sol5023m.htm | Gammonline - Backgammon Resources

Alan Alsop: 24/16.
To weak for any forward game. A back game will crunch quite easily. Not much left. Doubled again Blue is in to the end. Blue has an advanced anchor and some degree of a board but struggling in timing. The only way I can see to save this situation is move out with a back man and with a bit of luck hit White and keep him hemmed in. Failing that Blue can play a 3 pt game.

Chuck Bower: 24/16.
Blue's timing for a backgame or even a priming game is very bad. Short of White rolling a couple sets of big doubles, I think it's going to stay that way. Getting out (22/16) and keeping the high anchor (24/22) make the most sense to me. Some may call this "playing not to lose", but gammons are a real part of the game and Blue maintains winning chances by keeping the 22-point anchor, preventing strangulation.

Ilia Guzei: 24/16.
Fleeing with one checker is important, so it's 22/16 with the 6. Then remaking the advanced anchor with 24/22 remains. Attacking with 6/4 duplicates White's 4's, but since White will be hitting with a four (and 31 or 22) anyway and my entering numbers can play awkwardly the hit is too risky.

Oystein Johansen: 24/16.
8/2 6/4* ? What kind of 1970s play is that? That move goes out of the listat once. I such positions I usually don't have arguments, just a gutfeeling. My gut feeling says 24/16. Playing a backgame when your opponenthas a prime is usually a bad idea, and I won't have enough timing for thisgame plan. Just run, and hope that something good happens.

Neil Kazaross: 24/16.
We don't have a very good position with 4 men behind a deep 5prime and shaky looking timing. While I have sympathy for hitting loose with the 2 and jumping out with the 6, that play will result in too many terrible disasters to me. Another valid idea is to continue playing as a backgame with some forward chances with 6-4x, 11-5. That would likely have been the expert choice in the pre bot era, but I fear that the timing still won't be right considering White's two men on the midpoint and the difficulties Blue will face in jumping out with the spare if hit. Blue isn't all that likely to go forward if not hit.
My preference is to simply minimize the damage and hop out 24-16. Either alternerative could be somewhat superior, but I'll play to be G'd less often from this bad position and still retain some chances to win.

George Klitsas: 22/16, 6/4*.
A very interesting problem. Blue can play chicken to save the gammon (24/22 11/5), practically abandoning any hope of going forwards [barring a miracle], but I am not sure that Blue can save significantly more gammons that way, compared to just taking the risk of going forwards (22/16 6/4*). Two other moves (11/5 8/6 and 11/5 6/4*) will need also a lot of luck to extricate the back checkers. A last candidate is the sophisticated 8/2 6/4*. This might time Blue's back game, but can also backfire ending to a nothing game. It seems that 6/4*, if it is the half part of the correct move, must be combined with 22/16 and that is my final word.

Laila Leonhardt: 8/2, 6/4*.
Time to commit.Blue is running out of timing and soon he will be forced to crunch his homeboard and even forced of the anchor.Blue should try to revitalize his backgame by getting more checkers sendback so he can keep his board and flexibility until White has to startbearing in and breaking up his prime.Running from either point in White's homeboard is very much like conceding agammon right there.

Snowie: 24/16.
The best way to play a back game is to not play one until you have nochoice. My timing is in serious jeopardy, and it is vital to jump outinto the outfield now with this fine roll. In addition, holding the lead anchoris a must. Perhaps I can win forntwards, or perhaps I will be hit and can thenfall back into a backgame. If I don't get out now, it will soon becrunch time.or per

Marty Storer: 22/16, 6/4*.
Another tough one. In positions like this I generally try toavoid plays that fully commit to a backgame. Isn't this abackgame? Maybe and maybe not. Anyway, I reject 8/2 6/4* astoo committal (checker to the 2 point) and not necessarily aguarantee of timing. How about 11/5 6/4*, which is lesscommittal? I still don't like the timing much. If Blue isgoing to hit, he should probably try to go forward rather thanbackward. 22/16 6/4* seems to me to be the best hitting move.Is the more weenie 24/16 better? I'm not sure; it's good. Ittries for timing and keeps the edge-anchor, but it feels toomuch like an attempt to lose like a gentleman. 22/16 6/4* seemslike the best try to win, gaining a lot on White's missing numbers,especially 26 and 15. If hit, Blue may return hit on the 22,recover the 22, or keep timing for an acepoint game. HopefullyI won't be forced to abdicate the Oscar Mayer Crown aftermaking this big play.

Bob Stringer: 24/16.
I suspect I'm out of my depth in this kind of a backgame, whichlooks pretty grim. My timing doesn't look good, which means thatpassively waiting for something to happen isn't the way to go. Thechoice seems to be either 24/16, getting a man from the ace pointout of White's board, or something with 6/4*, in the hopes ofmaking the 4 point and maybe trapping White's back man. I can seetalking myself into a very deep gloom over this one. TrappingWhite while his board crunches seems wildly optimistic, since hehas two checkers on his midpoint which can bide their time.Likewise, I think I'm kidding myself if I expect to escape two ofmy back men, maintain a decent looking board, and then win asterling 3 point holding game. Aargh. I try to remember Kit'sadmonition that the glass is half full, but here it looks likeit's half full of something disgusting. So . . . since hittingincreases my chance of losing a gammon, I refuse to do it. I'llplay 24/16, be glad he can't double me again, and hope he getssome really stupid rolls.

Casper van der Tak: 24/16.
This position is unplayable as a backgame, Blue is not close to having the timing he needs, and efforts at recifying the timing by having additional checkers sent back (11/5 6/4* and 8/2 6/4*) will backfire, because of White's solid prime (Blue will enter quickly, and will only gain timing if he can spring the back checker before White slots and (maybe) covers the back of the prime, which does not happen often. In all other variations, Blue loses timing by being hit. At DMP, these approaches might be better, but not here.
24/16 aims to actify a back checker, increases outfield presence and reduces the number of gammon losses. If hit, Blue may remake his anchor. The best alternative seems 24/22 11/5.

Kit Woolsey: 11/5, 6/4*.
My timing for the back game isn't so great, but I'm not willing to giveup on the back game yet. Neither am I willing to let White escape withoutmaking a fight out of it. 11/5, 6/4* works on both of my objectives. IfWhite flunks I can make the four point and will have a chance to gofoward. If White hits back, this may help my timing if I am able to springthe fifth back checker.

Chris Yep: 24/16.
Blue doesn't have the timing for a 1-3 backgame. Thus his two main choices are attacking or shifting to a 22 pt. holding game. Attacking while White has a 5-prime doesn't look right, since Blue currently only has a 3-pt. board. I like 24/16. If Blue is hit he'll simply re-enter and not be much worse off than his current position. If not hit, Blue increases his outfield coverage and improves his timing, since he won't have to move any of his front checkers this turn.

Summary: In the pre-bot era, I'll bet that 24/16 would not have beena popular choice among the experts. They would not have given up on theback game so easily. Today the emphasis is away from back games -- toomany gammons. However, I wonder if the old-timers just might be righton this one.