Hi Phil,

Thank you for your kind words! While they are indeed two separate issues, and we will address the cube strategy question in the next column, they are united in concept because they involve playing against your own long-term best interests.

This differs from "Pro Am" strategy, where you deliberately make a play you know Snowie will dislike because you think it will draw far worse errors often enough to more than make up the difference. For example, suppose you are normally a 3-error and your opponent, a 7-error. You make a couple of "Pro Am" complicating plays and drive your error up to 6 but his up to 16! You have gained a lot, since as I understand it, you compare relative Snowie ratings using the arithmetic difference, not some ratio or other. (Doug Zare, are you here? Is that correct?)

There can be justification for keeping your lead down by not pursuing gammons if the decision is close. You might do this to avoid having the other players quit early, or recognize how much stronger you are. But if it isn't close, or you do it too often, you are conceding equity that they won't feel any need to give you back when the shoe is on the other foot. If they're really bad, you'll still win, of course...just not as much as you could have with the dice you were given.

I hope this is useful, and that my next column will help answer your second question regarding the cube.

Mary Hickey