| 132 126 |                         | White money game Blue |
Problem #8 Play Votes Score9/8, 9/6 4 10024/23, 4/1 3 9023/22, 4/1 2 8024/23, 9/6 1 607/6, 7/4 1 6024/23, 8/5 0 4024/23, 7/4 0 40 8/7, 8/5 0 40
Chuck Bower: 24/23, 4/1.
Another tough choice. White's position is very powerful. His checkers are in good position to extend the prime in both directions. 24/23 both gets Blue's second back checker in position to escape with a 6 and grabs the security of an anchor. 4/1 keeps Blue's best five point prime with the downside of burying a checker behind White's anchor. Even if White rolls a one, he will still be stuck behind the prime, which can't be said for any other prime-breaking move. Ugly, yes--maybe just ugly enough to win.
Steve Clark: 23/22, 4/1.
I am always reluctant to peel off the front of a prime but it looks likethe right move here. We will retain a 5 point prime with White not upto the edge. The obvious ace play is 23-22. I lack enthusiasm becausethis does leave White with a lot of good rolls.
In fact I am sufficiently dissatisfied as to take another look at thealternatives. 9-6, 9-8 is the best of the unpriming plays. But I wouldbe giving White a direct way out of my back court. I do not see this asan improvement.
I now notice that 4-1, 24-23 has more merit than I first thought. Itprovides fewer escaping numbers but is much safer. At the same time5's will play very well from the 9 point. Could this be better than myoriginal idea? Actually it might be but I am unconvinced. 4-1, 23-22is a more direct way to win, and I suppose I will stick with it.
Malcolm Davis: 23/22, 4/1.
Usually don't make these kind of plays - Usually don't even see them. However,this was the first one I saw, so why not? It might even be right.
Doug Doub: 9/8, 9/6.
As much as I would like to try the 'bananas split' playof 22-23, 4-1, just to say that I had done it once, it looks too crazy forme. I do not think that this position is such that we want to do anythingother than break our prime from the rear and hope to get a back man movingnext turn. The major virtue of the 'bananas split' is that is gives us achance to escape with 5's next turn. However, White will hit us with 55 orany 1,2,3,or 4, so the gains on 66 and 65 do not look sufficient to me tojustify the play.
George Klitsas: 9/8, 9/6.
I prefer 9/8 9/6, retaining a compact five-prime, to the more sophisticated 8/7 8/5, designed to be able to play awkward future 5's from the nine point (breaking it). Somehow compact primes work much better than broken ones and outweigh them in the long run even when distracting temporary considerations point to the opposite direction. Therefore, even when one does not know why this happens, one should follow this sound rule. Probable is what usually happens.
Laila Leonhardt: 7/6, 7/4.
6 point primes don't last forever, but Blue is still in the game. No reasonto allow White to sent another of Blues checkers back. The fancy playswitching to the ace point could be right in many positions, but not whenstuck behind a prime where you are likely to break yet another point nextturn.
Flexibility is the key. Blue needs to try to keep the 5-point prime. WithBlue owning the cube can afford the gamble of leaving the back checkerssplit. The sequences when Blue gets closed out, White may still end up beingunable to escape the prime.
Another move to consider is 23/22 7/4, but in spite of the duplication, muchto gammonish.Since this move is not on the list of options I can guess that majority ofpanelist will be voting for making the 23-point. But I'll stick by myinitial choice. 7/4 7/6
Rob Maier: 9/8, 9/6.
Since we are forced to break the prime, the first decision is whether or not to break it cleanly, or to play the ace on the other side of the board. If the blot on our side of the board survives, we will want to pick it up as soon as possible, so it seems reasonable to pick it up immediately, and let the other side of the board take care of itself. Breaking from the back has two things going for it. First, if White runs later in the game, we may be able to recreate the six prime. Second, the spares created give us the most pips to play with before another point must be broken, which may be important as we try to escape. There are no duplication issues to consider here, since White will not run even if they are able, unless of course it hits.
Snowie: 9/8, 9/6.
I have 13 checkers up front, and I'm making sure they are all there for aneventual attack. It would be a disaster if White escaped with a hit. My backmen really aren't in too much danger.
Kit Woolsey: 24/23, 9/6.
I belive getting both back checkers into escape range as well as making theanchor has to be right. After doing this, 9/6 which holds the solid 5-primeand puts an important spare on the six point seems right.
Chris Yep: 24/23, 4/1.
A somewhat deceiving problem. When I first studied the position, it seemed natural for Blue to break his prime in a natural way (from the back). However, on second glance it appears that Blue's prime is not as important as it initially seemed to be. White's 2 midpoint checkers and spares on his 5, 6, and 7 points represent a significant amount of timing. White will be content to sit on his 22-point anchor and attempt to extend his prime to a 5-prime, or with different dice rolls directly attack Blue's split back men. White's board is as strong as Blue's, White has a medium anchor at the edge of Blue's prime, Blue has a blot in his inner board, and White has plenty of spare pips to play with in the outfield should he get another checker sent/stuck behind Blue's 5-prime. Thus White has a good chance of successfully attacking Blue. Thus, it looks better for Blue to button up with 24/23. Even this is not so inflexible since it puts both checkers in position to escape with 6s. With the 5, I like 4/1 covering the hard-to-reach blot on the 1 point and preventing White from escaping in one turn. Next turn (if missed) Blue will have good diversification with 3s, 4s, and 5s to cover the 4 point (creating a 4-point board which will be useful if Blue later runs a back man and White attacks the remaining back man) and 6s to escape.
Summary: There was a fair amount of support for holding the back partof the blockade an breaking from the four point. However this approach oftencollapses fast. The more normal idea of retaining the better points andsome flexibility won out.