Newsgroups: rec.games.backgammon
Subject: Re: A backgame question
From: avir@chen.bgu.ac.il (Avi Roy Shapira)
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 03:37:24 GMT
Organization: Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheva, Israel

pbf@inoms.bellcore.com (Phil Franklin) writes:
:
: Money game, even opponents.
:
:   a) X to play 2-1.
:   b) X to play 5-1.
:
:
:      24 23 22 21 20 19   18 17 16 15 14 13
:     ---------------------------------------
:     |X  X  O  .  O  O | | O  O  .  .  .  X|
:     |X     O     O  O | | O  O            |
:     |X              O | |                 |
:     |                 | |                 |
:     |                 | |                 |
:     |                 | |                 |
:     |                 | |                 |
:     |                 | |                 |
:     |               X | |                 |
:     |   X  X     X  X | |                O|  [2]
:     |.  X  X  O  X  X | | .  X  .  .  O  O|
:     ---------------------------------------
:      1  2  3  4  5  6     7  8  9 10 11 12
:
: These positions comes from "The Backgammon Quizbook" by Joli Kansil.
: I'm posting them because I disagree with his suggested moves.  I'm
: looking for either confirmation of my analysis or a new way of looking
: at this type of problem.  So let me know what you think.
:
: a) X to play 2-1.  Kansil recommends 13/11*,24/23, stating "It's going
: to be difficult to gain the timing you need for a successful back
: game, but you may be able to hit and contain your opponent in your
: inner board and then make his 4-point and gradually escape."
:
: Huh?  His game plan sounds the same as mine, but I have to wonder
: about his execution.  I would move 6/4*, 24/23, reasoning that I can't
: afford to let O make my 4-point if I want to contain him in my inner
: board -- I need that point for myself.  And if I do get hit, then I'm
: improving my timing, and I need all I can get for a 1-2 backgame.  His
: play of 13/11*, on the other hand, doesn't help X's timing, and gives
: X the chance to make the 4-point, making it hard for X to contain O.
:
:
: b) X to play 5-1.  Kansil recommends 24/23, 13/8, stating "Playing
: 13/8 for the 5 is better than moving to your 1-point, even though your
: objective is not really to get rid of your blots."
:
: Why is 13/8 better?  I want O to hit me, or for me to hit him and
: force him to hit back.  I'd play 24/23, 6/1, and hope for a chance at
: him.  I'm tempted by the thought of 6/1, 5/4*, but that's just too
: bold without a second point in O's inner board.  So I'll hope I get
: another shot at him -- but I'm not going to reduce my chances by
: jumping past one blot and leaving myself only one number if I get a
: shot at all.

I am even more aggressive. I think the 2 men on the 2 are too far advanced.
with 2-1 I would hid the men on 4 and play 2-1.  My hope is that O will hit
with 1 or 2, and I'll get an additional men back in circulation.

Again with 5-1 hit on 4 and slot the 2 point.

I agree that hitting on 11 is a useless maneuvre. Unless O rolls outrageoulsy
poor numbers, you will have to break your innerboard structure by the time
you get a chance to hit and escape.

Avi
Newsgroups: rec.games.backgammon