XGID=-EaB--B---------a--bbbc-d-:1:-1:1:21:0:0:0:0:10

Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| O | | O O O O O | +---+
| | | O O O O O | | 2 |
| | | O O | +---+
| | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X X X | X
| | | X X O X | X X
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 23 O: 75 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 21

---
Tim Chow

On Friday, December 23, 2022 at 8:50:49 AM UTC-5, Tim Chow wrote:
> XGID=-EaB--B---------a--bbbc-d-:1:-1:1:21:0:0:0:0:10
>
> Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
> +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> | O | | O O O O O | +---+
> | | | O O O O O | | 2 |
> | | | O O | +---+
> | | | O |
> | | | |
> | |BAR| |
> | | | X | X
> | | | X | X
> | | | X | X
> | | | X X X | X
> | | | X X O X | X X
> +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count X: 23 O: 75 X-O: 0-0
> Cube: 2, O own cube
> X to play 21
>
> ---
> Tim Chow

Since the opponent isn't forced to leave next turn we have to play for safety over multiple turns (aka clean up next turn) so while 3/off minimizes shots now, overall it leaves far more shots on average when we're missed and have to try to clean up the mess next turn with our opponent sitting, waiting. 6/3 should be the safest overall. If our opponent was forced to run with sixes I would expect minimizing shots immediately to come out on top.

Stick

On 12/23/2022 4:43 PM, Stick Rice wrote:
> Since the opponent isn't forced to leave next turn we have to play for safety over multiple turns (aka clean up next turn) so while 3/off minimizes shots now, overall it leaves far more shots on average when we're missed and have to try to clean up the mess next turn with our opponent sitting, waiting. 6/3 should be the safest overall. If our opponent was forced to run with sixes I would expect minimizing shots immediately to come out on top.

Trying to force the blot forward by hitting isn't a candidate?

---
Tim Chow

On 12/23/2022 8:50 AM, Timothy Chow wrote:
> XGID=-EaB--B---------a--bbbc-d-:1:-1:1:21:0:0:0:0:10
>
> Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
>  +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
>  |          O       |   | O  O  O  O     O | +---+
>  |                  |   | O  O  O  O     O | | 2 |
>  |                  |   |          O     O | +---+
>  |                  |   |                O |
>  |                  |   |                  |
>  |                  |BAR|                  |
>  |                  |   |                X |  X
>  |                  |   |                X |  X
>  |                  |   |                X |  X
>  |                  |   | X        X     X |  X
>  |                  |   | X        X  O  X |  X X
>  +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count  X: 23  O: 75 X-O: 0-0
> Cube: 2, O own cube
> X to play 21

6/3 leaves the most shots (out of the reasonable plays that is); it
works great when it works, but I think fewer immediate shots is the way
to go. Also, hitting means O might be forced to enter with a high number
thereby reducing shots later.

3/1 3/2 minimizes shots, but 3/2*/off only leaves one more shot and it
takes a checker off, which is a substantial plus if we're hit and I
think outweighs the risk of one extra shot. So I"ll play that.

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

On Saturday, December 24, 2022 at 7:52:32 AM UTC-5, Tim Chow wrote:
> On 12/23/2022 4:43 PM, Stick Rice wrote:
> > Since the opponent isn't forced to leave next turn we have to play for safety over multiple turns (aka clean up next turn) so while 3/off minimizes shots now, overall it leaves far more shots on average when we're missed and have to try to clean up the mess next turn with our opponent sitting, waiting. 6/3 should be the safest overall. If our opponent was forced to run with sixes I would expect minimizing shots immediately to come out on top.
> Trying to force the blot forward by hitting isn't a candidate?
>
> ---
> Tim Chow

Not really but which not really are you asking about so I can address it, hit and off or hit and scootch?

Stick

On 12/24/2022 3:16 PM, Stick Rice wrote:
> On Saturday, December 24, 2022 at 7:52:32 AM UTC-5, Tim Chow wrote:
>> On 12/23/2022 4:43 PM, Stick Rice wrote:
>>> Since the opponent isn't forced to leave next turn we have to play for safety over multiple turns (aka clean up next turn) so while 3/off minimizes shots now, overall it leaves far more shots on average when we're missed and have to try to clean up the mess next turn with our opponent sitting, waiting. 6/3 should be the safest overall. If our opponent was forced to run with sixes I would expect minimizing shots immediately to come out on top.
>> Trying to force the blot forward by hitting isn't a candidate?
>>
>> ---
>> Tim Chow
>
> Not really but which not really are you asking about so I can address it, hit and off or hit and scootch?

