XGID=-FBBa-----a-c----d-d---bA-:0:0:1:00:0:0:0:0:10

X:Player 2 O:Player 1
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| O | | O O X |
| O | | O O |
| O | | O |
| O | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | 6 |
| | | X | X
| O | | X | X
| O | | X X X | X
| O O | | O X X X | X
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 40 O: 135 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X on roll, cube action

---
Tim Chow

On 5/4/2021 10:14 AM, Timothy Chow wrote:
> XGID=-FBBa-----a-c----d-d---bA-:0:0:1:00:0:0:0:0:10
>
> X:Player 2   O:Player 1
> Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
> +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> |             O    |   | O           O  X |
> |             O    |   | O           O    |
> |             O    |   | O                |
> |             O    |   | O                |
> |                  |   |                  |
> |                  |BAR|                  |
> |                  |   |                6 |
> |                  |   |                X |  X
> | O                |   |                X |  X
> | O                |   |          X  X  X |  X
> | O     O          |   |       O  X  X  X |  X
> +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count  X: 40  O: 135 X-O: 0-0
> Cube: 1
> X on roll, cube action
>

I'd cube here with Jacoby in place. X still stands to win a lot of
gammons, and while I know that it's rarely correct to cube in order to
"activate gammons" I suspect this might be an exception.

O has basically all of her checkers still in play while X's checkers are
pretty much dead or buried. Still, my experience is that a single
checker not stuck behind a prime is very resilient so X wins a lot of
games with many of them gammons.

Market losers? A run to the outfield and a miss seems like a clear
market loser, if the market is not already lost here. But With 13
cheeckers aimed at the runner O seems to have enough to take.

Without Jacoby I might be inclined to play on for gammon, which I know
contradicts my assessment of D/T - if it's a take with Jacoby it's a
take without, and if it's a take then it can't be TG. Which is a lot or
words to say that Jacoby confuses me.

D/T.

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

On 5/4/2021 12:56 PM, ah....Clem wrote:
> Without Jacoby I might be inclined to play on for gammon, which I know
> contradicts my assessment of D/T - if it's a take with Jacoby it's a
> take without, and if it's a take then it can't be TG.  Which is a lot or
> words to say that Jacoby confuses me.

Blaming Jacoby here for your confusion is only slightly less unfair than
blaming the coronavirus for your confusion.

There is no Jacoby rule in force here. So can I infer that your
assessment is TG/T? X is too good to double, but O should take if
doubled?

---
Tim Chow

On 5/4/2021 9:12 PM, Timothy Chow wrote:
> On 5/4/2021 12:56 PM, ah....Clem wrote:

>
> There is no Jacoby rule in force here. 

I think I asked this the other day, but I don't remember which thread
and don't remember the answer, so I'll ask again:

Are the unlimited positions you post here without Jacoby?

> So can I infer that your
> assessment is TG/T?  X is too good to double, but O should take if
> doubled?
Yes you could infer that. You can also infer that both of us think that
it's an impossible conclusion.

On 5/6/2021 1:39 PM, ah...Clem wrote:
> Are the unlimited positions you post here without Jacoby?

Yes. If the Jacoby rule is in force, XG will say "Jacoby."
If you can remember that, then you don't have to remember
what my personal preferences are; you just have to look at
the posted position.

---
Tim Chow

On 5/4/2021 10:14 AM, Timothy Chow wrote:
> XGID=-FBBa-----a-c----d-d---bA-:0:0:1:00:0:0:0:0:10
>
> X:Player 2   O:Player 1
> Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
>  +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
>  |             O    |   | O           O  X |
>  |             O    |   | O           O    |
>  |             O    |   | O                |
>  |             O    |   | O                |
>  |                  |   |                  |
>  |                  |BAR|                  |
>  |                  |   |                6 |
>  |                  |   |                X |  X
>  | O                |   |                X |  X
>  | O                |   |          X  X  X |  X
>  | O     O          |   |       O  X  X  X |  X
>  +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count  X: 40  O: 135 X-O: 0-0
> Cube: 1
> X on roll, cube action

Ok, try this again without Jacoby clouding my thought process.

