This is an interesting (to me) pay-now, pay-later position.
Eyeing XG's two inner board blots, I paid now, and was actually
proud of myself for spotting this.
I haven't done a rollout but the analysis (which I trust) indicates
that I had nothing to be proud of and that paying later would have
been just as good. Anyway it's clearly at the pay-now pay-later border,
and such borderline positions make good references.

Paul

XGID=-B-CCBBA-b-----B-a-cabbca-:1:-1:1:54:2:0:0:11:10

X:Daniel O:XG Roller+
Score is X:2 O:0 11 pt.(s) match.
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X O | | O O O O O O | +---+
| X | | O O O O | | 2 |
| | | O O | +---+
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | X X |
| O | | X X X X X |
| O X | | X X X X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 82 O: 84 X-O: 2-0/11
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 54

1. 4-ply 7/2 6/2 eq:-0.071
Player: 54.76% (G:1.24% B:0.01%)
Opponent: 45.24% (G:1.09% B:0.02%)

2. 4-ply 15/6 eq:-0.077 (-0.006)
Player: 51.91% (G:4.33% B:0.15%)
Opponent: 48.09% (G:1.30% B:0.03%)

3. 4-ply 6/2 6/1 eq:-0.087 (-0.017)
Player: 54.72% (G:0.75% B:0.01%)
Opponent: 45.28% (G:1.46% B:0.02%)

4. 4-ply 7/2 5/1 eq:-0.136 (-0.066)
Player: 52.17% (G:0.91% B:0.01%)
Opponent: 47.83% (G:1.58% B:0.03%)

5. 3-ply 7/3 6/1 eq:-0.151 (-0.081)
Player: 52.45% (G:0.89% B:0.01%)
Opponent: 47.55% (G:1.75% B:0.02%)

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

For reference, here's a money-game rollout.

XGID=-B-CCBBA-b-----B-a-cabbca-:1:-1:1:54:0:0:3:0:10

Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X O | | O O O O O O | +---+
| X | | O O O O | | 2 |
| | | O O | +---+
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | X X |
| O | | X X X X X |
| O X | | X X X X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 82 O: 84 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 54

1. Rollout¹ 7/2 6/2 eq:-0.044
Player: 54.59% (G:1.00% B:0.02%)
Opponent: 45.41% (G:0.87% B:0.02%)
Confidence: ±0.003 (-0.047..-0.041) - [100.0%]

2. Rollout¹ 6/2 6/1 eq:-0.058 (-0.014)
Player: 54.55% (G:0.68% B:0.01%)
Opponent: 45.45% (G:1.06% B:0.02%)
Confidence: ±0.004 (-0.061..-0.054) - [0.0%]

3. Rollout¹ 15/6 eq:-0.065 (-0.022)
Player: 52.19% (G:3.91% B:0.15%)
Opponent: 47.81% (G:1.33% B:0.02%)
Confidence: ±0.003 (-0.068..-0.062) - [0.0%]

¹ 2592 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.211.pre-release

---
Tim Chow

On Sunday, December 17, 2023 at 2:15:21 PM UTC, Timothy Chow wrote:
> For reference, here's a money-game rollout.
>
> XGID=-B-CCBBA-b-----B-a-cabbca-:1:-1:1:54:0:0:3:0:10
>
> Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver
> +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> | X O | | O O O O O O | +---+
> | X | | O O O O | | 2 |
> | | | O O | +---+
> | | | |
> | | | |
> | |BAR| |
> | | | |
> | | | |
> | | | X X |
> | O | | X X X X X |
> | O X | | X X X X X |
> +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count X: 82 O: 84 X-O: 0-0
> Cube: 2, O own cube
> X to play 54
> 1. Rollout¹ 7/2 6/2 eq:-0.044
> Player: 54.59% (G:1.00% B:0.02%)
> Opponent: 45.41% (G:0.87% B:0.02%)
> Confidence: ±0.003 (-0.047..-0.041) - [100.0%]
>
> 2. Rollout¹ 6/2 6/1 eq:-0.058 (-0.014)
> Player: 54.55% (G:0.68% B:0.01%)
> Opponent: 45.45% (G:1.06% B:0.02%)
> Confidence: ±0.004 (-0.061..-0.054) - [0.0%]
>
> 3. Rollout¹ 15/6 eq:-0.065 (-0.022)
> Player: 52.19% (G:3.91% B:0.15%)
> Opponent: 47.81% (G:1.33% B:0.02%)
> Confidence: ±0.003 (-0.068..-0.062) - [0.0%]
>
> ¹ 2592 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
> Dice Seed: 271828
> Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
>
> eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.211.pre-release

An old joke from Morecambe and Wise (an easy google if you
don't recognise them and care about the reference).