Both. Supposing that I decide to hit, I might choose to
minimize return shots, or I might decide that bearing off
an extra checker is worth the extra risk.

---
Tim Chow

XGID=-EaB--B---------a--bbbc-d-:1:-1:1:21:0:0:0:0:10

Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| O | | O O O O O | +---+
| | | O O O O O | | 2 |
| | | O O | +---+
| | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X X X | X
| | | X X O X | X X
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 23 O: 75 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 21

There is a tradeoff between short-term shot jeopardy and long-term
shot jeopardy that one needs to try to estimate here. Also, one
needs to judge the importance of having an extra checker off, since
that can make a significant difference if we get hit.

Trying to force the blot forward by hitting it can sometimes be the
right idea, but here, the chances of forcing it forward are not so
good, and usually doesn't reduce the long-term shot jeopardy by much
anyway.

I've included two variants this time, for good measure. The main
takeaway, from my perspective, is that the 6pt is a huge liability
here, and getting rid of it is worth some risk.

1. Rollout¹ 6/3 eq:+0.622
Player: 82.66% (G:3.86% B:0.01%)
Opponent: 17.34% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.004 (+0.618..+0.626) - [100.0%]

2. Rollout¹ 3/Off eq:+0.549 (-0.073)
Player: 77.49% (G:9.19% B:0.11%)
Opponent: 22.51% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.006 (+0.543..+0.555) - [0.0%]

3. Rollout¹ 3/2* 2/Off eq:+0.531 (-0.091)
Player: 76.45% (G:9.93% B:0.09%)
Opponent: 23.55% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.006 (+0.525..+0.536) - [0.0%]

4. Rollout¹ 3/1 3/2* eq:+0.494 (-0.128)
Player: 76.61% (G:6.15% B:0.02%)
Opponent: 23.39% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.006 (+0.488..+0.499) - [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

---------
Variant 1
---------

XGID=-EaB--B------------dbbb-d-:1:-1:1:21:0:0:0:0:10

Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| | | O O O O O | +---+
| | | O O O O O | | 2 |
| | | O O | +---+
| | | O O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X X X | X
| | | X X O X | X X
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 23 O: 75 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 21

1. Rollout¹ 6/3 eq:+0.587
Player: 82.02% (G:1.99% B:0.01%)
Opponent: 17.98% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.004 (+0.583..+0.591) - [100.0%]

2. Rollout¹ 3/Off eq:+0.556 (-0.031)
Player: 79.03% (G:5.99% B:0.06%)
Opponent: 20.97% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.005 (+0.551..+0.561) - [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

---------
Variant 2
---------

XGID=-EaB--B---------a--bbbc-d-:1:-1:1:31:0:0:0:0:10

Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| O | | O O O O O | +---+
| | | O O O O O | | 2 |
| | | O O | +---+
| | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X | X
| | | X X X | X
| | | X X O X | X X
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 23 O: 75 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 31

1. Rollout¹ 6/3 1/Off eq:+0.709
Player: 85.15% (G:6.52% B:0.04%)
Opponent: 14.85% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.004 (+0.706..+0.713) - [100.0%]

2. Rollout¹ 3/Off 1/Off eq:+0.662 (-0.047)
Player: 80.98% (G:11.83% B:0.16%)
Opponent: 19.02% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.006 (+0.656..+0.668) - [0.0%]

3. Rollout¹ 6/5 6/3 eq:+0.658 (-0.051)
Player: 84.13% (G:3.57% B:0.01%)
Opponent: 15.87% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.004 (+0.654..+0.661) - [0.0%]

4. Rollout¹ 3/2* 3/Off eq:+0.617 (-0.092)
Player: 79.35% (G:11.32% B:0.09%)
Opponent: 20.65% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Confidence: ±0.005 (+0.612..+0.622) - [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

