Baileys 2-20-14 v JQ

Below are selected errors from a live club match against John Quinn. Matches are to 5 points in the losers bracket.

I lead 3 away 5 away and have 53 to play. But don't let the score fool you. The correct play is same as for money.

is JQ score: 0 pip: 157

5 point match

pip: 161 score: 2 is Bill

XGID=-b--B-D-B---eE---b-d---bB-:0:0:1:53:2:0:0:5:10

to play 53

1.	XG Roller++	24/21 13/8	eq: +0.134
	Player: Opponent: 55.90% (G:17.27% B:0.92%) 44.10% (G:12.85% B:0.46%)
2.	XG Roller++	8/3 6/3	eq: +0.111 (-0.023)
	Player: Opponent: 54.83% (G:19.32% B:0.92%) 45.17% (G:13.47% B:0.77%)
3.	XG Roller+	13/10 13/8	eq: +0.102 (-0.032)
	Player: Opponent: 54.85% (G:18.02% B:0.91%) 45.15% (G:13.08% B:0.65%)

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

I made the 3 point with 8/3, 6/3.

The computer likes up and down 24/21, 13/8.

This is the type of position that should be fundamental. Unfortunately I am struggling to grasp the essence of what's going on.

I "know" that when opponent makes the 2 point he has an attacking formation and I should therefore be reluctant to split into the attack. Therefore when I can do something constructive like make an inner board point this seems like an obvious play.

I must be overemphasizing this point as correct is to split now. Why? Some guesses:

• The 5 plays well. It unstacks the midpoint while reinforcing the stripped 8 point and leaves no shots.

• The 4 point is more of a priming formation than attacking formation so I should strive to fill in the bar or 5-point rather than the 3 point. By placing an extra man on the 8 point I give myself some numbers to perhaps make either the five or bar next time.

• While I don't want to be blitzed, now is an ideal to split (?). He only has eight men in the zone so it is not too dangerous. Also, my man sits on the 4 point which is less ideal to attack than a man on his 5 point. (Note that with 52 or 53 split is correct while with 54 two down is correct. Hence my speculation about the 5 point being the spot he'd rather attack on.)

• Splitting hopes to anchor next time, and also places some pressure on opponent's outer board. JQ can't simply pull down from the stacked midpoint without leaving a decent amount of indirects and possibly even a direct shot. So I am influencing all sectors of the board - a balanced play.

• Finally splitting doesn't leave a blotted 8 point which could be hit by a seven from JQ.

******************************

Very next play.  How to use these double twos?

is JQ score: 0 pip: 141

5 point match

pip: 153 score: 2 is Bill

XGID=---BBbC-A---cE--bb-d---bB-:0:0:1:22:2:0:0:5:10

to play 22

1.	XG Roller++	24/22(2) 13/11(2)	eq: -0.177
	Player: Opponent: 46.88% (G:9.99% B:0.32%) 53.12% (G:11.61% B:0.36%)
2.	XG Roller++	24/20(2)	eq: -0.216 (-0.038)
	Player: Opponent: 44.39% (G:8.00% B:0.22%) 55.61% (G:8.27% B:0.24%)
3.	3-ply	24/22(2) 8/4	eq: -0.283 (-0.106)
	Player: Opponent: 42.91% (G:8.43% B:0.23%) 57.09% (G:10.58% B:0.31%)

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

I rather quickly moved 24/20(2).  This makes the best forward anchor and lessens the gammons.  What could be wrong with that?

And yet 24/22(2), 13/11(2) is clearly correct.  I *think* these are the reasons:

• Opponent has 2 point made.  The priming threat isn't that great since JQ can't use the men on his 2 point to build points in front of me.  So there is less need to advance all the way.

• Also I am down in the race.  So I want more contact (stay back) and I want more contact (by making the 11 point to block him).

• The blot on the 8 point isn't under much danger no matter what play I make.  JQ will be reluctant to break anchor to hit.  Not too relevant here as applies to both plays with 22 but I wanted to note it.