Name please?
Paul Epstein

And your specialist subject?
The bloody obvious.

So I'd like to ask the very obvious question:
Are the differences between your equities and my equities
primarily due to the greater accuracy of the rollout as opposed to
analysis or due to the AtS difference?

Paul

On 12/17/2023 9:29 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
> Are the differences between your equities and my equities
> primarily due to the greater accuracy of the rollout as opposed to
> analysis or due to the AtS difference?

XGID=-B-CCBBA-b-----B-a-cabbca-:1:-1:1:54:2:0:0:11:10

Score is X:2 O:0 11 pt.(s) match.
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X O | | O O O O O O | +---+
| X | | O O O O | | 2 |
| | | O O | +---+
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | X X |
| O | | X X X X X |
| O X | | X X X X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 82 O: 84 X-O: 2-0/11
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 54

1. Rollout¹ 7/2 6/2 eq:-0.060
Player: 54.57% (G:1.04% B:0.02%)
Opponent: 45.43% (G:0.89% B:0.02%)
Confidence: ±0.003 (-0.063..-0.057) - [100.0%]

2. Rollout¹ 6/2 6/1 eq:-0.073 (-0.013)
Player: 54.59% (G:0.71% B:0.01%)
Opponent: 45.41% (G:1.12% B:0.02%)
Confidence: ±0.003 (-0.077..-0.070) - [0.0%]

3. Rollout¹ 15/6 eq:-0.076 (-0.016)
Player: 52.18% (G:3.93% B:0.15%)
Opponent: 47.82% (G:1.33% B:0.02%)
Confidence: ±0.003 (-0.078..-0.073) - [0.0%]

¹ 2592 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.211.pre-release, MET: Kazaross XG2

---
Tim Chow

On Sunday, December 17, 2023 at 6:06:03 AM UTC-5, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
> This is an interesting (to me) pay-now, pay-later position.
> Eyeing XG's two inner board blots, I paid now, and was actually
> proud of myself for spotting this.
> I haven't done a rollout but the analysis (which I trust) indicates
> that I had nothing to be proud of and that paying later would have
> been just as good. Anyway it's clearly at the pay-now pay-later border,
> and such borderline positions make good references.
>
> Paul
>
> XGID=-B-CCBBA-b-----B-a-cabbca-:1:-1:1:54:2:0:0:11:10
>
> X:Daniel O:XG Roller+
> Score is X:2 O:0 11 pt.(s) match.
> +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> | X O | | O O O O O O | +---+
> | X | | O O O O | | 2 |
> | | | O O | +---+
> | | | |
> | | | |
> | |BAR| |
> | | | |
> | | | |
> | | | X X |
> | O | | X X X X X |
> | O X | | X X X X X |
> +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count X: 82 O: 84 X-O: 2-0/11
> Cube: 2, O own cube
> X to play 54
>
> 1. 4-ply 7/2 6/2 eq:-0.071
> Player: 54.76% (G:1.24% B:0.01%)
> Opponent: 45.24% (G:1.09% B:0.02%)
>
> 2. 4-ply 15/6 eq:-0.077 (-0.006)
> Player: 51.91% (G:4.33% B:0.15%)
> Opponent: 48.09% (G:1.30% B:0.03%)
>
> 3. 4-ply 6/2 6/1 eq:-0.087 (-0.017)
> Player: 54.72% (G:0.75% B:0.01%)
> Opponent: 45.28% (G:1.46% B:0.02%)
>
> 4. 4-ply 7/2 5/1 eq:-0.136 (-0.066)
> Player: 52.17% (G:0.91% B:0.01%)
> Opponent: 47.83% (G:1.58% B:0.03%)
>
> 5. 3-ply 7/3 6/1 eq:-0.151 (-0.081)
> Player: 52.45% (G:0.89% B:0.01%)
> Opponent: 47.55% (G:1.75% B:0.02%)
>
>
> eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

