Here, I took but I regretted it, and I was anticipating a horrendous PR.
As it happens, I played the game perfectly as far as I can tell without
rollouts. (My PR was less than 1).
The opponent's blitz is formidable, and I think most strong players
would drop here, and that, given that humans can't evaluate
these positions exactly, a drop is the practical choice.
So, a correct take, but not a well-informed one.
My game would improve, I'm sure, if I dropped this type of position.

Paul

XGID=---Bb-EBBa---C-a-bacc-b--A:0:0:-1:00:0:0:3:0:10
X:eXtremeGammon O:Daniel

Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X O O | | O X O |
| O O | | O X O |
| | | O |
| | | O |
| | | O |
| |BAR| |
| | O | |
| | | |
| O | | X X |
| O X | | X X X |
| O X X X | | X X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 130 O: 130 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X on roll, cube action

Analyzed in 4-ply
Player Winning Chances: 68.81% (G:27.40% B:0.39%)
Opponent Winning Chances: 31.19% (G:5.51% B:0.19%)

Cubeless Equities: No Double=+0.597, Double=+1.208

Cubeful Equities:
No double: +0.767 (-0.221)
Double/Take: +0.988
Double/Pass: +1.000 (+0.012)

Best Cube action: Double / Take

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

On 9/4/2022 4:44 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
> Here, I took but I regretted it, and I was anticipating a horrendous PR.
> As it happens, I played the game perfectly as far as I can tell without
> rollouts. (My PR was less than 1).
> The opponent's blitz is formidable, and I think most strong players
> would drop here, and that, given that humans can't evaluate
> these positions exactly, a drop is the practical choice.

I would probably have dropped, but it's worth noting some of the
differences between this position and your previous one.

1. O has made her bar point and 3pt. This is the most important
difference IMO. It gives O much better defensive chances.

2. The race is even here, whereas in the previous position the
taker was 12 pips down. When the blitzee has just one checker
back, the slime vig of escaping the last checker and winning the
race is important, and by extension the pip count is important.

3. X's board is slightly weaker here, with the 3pt made instead
of the 4pt.

4. X is anchored here but not in the previous position. Being anchored
is usually a big plus, but in the previous position, the taker's
position was so weak that being unanchored was not really a liability.

---
Tim Chow

On 9/4/2022 4:44 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
> Here, I took but I regretted it...

> XGID=---Bb-EBBa---C-a-bacc-b--A:0:0:-1:00:0:0:3:0:10
> X:eXtremeGammon O:Daniel
>
> Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver
> +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> | X O O | | O X O |
> | O O | | O X O |
> | | | O |
> | | | O |
> | | | O |
> | |BAR| |
> | | O | |
> | | | |
> | O | | X X |
> | O X | | X X X |
> | O X X X | | X X X |
> +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count X: 130 O: 130 X-O: 0-0
> Cube: 1
> X on roll, cube action

PRAT would imply D/T. Yeah, this is pretty simplistic, but it's
interesting how often it works.

On Monday, September 5, 2022 at 2:40:28 PM UTC+1, ah...Clem wrote:
> On 9/4/2022 4:44 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Here, I took but I regretted it...
> > XGID=---Bb-EBBa---C-a-bacc-b--A:0:0:-1:00:0:0:3:0:10
> > X:eXtremeGammon O:Daniel
> >
> > Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver
> > +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> > | X O O | | O X O |
> > | O O | | O X O |
> > | | | O |
> > | | | O |
> > | | | O |
> > | |BAR| |
> > | | O | |
> > | | | |
> > | O | | X X |
> > | O X | | X X X |
> > | O X X X | | X X X |
> > +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> > Pip count X: 130 O: 130 X-O: 0-0
> > Cube: 1
> > X on roll, cube action
> PRAT would imply D/T. Yeah, this is pretty simplistic, but it's
> interesting how often it works.

Without any evidence whatsoever, I'll hypothesise that it's a drop in the following sense.
Suppose you borrow Tim Chow's shoes, and do a large number of variantizations,
where the changes to the position are apparently very slight.
And suppose you agree to make the same drop/take decision with all variantizations.
(The double is absolutely clear.)
Then I think you might lose less equity by dropping the class of variantizations rather than
taking them.
Somehow, a drop seems like a practical choice that a strong player would normally make,
even though XG finds a take.

Paul