---
Tim Chow

On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 11:06:07 AM UTC-5, Tim Chow wrote:
> XGID=-EaB--B---------a--bbbc-d-:1:-1:1:21:0:0:0:0:10
>
> Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
> +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> | O | | O O O O O | +---+
> | | | O O O O O | | 2 |
> | | | O O | +---+
> | | | O |
> | | | |
> | |BAR| |
> | | | X | X
> | | | X | X
> | | | X | X
> | | | X X X | X
> | | | X X O X | X X
> +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count X: 23 O: 75 X-O: 0-0
> Cube: 2, O own cube
> X to play 21
> There is a tradeoff between short-term shot jeopardy and long-term
> shot jeopardy that one needs to try to estimate here. Also, one
> needs to judge the importance of having an extra checker off, since
> that can make a significant difference if we get hit.
>
> Trying to force the blot forward by hitting it can sometimes be the
> right idea, but here, the chances of forcing it forward are not so
> good, and usually doesn't reduce the long-term shot jeopardy by much
> anyway.
>
> I've included two variants this time, for good measure. The main
> takeaway, from my perspective, is that the 6pt is a huge liability
> here, and getting rid of it is worth some risk.
>
> 1. Rollout¹ 6/3 eq:+0.622
> Player: 82.66% (G:3.86% B:0.01%)
> Opponent: 17.34% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
> Confidence: ±0.004 (+0.618..+0.626) - [100.0%]
>
> 2. Rollout¹ 3/Off eq:+0.549 (-0.073)
> Player: 77.49% (G:9.19% B:0.11%)
> Opponent: 22.51% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
> Confidence: ±0.006 (+0.543..+0.555) - [0.0%]
>
> 3. Rollout¹ 3/2* 2/Off eq:+0.531 (-0.091)
> Player: 76.45% (G:9.93% B:0.09%)
> Opponent: 23.55% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
> Confidence: ±0.006 (+0.525..+0.536) - [0.0%]
>
> 4. Rollout¹ 3/1 3/2* eq:+0.494 (-0.128)
> Player: 76.61% (G:6.15% B:0.02%)
> Opponent: 23.39% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
> Confidence: ±0.006 (+0.488..+0.499) - [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
>
> ---------
> Variant 1
> ---------
>
> XGID=-EaB--B------------dbbb-d-:1:-1:1:21:0:0:0:0:10
> Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
> +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> | | | O O O O O | +---+
> | | | O O O O O | | 2 |
> | | | O O | +---+
> | | | O O |
> | | | |
> | |BAR| |
> | | | X | X
> | | | X | X
> | | | X | X
> | | | X X X | X
> | | | X X O X | X X
> +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count X: 23 O: 75 X-O: 0-0
> Cube: 2, O own cube
> X to play 21
> 1. Rollout¹ 6/3 eq:+0.587
> Player: 82.02% (G:1.99% B:0.01%)
> Opponent: 17.98% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
> Confidence: ±0.004 (+0.583..+0.591) - [100.0%]
>
> 2. Rollout¹ 3/Off eq:+0.556 (-0.031)
> Player: 79.03% (G:5.99% B:0.06%)
> Opponent: 20.97% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
> Confidence: ±0.005 (+0.551..+0.561) - [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
>
> ---------
> Variant 2
> ---------
>
> XGID=-EaB--B---------a--bbbc-d-:1:-1:1:31:0:0:0:0:10
> Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
> +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> | O | | O O O O O | +---+
> | | | O O O O O | | 2 |
> | | | O O | +---+
> | | | O |
> | | | |
> | |BAR| |
> | | | X | X
> | | | X | X
> | | | X | X
> | | | X X X | X
> | | | X X O X | X X
> +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count X: 23 O: 75 X-O: 0-0
> Cube: 2, O own cube
> X to play 31
>
> 1. Rollout¹ 6/3 1/Off eq:+0.709
> Player: 85.15% (G:6.52% B:0.04%)
> Opponent: 14.85% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
> Confidence: ±0.004 (+0.706..+0.713) - [100.0%]
>
> 2. Rollout¹ 3/Off 1/Off eq:+0.662 (-0.047)
> Player: 80.98% (G:11.83% B:0.16%)
> Opponent: 19.02% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
> Confidence: ±0.006 (+0.656..+0.668) - [0.0%]
>
> 3. Rollout¹ 6/5 6/3 eq:+0.658 (-0.051)
> Player: 84.13% (G:3.57% B:0.01%)
> Opponent: 15.87% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
> Confidence: ±0.004 (+0.654..+0.661) - [0.0%]
>
> 4. Rollout¹ 3/2* 3/Off eq:+0.617 (-0.092)
> Player: 79.35% (G:11.32% B:0.09%)
> Opponent: 20.65% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
> Confidence: ±0.005 (+0.612..+0.622) - [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
>
> ---
> Tim Chow

Did you cleverly eschew simply bringing your blot from the outfield to the 6pt which would be the normal way to create a variant without also unnecessarily rearranging spares because it didn't fit your bottom line? It could have still fit your narrative if you took the time to explain it v. the ghetto version of that variant you included, variant #1.

