Cash game. Center cube. White on move.

White to play 2-2.

The advent of the bots in the late 1990s enabled players to solve a myriad of small technical plays that recurred frequently but couldn’t really be tackled with hand rollouts or pure reasoning. Hand rollouts were so slow that they really had to be reserved for positions where the solution was unknown but the difference between plays was likely to be large and important. Players ignored what appeared to be small technical stuff, on the theory that solving these problems, even if possible, was most likely a huge waste of energy.

read more…

Cash game. Center cube. White on move.

White to play 6-4.

This is a comparatively easy problem if you can properly balance the key features of the position. Let’s step back for a second and look at just what is happening, before we try to evaluate the different choices.

The race: White will trail in the race by 16 pips after he plays his 6-4. Considering that he has five men back to Black’s two, he’s not as far behind as one might think at first glance. Since he’s trailing in the race, however, he wants to maintain a good anchor (to generate some shots) and a good blockade (to contain blots he may hit).

Blockades: White has four good points in front of Black’s anchor. That’s a solid plus for him, if he can maintain it. Black has a motley collection of scattered points, which indicates that he probably won’t be able to build a good block anytime soon, and that he’ll likely have to start leaving shots in the near future.

Weaknesses: For White, what might seem a strength is actually a long-term weakness. He has two great anchors, on the 20-point and the 18-point, but that’s one great anchor too many. The 20-point/18-point combination doesn’t work well together; they tie up 76 pips at a time when maneuvering freely is still key.

Black’s weakness is glaringly obvious; it’s the 2-point, too deep in his board to be useful at this stage. Black might have had good reason to make it in the past, but now he’d be better off if those checkers were back on the 4-point or the 9-point.

Now let’s put all this together and see just what we can do with the 6-4.

8/2 6/2. A bad choice. White burns two of his remaining builders to make a useless point far behind Black’s anchor. Now all his remaining points are stripped and his only convenient rolls next turn are those that can be made entirely with the blot on the 24-point. Take a look at how numbers like 4-1, 3-2, 6-1, 5-2, 4-3, 5-1, and 6-4 play next turn. In complex middle games with action on both sides of the board you need checkers that can move easily, and sometimes you have to take risks to preserve those checkers.

24/18 6/2 and 24/20 8/2. Not as committal as making the 2-point, but half-hearted versions of the same idea. You only have 15 checkers, and you want everyone in play at this stage of the game.

20/10. To those who worship the 5-point, this looks like a shocking idea. White breaks the defensive 5-point before he must. But it’s really a fine move, which solves all White’s problems at once. White doesn’t need both anchors, so he gives one up voluntarily.

Take a look at the position after 20/10 and notice how White has solved most of his problems. He now has five spare checkers, ensuring that he won’t have to concede any valuable points in the near future. He’s got more combinations to make his 5-point or 7-point, as well as more ways to attack if Black should split his back checkers for some reason. Finally, he’s resolved the issue of too many anchors in a neat and efficient fashion.

If you missed this problem, it’s probably because you’re too focused on static features of the position, and not enough on the flow of the game. Try to anticipate how the game is likely to develop over the next couple of rolls, and avoid positions where you have a real shortage of checkers that can move.