Chuck Bower: 13/10(2), 8/5, 6/3*.
What a fine roll! The 10-point blocks White's checker on Blue's4-point, with a bonus that those checkers become potential buildersfor the 4-point. 6/3* throws White off balance, and 8/5 diversifiesbuilders. White probably needs to either hit back or anchor to fend off a cube turn.
Steve Clark: 13/7(2).
13-7(2) sure looks good to me. We will have 4 points in a row. The restof our pieces are flexibly placed. I could make arguments for some of thealternatives I suppose, but I would never make any of those other plays.
Doug Doub: 23/20, 13/10(2), 8/5.
My first impulse was to play 13-7(2), but Ithink that I can do a bit better with this choice. Getting a spare to my5pt puts a great deal of pressure on White to throw an ace and anchor.Coming up to the 20pt duplicates the ace that he needs on the other side ofthe board. I like the stronger divisity of 23-20, 13-10(2), 8-5, along withthe excellent attacking potential.
George Klitsas: 23/20, 13/10(2), 8/5.
13/7(2) leaves the back checkers dangerously isolated. Better is 13/10(2) 23/20 8/5 (notice the duplication of aces), which is my choice.
Laila Leonhardt: 23/20, 13/10(2), 8/5.
Blue doesn't really gain anything from hitting White. Better to put somepressure on White to anchor or point on Blue next time.Blue has a very strong position and White will have to perform to avoidbeing cubed.
Rob Maier: 13/4*, 6/3*.
Time to go off the reservation I suppose. This play didn't appear on the version I originally printed out, and I'm too chicken to see if it's been added or not. At any rate, putting two on the roof is fantastic the 14 times that White misses, and getting hit is not the end of the world. So, consider this as evidence of great creativity, or the fact that winning the consolation of the open overflow in Pittsburgh doesn't mean much. :)
Snowie: 23/20, 13/10(2), 8/5.
Makes a good blocking point, puts a valuable builder onto the five point, andgoes after the best anchor. It isn't often you can do so many good thingswith one roll. Can anybody find something better?
Bob Stringer: 13/7(2).
I actually spent a long time looking at 13/4* 6/3*, only to realize that itwasn't one of the choices. Whew! Saved from embarrassment again. I don't care forwaltzing up into the jaws of death with one or both of my back men. I knowpeople do it; but when I do it it always sticks to my face. Nor do I really wantto move off the midpoint, since doing so frees up the men on White's midpoint.But if I keep going like this I'm going to talk myself out of every move. Thefact of the matter is that these 3's just don't play that smoothly, so I'm goingto do the easy thing and make a 4 point prime. Not only does that give me theprime, it adds threats against White's back men, both of whom he's advanced intothe field of danger. If he doesn't anchor up right away, I'm in a position toattack. Right now I don't think there's enough ammo for an immediate attack,since I can't go after his blots in order (i.e., right now I'd have to hit theman.
Casper Van Der Tak: 23/20, 13/10(2), 8/5.
This appeals the most to me. There seems little to be gained from hitting loose. The 10 point is strong in this position, especially if white makes the 21 anchor. Moving 23/20 provides good coverage of the outfield. Not moving the checker on the acepoint increases board coverage. Moving 8/5 increases building potential.
In my view, 13/7 (2) is quite close. I believe that the reduction in board coverage and larger number of pointing rolls are sufficient to make 23/20 13/10(2) 8/5 better than 13/7(2), but that latter play gains a lot on white's 4-3. Hard to call.
Kit Woolsey: 23/20, 13/10(2), 8/5.
There doesn't appear to be much gain from hitting loose on the three point.That costs us our valuable spare on the six point. 23/20, 13/10(2), 8/5distributes the checkers well, makes a good point, and covers all partsof the board.
Chris Yep: 23/20, 13/10(2), 8/5.
All 8 moves look strong, but I have a definite preference for 23/20 13/10(2) 8/5, which works on both sides of the board. 23/20 slots an advanced anchor, while keeping a checker on the 24 point to cover the inner board in case White rolls awkwardly next turn. 23/20 is better than 24/21 not only because it slots a better anchor, but also because of the duplication of 1s (White can also use a 1 to make his own advanced anchor). I like playing 13/10(2) 8/5 with the last three 3s. Hitting (6/3* with or without the original 23/20) is also possible but it overextends Blue's position. Blue's checkers are too far away to blitz, so the loose hit doesn't accomplish much. Except for 24/21 23/20 8/5 6/3*, Blue can't both slot an advanced anchor and provide two direct covers for the 3 point. 24/21 23/20 8/5 6/3* (and the other 24/21 23/20 plays) suffers for another reason -- it gives White several powerful double hits which simultaneously start White's 4 or 5 point.
Assuming that Blue doesn't play 24/21 23/20 or 6/3*, this leaves two choices: 23/20 13/10(2) 8/5 or 13/7(2). (24/21 13/10(2) 8/5 is worse than 23/20 13/10(2) 8/5 for the reasons described above.) 13/7(2) creates a solid 4-prime, but 23/20 13/10(2) 8/5 slots an advanced anchor, unstacks the heavy 8 point, and makes it easier for Blue to attack next turn if White doesn't anchor (it aims an extra builder at the 4 point); if White does anchor on Blue's 4 point, 13/10(2) blocks 6s making it potentially awkward for White to play a 6. Overall I think these benefits outweigh the downside of not making a solid 4-prime. As a final note, compare this problem to problem 7 of January's quiz. In January's problem Blue's prime (if he played 13/7 8/7) was restraining 3 checkers instead of 2. Also White only had a 1 point board and Blue only had one back man which was in position to escape. In this month's problem, if Blue plays 13/7(2) he strands 2 back checkers, with White having a stronger board. Finally if Blue plays 13/10(2) he still creates a 4-prime -- it's just a broken 4-prime instead of a solid 4-prime. All things considered I definitely like the "pretty" 23/20 13/10(2) 8/5.
Summary: Sometimes a move does so many good things that it just hasto be right. The majority choice here is a perfect example. All thecheckers go exactly where they belong.