Stick

On 12/25/2022 3:22 PM, Stick Rice wrote:
> Did you cleverly eschew simply bringing your blot from the outfield to the 6pt which would be the normal way to create a variant without also unnecessarily rearranging spares because it didn't fit your bottom line? It could have still fit your narrative if you took the time to explain it v. the ghetto version of that variant you included, variant #1.

There's no "normal way to create a variant." Keeping the pip count
constant is one principle that is sometimes useful.

And certainly, it was not because "it didn't fit my bottom line."
As you yourself say, it still fits my bottom line. In any case,
I always create variants first and only then try to come up with a
"bottom line." (When I say "always," maybe I should qualify that
by saying at least in the last 8 or 9 years. Before that, I may
have been less disciplined.)

---
Tim Chow

On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 4:58:39 PM UTC-5, Tim Chow wrote:
> On 12/25/2022 3:22 PM, Stick Rice wrote:
> > Did you cleverly eschew simply bringing your blot from the outfield to the 6pt which would be the normal way to create a variant without also unnecessarily rearranging spares because it didn't fit your bottom line? It could have still fit your narrative if you took the time to explain it v. the ghetto version of that variant you included, variant #1.
> There's no "normal way to create a variant." Keeping the pip count
> constant is one principle that is sometimes useful.
>
> And certainly, it was not because "it didn't fit my bottom line."
> As you yourself say, it still fits my bottom line. In any case,
> I always create variants first and only then try to come up with a
> "bottom line." (When I say "always," maybe I should qualify that
> by saying at least in the last 8 or 9 years. Before that, I may
> have been less disciplined.)
>
> ---
> Tim Chow

Of course there's a normal way to create a variant, it's why we often arrive at the same one without consulting. If you were to pick 100 random problems that were posted and asked myself and Nack to pick the most instructive variant how many of them do you think would match? Did you not first originally look at the variant I suggested? I'd find that hard to believe.

Stick

On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 11:21:49 PM UTC, Stick Rice wrote:
> On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 4:58:39 PM UTC-5, Tim Chow wrote:
> > On 12/25/2022 3:22 PM, Stick Rice wrote:
> > > Did you cleverly eschew simply bringing your blot from the outfield to the 6pt which would be the normal way to create a variant without also unnecessarily rearranging spares because it didn't fit your bottom line? It could have still fit your narrative if you took the time to explain it v. the ghetto version of that variant you included, variant #1.
> > There's no "normal way to create a variant." Keeping the pip count
> > constant is one principle that is sometimes useful.
> >
> > And certainly, it was not because "it didn't fit my bottom line."
> > As you yourself say, it still fits my bottom line. In any case,
> > I always create variants first and only then try to come up with a
> > "bottom line." (When I say "always," maybe I should qualify that
> > by saying at least in the last 8 or 9 years. Before that, I may
> > have been less disciplined.)
> >
> > ---
> > Tim Chow
> Of course there's a normal way to create a variant, it's why we often arrive at the same one without consulting. If you were to pick 100 random problems that were posted and asked myself and Nack to pick the most instructive variant how many of them do you think would match? Did you not first originally look at the variant I suggested? I'd find that hard to believe.
>
> Stick

For some reason, the number 31 comes to mind. I estimate that you and Nack would get 31 matches out of 100.

Paul

On 12/25/2022 6:21 PM, Stick Rice wrote:
> Of course there's a normal way to create a variant, it's why we often arrive at the same one without consulting. If you were to pick 100 random problems that were posted and asked myself and Nack to pick the most instructive variant how many of them do you think would match? Did you not first originally look at the variant I suggested? I'd find that hard to believe.

Ah, so that's what this is about?

I roll out variants long before I post the problem. In this
case, I did think about whether O would be forced to run with
sixes, so I looked at a variant with the same pip count but
where O would have to run with sixes. Then yes, I saw you said
something about running with sixes. Sometimes, when you or
someone else makes a comment that isn't addressed at all by
the variants that I've prepared in advance, I'll roll out a
new variant just before posting. In this case, I didn't think
it was necessary to roll out yet a third variant, since I already
had one that I thought addressed that.

Whether I looked at the variant you suggested, I don't remember;
I have a long queue of positions waiting to be posted, and it was
weeks ago that this position came up OTB. Probably I did. I
typically look at half a dozen variants at least, if not more,
and I'll pick one or two to post. Will I always pick the same
variant that you would? Of course not. Sometimes I will, and
sometimes I won't. Would you and Nack have a higher hit rate?
Probably. I don't see why that's relevant to your insinuation
that I dishonestly picked variants to "fit my bottom line."

---
Tim Chow