return to index

Letters to the Editor

E-mail me at kwoolsey@netcom.com


Generally speaking, at what point should a player start thinking about thedistribution of his or her checkers, i.e., being sure that big doubles playwell, avoiding gaps,etc.? I find that when I do start planning a smoothdistribution, it's usually too late, and the gaps occur nonetheless.Isthere a general rule?

Kenneth Duryea

There is no general rule -- each position must be analyzed on its ownmerits. Sometimes smoothness has the higher priority, while sometimesimmediate tactical considerations are more important. However, it is nevertoo early to be thinking about a smooth bearin. While you can't determineexactly what the dice rolls will be, following good general principlesand keeping flexible and well-distributed will usually lead to achievingthe optimal goals for any position.

Kit Woolsey

Could you please explain how you derived 60% for the match equity table entry (-2,-3). When I make the calculation without taking the cube into account I get 63%. When I adjust for the slightly higher cube equity that the trailer has I get 62.6%.

Secondly, as these are just estimates, and as Mr. Kleinman hasdemonstrated, an error of .49999% (rounding) can cause a miscalculation of several percent how much value do you think using a match equity table really bestows upon someone who is adept at both the assessment of the position and the match equity calculation?

Craig T. Campbell

I don't know that one can calculate the value of the cube equity whichthe trailer has, but it is far higher than most people think. To giveyou an idea, over a data base of several hundred games where the leaderhad 2 points to go and the trailer had 6 or more points to go, the averageresult for the game was +.30 for the trailer -- almost 1/3 of a pointadvantage. Maybe it shouldn't be this way in theory (or maybe it shouldbe even higher!), but this is what the results showed. The 60% figureI use in the match equity table is largely derived from the results ofseveral hundred matches. It could be wrong, but I believe it to beaccurate in practice even if it is wrong in theory.

Even if the match equity tables are off by a little bit, they are still veryvaluable. They give the player a good target number to shoot for, and willavoid the danger of some huge cube blunder because the player has the wrongequities for his various actions. Even if a rounding error in the equitytables causes one to be off a couple of percent on a take point estimate,that is not so terrible. The real problem usually isn't in calculating theequities -- it is in evaluating the position properly in the first place.How many complex positions are there where even the best players in the worldcan confidently estimate their winning chances to within a couple of percent?Thus, just getting in the ball park on the match equities is quite sufficient.Evaluating the position is the true challenge.

Kit Woolsey

As a confirmed INTERMEDIATE player, but one with 20 years experience, I'venoticed one omission in your discussions on doubling strategy. The rulesare different among skill levels! Watching expert players at varioustournaments I am always astounded at their willingness to take veryunfavorable positions when doubled. My guess is they're right, I'm wrong.But as a practical matter, most intermediate players quickly drop thesepositions, even including positions which are takes in my humble opinion.The lesson is, you can bully a lesser player a much greater part of thetime. In playing on GamesGrid, usually for 7 pt matches, I routinely doublewhen any advantage appears. Much, maybe most of the time, the opponentdrops. These 'stolen' points add up quickly. When I play top players(rarely, but every now and then), I can't get away with this. Clearly I'vemade off with many more free points from bad drops than have lost from tooaggressive doubling. The psychology appears to be "don't let one badgame/gammon lose the match", and this can be taken advantage of. Pleasedon't let anyone who plays me see this letter.

Your experience has been different from mine. I have seen the best playersin the world drop what I think are trivial takes. This error is not atall limited to weak players. I have also seen hopeless takes from bothgood and bad players. It all depends upon the player, and his evaluationof the position. My general philosophy unless I am very sure about aparticular player's tendencies is to treat the cube the same regardless ofthe player. If I think it is a double I double, and then it is their problem.Players of all levels will get it wrong some of the time if you give themthe problem in the first place.

Kit Woolsey


return to index