X wins a lot of gammons. That makes me think it might be TG. O loses a
lot of gammons, which makes me think it might be a pass, but O wins a
fair amount of games since X has to run all the way around the board, so
maybe it's a take? And if it's a take it can't be TG.

Since the take is unclear to me I'll ship it and make it O's problem.
I'm inclined to pass as O, but won't be surprised if XG's verdict is to
take.

D/P

XGID=-FBBa-----a-c----d-d---bA-:0:0:1:00:0:0:0:0:10

X:Player 2 O:Player 1
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| O | | O O X |
| O | | O O |
| O | | O |
| O | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | 6 |
| | | X | X
| O | | X | X
| O | | X X X | X
| O O | | O X X X | X
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 40 O: 135 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X on roll, cube action

It's impossible to gauge these types of positions without
studying them ahead of time. I was O here and passed, which
XG thinks is an unspeakable horror. If anything, XG makes
more mistakes playing O than X in this sort of position, so
it must really be a gigantic take.

Analyzed in Rollout
No double
Player Winning Chances: 56.47% (G:33.04% B:0.25%)
Opponent Winning Chances: 43.53% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Double/Take
Player Winning Chances: 56.40% (G:32.83% B:0.23%)
Opponent Winning Chances: 43.60% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)

Cubeful Equities:
No double: +0.414 (-0.073)
Double/Take: +0.488
Double/Pass: +1.000 (+0.512)

Best Cube action: Double / Take

Rollout:
1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
Confidence No Double: ± 0.012 (+0.402..+0.427)
Confidence Double: ± 0.015 (+0.473..+0.502)

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.207.pre-release

---
Tim Chow

On Saturday, May 8, 2021 at 11:24:30 AM UTC-4, Tim Chow wrote:
> XGID=-FBBa-----a-c----d-d---bA-:0:0:1:00:0:0:0:0:10
>
> X:Player 2 O:Player 1
> Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
> +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> | O | | O O X |
> | O | | O O |
> | O | | O |
> | O | | O |
> | | | |
> | |BAR| |
> | | | 6 |
> | | | X | X
> | O | | X | X
> | O | | X X X | X
> | O O | | O X X X | X
> +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count X: 40 O: 135 X-O: 0-0
> Cube: 1
> X on roll, cube action
> It's impossible to gauge these types of positions without
> studying them ahead of time. I was O here and passed, which
> XG thinks is an unspeakable horror. If anything, XG makes
> more mistakes playing O than X in this sort of position, so
> it must really be a gigantic take.
>
> Analyzed in Rollout
> No double
> Player Winning Chances: 56.47% (G:33.04% B:0.25%)
> Opponent Winning Chances: 43.53% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
> Double/Take
> Player Winning Chances: 56.40% (G:32.83% B:0.23%)
> Opponent Winning Chances: 43.60% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
>
> Cubeful Equities:
> No double: +0.414 (-0.073)
> Double/Take: +0.488
> Double/Pass: +1.000 (+0.512)
>
> Best Cube action: Double / Take
>
> Rollout:
> 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
> Dice Seed: 271828
> Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
> Confidence No Double: ± 0.012 (+0.402..+0.427)
> Confidence Double: ± 0.015 (+0.473..+0.502)
>
> eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.207.pre-release
>
> ---
> Tim Chow

These positions are fun to play out. I always save my late game "got a shot but if I miss it the game is over but if I hit it then containment mode activated" positions. You save the position from when you get the shot and input a mediocre hitting roll. You don't actually have to hit in the game itself. This way you get no shortage of this type of position to practice.

While your statement of XG making more mistakes for the taker's side than the doubling side is certainly true it might be a little misleading to some. It's true of course because the doubler's decisions are nearly all virtually forced. The taker has actual decisions ever turn. XG in no way misplays this particular position though that one should be worried about how it plays it out/its rollout results.

Stick