by Clyde Wolpe
23 January 2013
After far too lengthy a break, I'm back with some more articles from the positive backgammon series. This time, I've collaborated with Grant Hoffman, my co–author in our upcoming book.
(Grant is a top backgammon player and promoter based in New Zealand. He is a previous winner of the New Zealand backgammon championship and is a prominent promoter and organizer. Other successes include a 2nd place in the Australian championships and online victories).
Continuing with the ‘Positive Backgammon' (the secrets of quick and powerful decision making) series of articles, today's article focuses on priority thinking.
|The rest of this article (0.00 K) is premium content. Please subscribe below.|
Good positions! In Diagram 6, I'm still having trouble seeing why 8/4 isn't a candidate, especially in light of the reasoning you gave for Diagram 4.
EXcellent question Timothy.
It is the second best reply (-0.014 with a 5k rollout) but if you make the 4 point - you have actually made it. This is better for return shots and a solid 4 prime is better than a broken 4 prime.
I don't understand diagram 3.
"The priority here is to reduce the number of effective rolls that your opponent has to attack you with."
Is there a checker too many on the 24-point in the diagram?
This comes from an online cash game (real money) my opponent rolled 64 and ran 24/18. This is the third best option, 8/2 6/2 is second. I crucified him.
We played around with having the checker on the 18 point or showing the whole move, and somehow got the diagram and commentry out of sync. Think of the diagram with one checker on the 24 point and one on the 18 point.
I remember my opponents lack of willingness to hit loose and was able to use it against him/her
You must be signed in to post comments.