{"id":557,"date":"2023-03-05T07:13:59","date_gmt":"2023-03-05T07:13:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/?page_id=557"},"modified":"2023-03-05T07:14:06","modified_gmt":"2023-03-05T07:14:06","slug":"four-is-sometimes-one-too-many","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/index.php\/four-is-sometimes-one-too-many\/","title":{"rendered":"Four is sometimes one too many"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>Another position that I found tricky. Black to play 66.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1024\" height=\"799\" src=\"https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/wasmitdemsechserpasch-1024x799.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-558\" srcset=\"https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/wasmitdemsechserpasch-1024x799.png 1024w, https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/wasmitdemsechserpasch-300x234.png 300w, https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/wasmitdemsechserpasch-768x599.png 768w, https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/wasmitdemsechserpasch.png 1435w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>Now if a 66 would move three checkers, or even only two, things would be easy. 22\/16(3) or (2), done, happy. But with four I can either go 22\/16(2), 22\/10 and face a double hit, or I can try to hit on the 4, move one checker to the 16 point, 22\/4*, 22\/16. Or maybe move two checkers 22\/10(2) and face a blitz with the remaining checker?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>What would you do?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:473px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p>Okay, here&#8217;s the solution according to XG2. The best move is risking the double hit. Logic is probably: <\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>22\/4*, 22\/16 offers white too many chances to get a grave advantage immediately. Every 4 hits, every 5 or 6 in combination with a 1,3,4,5 hits the other blot. That&#8217;s 50% hits that will most likely bring black into serious trouble. And the double hits after 41, 43, 44, 45 look like &#8220;game over&#8221; for black. XG says this is a -0.15 blunder.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>22\/10(2) faces too much of a blitz danger. 11, 31, 41, 51, 43, 53, 54 are just too many shots that make the point and have a superior position. Not as bad as the previous move (-0,089) but still a blunder.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The right move is 22\/16(2), 22\/10. The reason is probably that if white hits he can&#8217;t make a point or improve his board at the same time. Given white&#8217;s pretty poor prime and two-point board, getting hit is no immediate desaster, black can still hope for a lead. And if white fails to hit, black is fine.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>Here&#8217;s its analysis. What I find particularly interesting is that I felt I was winning this game as black. when actually I&#8217;m only winning 37% of the games from this position, according to XG2.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-medium\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"300\" height=\"135\" src=\"https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/wasmitdemsechserpasch_xg-300x135.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-559\" srcset=\"https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/wasmitdemsechserpasch_xg-300x135.png 300w, https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/wasmitdemsechserpasch_xg.png 417w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">XG&#8217;s analysis<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Another position that I found tricky. Black to play 66. Now if a 66 would move three checkers, or even only two, things would be easy. 22\/16(3) or (2), done, happy. But with four I can either go 22\/16(2), 22\/10 and face a double hit, or I can try to hit on the 4, move [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-557","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/557","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=557"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/557\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":560,"href":"https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/557\/revisions\/560"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/gammonrants.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=557"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}