| 146 147 |                           | White money game Blue |
Problem #8 Play Votes Score13/9, 10/9 8 10024/20, 11/10 2 7011/7, 8/7 1 6024/23, 10/6 0 4013/8 0 4013/9, 11/10 0 40
Doug Doub: 13/9, 10/9.
The primary alternatives are 24-20,11-10, and13-9,11-10. Although it is reasonable to try to get our last back man home,I prefer not to expose myself to being attacked on the point that myopponent most wants to make, when I have a constructive alternative,especially since my opponent has more inner board points than I do.
Although it is usually a very good move to make the point that is 6 pipsaway from the next inner board point that you want to make, having four outof five points in a row is better than having 4 out of 6. More importantly,if we make the 9pt, we preserve a reasonable six, since we can play 11-5 ifwe cannot make a point with a six.
Neil Kazaross: 24/20, 11/10.
This is a tough choice. Should I play to build in my outer board orshould I play the obvious looking 24/20, 11/10 which forces White to attack which is exactly what he wants to do ?! My slight preference is to force the issue right now and play 11/10, 24/20 over making the nine point or making the 10 and bringing down a builder.
George Klitsas: 11/7, 10/7.
I think that 8 indirect shots is rather a small price for locking the bar point in this position and, at the same time, prepare for making a four prime in front of White's back checkers (the conceivable alternatives leave from 2-4 indirect shots anyway [24/20 11/10 is not conceivable imo]). Needless to say, I vote for 11/7 10/7.
Achim Mueller: 13/9, 10/9.
The question here is whether Blue should advance to the 20-point or not. Ifhe goes to the 20-point, he should play save on the other side of the board,because White will use every opportunity to hit on his 5-point. So one plan is24/20,11/10.Another plan is 13/9,10/9, a good compromise between constructive and saveplay. I'm not sure, but in real life I probably would play the latter.
Snowie: 13/9, 10/9.
There is no rush to escape the back checker. White has the strongerinner board and I have the better timing since he has two checkers back,so my emphasis should be on building up my blockade. The nine point isthe next point in line, leaving me one point away from having a solidfive-prime.
Marty Storer: 13/9, 10/9.
The race is close, so it looks better to try topress the advantage in number of back checkers, by blocking.Blue is outboarded, so I think the very cautious 13/9 10/9beats making the 7, or slotting the 9 and making the 10. Itpays to minimize shots, and the 9 point is structurallyvaluable, being a good blocking point in itself as well asa pair of builders and a safe landing spot for more.
Bob Stringer: 13/9, 10/9.
This roll gives me a chance to make another point. Nothing else looksuseful, so that's the way I'll go. Taking them in order, 24/10, 11/10tidies up so I can bring up the rear checker in hopes of springing itto safety. I'm wary of that since White *will* hit if he can. If hedoes, that gets him that much closer to a really strong board. 13/9,10/9 is nice and solid. It makes a good point without riskinganything, and I'm still ready to spring the back checker if I roll a 4plus something more than a 2. 11/7, 8/7 is ungood. Making a solid3-point prime isn't so fabulous that it justifies leaving 2 blots inthe outfield in the face of White's stronger board. Also, making the 9point gives me 4 points in my blockade; making the bar point gives meonly three.
Casper van der Tak: 13/9, 10/9.
Blue can move up, but that just makes it easier for White to attack. That would prevent Blue from developing the position, and would also play into White's strength, because White has the better board. Anyway - the race is dead even, so it is not clear that the focus should be on trying to escape. Instead, Blue should concentrate on building the position, play prime vs. prime with the advantage of having only one checker back. So scratch plays involving 24/20 or 24/23.
The straightforward building play is 11/7 8/7, but that leaves 8 shots at this side of the board, in exchange for which Blue does not add a point, but just improves one and slots another. 13/8? Another builder, no extra point, 5 shots at this side of the board (of which 33 is strongly duplicated). This is also not very attractive. Now look at 13/9 10/9 and 13/9 11/10. Both plays add a point, leave only one blot at this side of the board, and leave only a small number of shots (2 respectively 4). For me, the choice should be between these two plays.
The pros of 13/9 10/9 vis-�-vis 13/9 11/10 are that the 9-point is better than the 10-point for priming purposes (the 9 point is part of the prime stretching from the 4- to the 9-, and the 5- to the 10-point, the 10 point is only part of the latter; the 9 point gives 4 out of 5 consecutive points, which the 10 point does not), and that it leaves less shots. The advantage of 13/9 11/10 is that the builder on the 9 is better for building purposes than it is on the 11. However, I don't think that is enough to compensate, and would make the 9.
Kit Woolsey: 24/20, 11/10.
I want to escape the back checker, and I want to lock up a new pointup front without leaving too many blots. My play accomplishes bothof these objectives.
Chris Yep: 13/9, 10/9.
Once again, making points (and not breaking points) looks right. Blue can make either the 9 pt. or 10 pt. (he can also make the 7 pt., but must break the 8 pt. to do so). With White still on the 24 pt., the 9 pt. is usually the better offensive pt. to have since it's more likely to form part of a compact prime (it also bears on both the 4 pt. and 3 pt.). This is the case here, so I like 13/9 10/9.
Summary: While I can certainly understand the reasons behind making the 9 point, ismy choice of 24/20, 11/10 really so bad? The ten point is valuable, andmy play works on both sides of the board profitably while not leaving anymore blots than necessary. I'm not yet convinced.