 (-0.009)
> Player: 92.34% (G:84.72% B:33.04%)
> Opponent: 7.66% (G:0.27% B:0.01%)
> Confidence: ±0.005 (+1.985..+1.994) - [0.2%]
>
> 3. Rollout² 13/4 eq:+1.961 (-0.038)
> Player: 91.95% (G:84.09% B:32.06%)
> Opponent: 8.05% (G:0.40% B:0.02%)
> Confidence: ±0.009 (+1.952..+1.970) - [0.0%]
>
> ¹ 5184 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
> Dice Seed: 271828
> Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
> ² 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
> Dice Seed: 271828
> Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
>
> eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.211.pre-release

I made the 4 point because I'm more scared of the opponent anchoring on the 4 point than anchoring on the
ace point.
Why is this a worse idea than spending thirty years aiming for mathematical immortality by summing up the divisors of randomly
selected odd integers in the hope of finding a perfect one?

Paul

On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 9:31:32 AM UTC-5, Tim Chow wrote:
> On 12/17/2022 6:11 PM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
> > And is Stick correct that the DMP play is correct here?
> As you know, that goes without saying.
>
> ---
> Tim Chow

That's either a great compliment (which we all know it isn't what you meant lol) or you're suggesting that with that many plays that close I rolled it out before posting my response. I'm not sure which is the bigger lol, which would you like it to be?

Stick

On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 7:55:54 PM UTC, Stick Rice wrote:
> On Sunday, December 18, 2022 at 9:31:32 AM UTC-5, Tim Chow wrote:
> > On 12/17/2022 6:11 PM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > And is Stick correct that the DMP play is correct here?
> > As you know, that goes without saying.
> >
> > ---
> > Tim Chow
> That's either a great compliment (which we all know it isn't what you meant lol) or you're suggesting that with that many plays that close I rolled it out before posting my response. I'm not sure which is the bigger lol, which would you like it to be?
>
> Stick

I don't see anything to complain about in Tim's response.
It so happens that your accuracy in your comments on this
forum is extremely high. I can't recall you making an incorrect
assertion, although I remember hearing that it has happened.
So if you say the DMP play is correct, then the DMP play is correct.

I don't see anyone making any implication, insinuation, or statement
as to _why_ you are nearly always correct.

But since you are nearly always correct, if you post something, it's sensible of
readers to assume it's true.

I actually don't care why you're nearly always correct, but you are.

Paul

On 12/18/2022 3:11 PM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
> I don't see anything to complain about in Tim's response.
> It so happens that your accuracy in your comments on this
> forum is extremely high. I can't recall you making an incorrect
> assertion, although I remember hearing that it has happened.
> So if you say the DMP play is correct, then the DMP play is correct.
>
> I don't see anyone making any implication, insinuation, or statement
> as to _why_ you are nearly always correct.
>
> But since you are nearly always correct, if you post something, it's sensible of
> readers to assume it's true.
>
> I actually don't care why you're nearly always correct, but you are.

I agree with Paul 100%.

---
Tim Chow

On 12/19/2022 6:13 AM, I wrote:
> I agree with Paul 100%.

Actually, Paul doesn't say anything about inadvertent errors, like
posting in the wrong thread by accident, or misreading the question.
But I don't think that's what Paul was talking about.

Here's one example that I think falls into that category, though
Stick never confirmed it.

https://groups.google.com/g/rec.games.backgammon/c/n0WTzRCHkqQ/m/7_IijqMrCQAJ

---
Tim Chow

On 12/18/2022 2:35 PM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
> I made the 4 point because I'm more scared of the opponent anchoring on the 4 point than anchoring on the
> ace point.

It's true that if O enters 4 checkers immediately then you'd
prefer her to enter on your 1pt rather than her 4pt. But
otherwise, the point is that you're more likely to close out O
if you make the 1pt now than if you make the 4pt now.

See the two positions below for some further insight. If O
enters 1 checker immediately then she'd rather enter on the 1pt
because her chances of anchoring are better that way---X's
checker on the 13pt has further to travel to reach the 1pt.
(Note that in the positions below, it's O on roll, but X is
on the bottom still.)

XGID=eABBBBC-----dA-----d-bA-A-:0:0:-1:61:0:1:1:2:10

Score is X:0 O:1 2 pt.(s) match.
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
| X | | O O X X |
| | | O O |
| | | O |
| | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | O | |
| O | O | |
| O | O | X |
| O | O | X X X X X |
| O | O | X X X X X X |
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
Pip count X: 106 O: 209 X-O: 0-1/2 Crawford
Cube: 1
O to play 61

1. XG Roller++ Bar/24* eq:-2.281
Player: 12.55% (G:0.68% B:0.01%)
Opponent: 87.45% (G:76.60% B:21.46%)

XGID=eBBBABB--A--dA-----d-bA-A-:0:0:-1:64:0:1:1:2:10

-----------------------------------------------------------------

XGID=eBBBABB--A--dA-----d-bA-A-:0:0:-1:64:0:1:1:2:10

Score is X:0 O:1 2 pt.(s) match.
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
| X | | O O X X |
| | | O O |
| | | O |
| | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | O | |
| O | O | |
| O | O | |
| O | O | X X X X X |
| O X | O | X X X X X X |
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
Pip count X: 106 O: 209 X-O: 0-1/2 Crawford
Cube: 1
O to play 64

1. XG Roller++ Bar/21* eq:-2.408
Player: 10.83% (G:1.23% B:0.03%)
Opponent: 89.17% (G:81.21% B:14.80%)

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.211.pre-release, MET: Kazaross XG2

---
Tim Chow

On Monday, December 19, 2022 at 6:22:35 AM UTC-5, Tim Chow wrote:
> On 12/19/2022 6:13 AM, I wrote:
> > I agree with Paul 100%.
> Actually, Paul doesn't say anything about inadvertent errors, like
> posting in the wrong thread by accident, or misreading the question.
> But I don't think that's what Paul was talking about.
>
> Here's one example that I think falls into that category, though
> Stick never confirmed it.
>
> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.games.backgammon/c/n0WTzRCHkqQ/m/7_IijqMrCQAJ
>
> ---
> Tim Chow

After I do rollouts I don't save them and generally that doesn't matter because most rollouts can be done again if needed so fast it doesn't matter. A ++/gigantic rollout though takes time and I didn't want to redo the rollout and then forgot about it so no idea what went on.

Stick