Here, I played 7/4 which is the bot's choice (no rollout).
However, it involved a few interesting (to me) changes of mind.
I made the play very quickly, probably focused on clearing my 7 point.
The instant after I played it, I hugely regretted it, seeing that there
were now quite a lot of shotleavers for me that could have been avoided
by 4/1. I was expecting to be battered by the evaluations.
I was pleasantly surprised though, when my unthinking carelessness
was rewarded, by XG opining that I got it right after all.

I know there's not much equity involved but I'd be interested to hear other comments.

Paul

XGID=-CCbE--C--a-a-----bbcb-bA-:2:1:1:43:0:0:3:0:10
X:Daniel O:eXtremeGammon

Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| O | | O O O O X |
| O | | O O O O |
| | | O |
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | X |
| | | X |
| X | | X X X | +---+
| X | | X O X X | | 4 |
| O O X | | X O X X | +---+
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 74 O: 125 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 4, X own cube
X to play 43

1. 4-ply 7/4 eq:-0.595
Player: 20.78% (G:3.45% B:0.02%)
Opponent: 79.22% (G:11.46% B:0.46%)

2. 4-ply 4/1 eq:-0.613 (-0.018)
Player: 20.76% (G:3.23% B:0.01%)
Opponent: 79.24% (G:13.00% B:0.43%)

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 11:46:19 AM UTC+1, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
> Here, I played 7/4 which is the bot's choice (no rollout).
> However, it involved a few interesting (to me) changes of mind.
> I made the play very quickly, probably focused on clearing my 7 point.
> The instant after I played it, I hugely regretted it, seeing that there
> were now quite a lot of shotleavers for me that could have been avoided
> by 4/1. I was expecting to be battered by the evaluations.
> I was pleasantly surprised though, when my unthinking carelessness
> was rewarded, by XG opining that I got it right after all.
>
> I know there's not much equity involved but I'd be interested to hear other comments.
>
> Paul
>
> XGID=-CCbE--C--a-a-----bbcb-bA-:2:1:1:43:0:0:3:0:10
> X:Daniel O:eXtremeGammon
>
> Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver
> +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> | O | | O O O O X |
> | O | | O O O O |
> | | | O |
> | | | |
> | | | |
> | |BAR| |
> | | | X |
> | | | X |
> | X | | X X X | +---+
> | X | | X O X X | | 4 |
> | O O X | | X O X X | +---+
> +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count X: 74 O: 125 X-O: 0-0
> Cube: 4, X own cube
> X to play 43
>
> 1. 4-ply 7/4 eq:-0.595
> Player: 20.78% (G:3.45% B:0.02%)
> Opponent: 79.22% (G:11.46% B:0.46%)
>
> 2. 4-ply 4/1 eq:-0.613 (-0.018)
> Player: 20.76% (G:3.23% B:0.01%)
> Opponent: 79.24% (G:13.00% B:0.43%)
>
>
> eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10

One point is that I didn't actually count the shotleavers.
So my intuition that 4/1 is better for immediate shot jeopardy might be wrong.

Paul

On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 11:52:21 AM UTC+1, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 11:46:19 AM UTC+1, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Here, I played 7/4 which is the bot's choice (no rollout).
> > However, it involved a few interesting (to me) changes of mind.
> > I made the play very quickly, probably focused on clearing my 7 point.
> > The instant after I played it, I hugely regretted it, seeing that there
> > were now quite a lot of shotleavers for me that could have been avoided
> > by 4/1. I was expecting to be battered by the evaluations.
> > I was pleasantly surprised though, when my unthinking carelessness
> > was rewarded, by XG opining that I got it right after all.
> >
> > I know there's not much equity involved but I'd be interested to hear other comments.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > XGID=-CCbE--C--a-a-----bbcb-bA-:2:1:1:43:0:0:3:0:10
> > X:Daniel O:eXtremeGammon
> >
> > Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver
> > +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> > | O | | O O O O X |
> > | O | | O O O O |
> > | | | O |
> > | | | |
> > | | | |
> > | |BAR| |
> > | | | X |
> > | | | X |
> > | X | | X X X | +---+
> > | X | | X O X X | | 4 |
> > | O O X | | X O X X | +---+
> > +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> > Pip count X: 74 O: 125 X-O: 0-0
> > Cube: 4, X own cube
> > X to play 43
> >
> > 1. 4-ply 7/4 eq:-0.595
> > Player: 20.78% (G:3.45% B:0.02%)
> > Opponent: 79.22% (G:11.46% B:0.46%)
> >
> > 2. 4-ply 4/1 eq:-0.613 (-0.018)
> > Player: 20.76% (G:3.23% B:0.01%)
> > Opponent: 79.24% (G:13.00% B:0.43%)
> >
> >
> > eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10
> One point is that I didn't actually count the shotleavers.
> So my intuition that 4/1 is better for immediate shot jeopardy might be wrong.
>
> Paul

Yes, I think that's right. I still haven't counted though.
The concern about shot minimization is correct.
But 4/1 probably doesn't concede significantly fewer shots.
If the issue is close, 7/4 would probably be the default because it furthers the goal of clearance of the 7 point.

Paul

On 9/20/2022 6:46 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
> Here, I played 7/4 which is the bot's choice (no rollout).
> However, it involved a few interesting (to me) changes of mind.
> I made the play very quickly, probably focused on clearing my 7 point.
> The instant after I played it, I hugely regretted it, seeing that there
> were now quite a lot of shotleavers for me that could have been avoided
> by 4/1. I was expecting to be battered by the evaluations.
> I was pleasantly surprised though, when my unthinking carelessness
> was rewarded, by XG opining that I got it right after all.

This one is tough, I think.

Generally speaking, when you still have a straggler to bring home,
you should try to avoid "burning up" your spares, because you might
need to play (in this case) an awkward 5 or 6 later on, and might
regret not having "saved a 6" or "saved a 5."

On the other hand, as you point out, you'd also like to clear the
7pt so that you don't have to worry about it at all. By playing
7/4, you're sort of "avoiding double jeopardy"---a sort of pay now
or pay later decision.

Mochy wrote an interesting blog post years ago about avoiding double
jeopardy. Your position is not exactly a classic case of double
jeopardy, since you still have a straggler to bring home, but I think
some of the same concepts may apply.

http://bgmochy.blogspot.com/2010/09/avoiding-double-jeopardy-is-rarely.html

---
Tim Chow