While spotting and taking into account the two inner board blots of the opponent is something to be proud of we still have to go one step, even two steps, further. One of my old rules is that when the opponent has two (or more) inner board blots we should look around for plays we might not otherwise make. This adage, like all adages I use in bg, doesn't contain all the details to make proper use of it. First off, it's obviously a lot better for us if the opponent has no real board to speak of opposed to here where he has a four point board as he does here. One of the next most important things to take into account in these situations is to be mindful ... sure, he has a double blotted inner board but how many of his hitting numbers actually cover one or both of those blots? You'll note here if you pay now the opponent has [65 64 63 61 33] that all hit and cover either the by far most important blot, his 5pt, putting you on the bar against the best 5pt board and even if you manage to miraculously enter, you're behind a five prime, or it covers both blots.

Stick

On Sunday, December 17, 2023 at 9:35:02 PM UTC, Stick Rice wrote:
> On Sunday, December 17, 2023 at 6:06:03 AM UTC-5, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
> > This is an interesting (to me) pay-now, pay-later position.
> > Eyeing XG's two inner board blots, I paid now, and was actually
> > proud of myself for spotting this.
> > I haven't done a rollout but the analysis (which I trust) indicates
> > that I had nothing to be proud of and that paying later would have
> > been just as good. Anyway it's clearly at the pay-now pay-later border,
> > and such borderline positions make good references.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > XGID=-B-CCBBA-b-----B-a-cabbca-:1:-1:1:54:2:0:0:11:10
> >
> > X:Daniel O:XG Roller+
> > Score is X:2 O:0 11 pt.(s) match.
> > +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
> > | X O | | O O O O O O | +---+
> > | X | | O O O O | | 2 |
> > | | | O O | +---+
> > | | | |
> > | | | |
> > | |BAR| |
> > | | | |
> > | | | |
> > | | | X X |
> > | O | | X X X X X |
> > | O X | | X X X X X |
> > +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> > Pip count X: 82 O: 84 X-O: 2-0/11
> > Cube: 2, O own cube
> > X to play 54
> >
> > 1. 4-ply 7/2 6/2 eq:-0.071
> > Player: 54.76% (G:1.24% B:0.01%)
> > Opponent: 45.24% (G:1.09% B:0.02%)
> >
> > 2. 4-ply 15/6 eq:-0.077 (-0.006)
> > Player: 51.91% (G:4.33% B:0.15%)
> > Opponent: 48.09% (G:1.30% B:0.03%)
> >
> > 3. 4-ply 6/2 6/1 eq:-0.087 (-0.017)
> > Player: 54.72% (G:0.75% B:0.01%)
> > Opponent: 45.28% (G:1.46% B:0.02%)
> >
> > 4. 4-ply 7/2 5/1 eq:-0.136 (-0.066)
> > Player: 52.17% (G:0.91% B:0.01%)
> > Opponent: 47.83% (G:1.58% B:0.03%)
> >
> > 5. 3-ply 7/3 6/1 eq:-0.151 (-0.081)
> > Player: 52.45% (G:0.89% B:0.01%)
> > Opponent: 47.55% (G:1.75% B:0.02%)
> >
> >
> > eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2
> While spotting and taking into account the two inner board blots of the opponent is something to be proud of we still have to go one step, even two steps, further. One of my old rules is that when the opponent has two (or more) inner board blots we should look around for plays we might not otherwise make. This adage, like all adages I use in bg, doesn't contain all the details to make proper use of it. First off, it's obviously a lot better for us if the opponent has no real board to speak of opposed to here where he has a four point board as he does here. One of the next most important things to take into account in these situations is to be mindful ... sure, he has a double blotted inner board but how many of his hitting numbers actually cover one or both of those blots? You'll note here if you pay now the opponent has [65 64 63 61 33] that all hit and cover either the by far most important blot, his 5pt, putting you on the bar against the best 5pt board and even if you manage to miraculously enter, you're behind a five prime, or it covers both blots.
>
> Stick

Thanks, very helpful. Great to get free tuition from a world-class player.

Paul