Forum Archive : Propositions

Opening 11 vs. Owning the cube From:   Bob Ebbeler Address:   rebbeler@bellsouth.net Date:   20 August 1999 Subject:   Re: Double on double 1 ? Forum:   rec.games.backgammon Google:   NCov3.441$dO3.8557@news4.mia > If you throw a double one and take the 5 and the 7 point you are > (1) Blocking your opponent (2) 2 points away from setting a prime > (3) giving yourself good time to create a hard anchor (4) giving > youself a good block to help move down pieces from the 13 point. > You are at a clear advantage in the game. > > It is my *tactical* decision to double. Please advise me if this is > the ramblings of a misguided idiot. One of my earliest, expensive lessons was over the issue you raised. I wound up playing a proposition with another player wherein I started with 1-1 and he had the doubling cube on his side at 2. This was, and probably still is, a time honored proposition and I will, hopefully, save you the expense of learning the lesson I learned. The guy who has the cube CRUSHES the guy who starts with 1-1. NIHILIST Paul Tanenbaum  writes: <sigh> Bob, a backgammon hustler you aren't. The idea is to recoup the cost of your lesson at somebody else's expense. What was the equity for the cube-holder (assume at the 2-level)? Presumably you played it {6/5(2), 8/7(2)}. However, I don't like giving the indirect shot at the blot, so I would try {6/5(3), 24/23}. Has this alternative been rolled out? Probably not enough to make a difference in the prop, though. Daniel Murphy  writes: This proposition illustrates the value of cube possession. Early double aces is usually a fine number, and played 8/7(2) 6/5(2) on the very first roll of the game is enough to make you a 55-60% favorite straight off, but you forfeit your entire advantage if you have to give your opponent the cube before you move! I read "CRUSHES" to mean "solid favorite," and like Bob's hustler, I'd also happily let my opponent start with 11 in exchange for cube possession. A too-quick JF level 5 rollout (1296 rollouts, .550 settlement, 0.029-0.038 standard deviation) makes the player with 11 a 56% favorite cubeless, but a 46% underdog if his opponent has the cube. In this rollout, JF still thinks the player with 11 has an 0.072 equity edge, but I think the rollout gives way too little credit to opponent's redoubling and gammon chances. I undaringly predict that 6/5(2) 8/7(2) "crushes" all alternatives in rollouts, and that 6/5(2) 24/22 does better than 6/5(3) 24/23. (In a real game, don't be afraid to split to the 22 point with 11 if 6/5(2) 8/7(2) would leave a _direct_ shot at the blot on the 8 point. And, in a real game, be very wary of moving your last spare checker from the 6 point to the 5 point. More often than not, that one little move will come back to haunt you before the game is through.)   Did you find the information in this article useful?           Do you have any comments you'd like to add?

 

Propositions

Choose roll vs. double roll  (Larry Deckel, Jan 1997) 

Choose roll vs. double-roll  (Rafy Marootians+, Mar 1994) 

Eight checkers vs. fifteen  (Raccoon, Feb 2006) 

Fifteen on the bar  (Pete+, Nov 2002) 

Monte Carlo 1998  (Daniel Murphy, Feb 2006) 

No ones  (Murat Kalinyaprak, Oct 2002) 

Opening 11 vs. Owning the cube  (Bob Ebbeler+, Aug 1999) 

Tino Road Position  (Arthur+, Apr 2005) 

Up in the air  (Daniel Murphy, Feb 2006) 

From GammOnLine         Long message         Recommended reading         Recent addition

 

Book Suggestions Books Cheating Chouettes Computer Dice Cube Handling Cube Handling in Races Equipment Etiquette Extreme Gammon Fun and frustration GNU Backgammon History Jellyfish Learning Luck versus Skill Magazines & E-zines Match Archives Match Equities Match Play Match Play at 2-away/2-away Miscellaneous Opening Rolls Pip Counting Play Sites Probability and Statistics Programming Propositions Puzzles Ratings Rollouts Rules Rulings Snowie Software Source Code Strategy--Backgames Strategy--Bearing Off Strategy--Checker play Terminology Theory Tournaments Uncategorized Variations