********************

Later in the same game.  I still lead 3 away 5 away and have been doubled.  Take or Drop?

is JQ score: 0 pip: 76

5 point match

pip: 88 score: 2 is Bill

XGID=-ABCCBB----------cbcBbbc--:0:0:-1:00:2:0:0:5:10

on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in XG Roller++	No double	Double/Take
Player Winning Chances:	78.47% (G:1.15% B:0.01%)	78.60% (G:1.14% B:0.01%)
Opponent Winning Chances:	21.53% (G:0.41% B:0.00%)	21.40% (G:0.36% B:0.01%)
Cubeless Equities	+0.574	+1.008
Cubeful Equities
No double:	+0.867 (-0.047)
Double/Take:	+0.914
Double/Pass:	+1.000 (+0.086)
Best Cube action: Double / Take

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

I dropped. Down 12 pips I figure this would be a drop in a straight race and it's not obvious that the contact favors me. Barring boxes I am not getting a shot next time. I will leap out next roll and then JQ can point on me or pick and pass or leave me alone. This seems like unfavorable contact. Gammons are low but it feels like I don't win much from here. So I dropped.


This position is actually a take. And it's strictly score based. The position is indeed a small drop for money. But at this score the takepoint is about 19% so by the book I should take.

The real question is how to remember that at this score the takepoint is lower than normal? And why is that? Once again I don't know the answer. What follows is speculation.


If I drop the score is 3 away 4 away. This is one of those special scores where the opponent has trememdous cube leverage. His gammon value is almost 1.0, which leads to frequent fast double (as trailer) and fast passes (as the leader). The leader could easily get gammoned for the match. This is a score the leader would just assume avoid. Which is a long winded way of saying "what the hell, if I lose its 3 away 3 away which isn't too bad. 3 away 4 away isn't much of a picnic anyway."

Winning gets you to Crawford. Worth noting but this can't really be the reason. At least I don't think so. After all, winning also gets you to crawford from 3 away 4 away and also 3 away 6 away and 3 away 7 away where the respective takespoints are 21.5%, 22% and 23%. I suppose I should add that these are "Stick's takepoints" which assume less recube vig than the computer does. Stick's umbers don't quite conform to the computer match equity tables.

Another possibility comes from Mochy's 5 point match advice. Where he simply states the trailer at 4 away and 5 away wants to win 4 points while the leader at 2 away and 3 away wants to win 2 points. This position is exactly what the leader wants - a two point game. Maybe. Maybe. A con to this line of thinking is the same holds true for 3 away 6 away and 3 away 7 away yet the takepoints are higher. So once again I am at a loss.

******************

I lead 3 away 4 away and am on roll. Roll or Double?

is JQ score: 1 pip: 166

5 point match

pip: 134 score: 2 is Bill

XGID=----cBD-CB--cBb-Bb-ca-a---:0:0:1:00:2:1:0:5:10

on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in XG Roller++	No double	Double/Take
Player Winning Chances:	71.40% (G:10.97% B:0.28%)	71.67% (G:11.00% B:0.29%)
Opponent Winning Chances:	28.60% (G:4.17% B:0.14%)	28.33% (G:4.18% B:0.15%)
Cubeless Equities	+0.572	+1.381
Cubeful Equities
No double:	+0.739 (-0.053)
Double/Take:	+0.792
Double/Pass:	+1.000 (+0.208)
Best Cube action: Double / Take

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

I rolled. I really wasn't thinkin of cubing unless and until I cleared the 15 point. I am reluctant to cube knowing JQ can recube aggressively for the match. Especially since my takepoint on a recube at this 3 away 4 away score is a very high 40%.

And yet the double is clearly correct. The key seems to be JQ's double blotted one point board. Most likely I will abandon the 15 point next roll. John will have to hit and cover a point and then I will have to miss from the bar - else he's behind the eight ball. And this is a relatively small parlay. So since the crunch point is coming and I am a heavy favorite, now seems to be the time to double. It wasn't really on my radar at the table.