Why is it wrong to hit?
Hello everyone. In the position below I hit, with my reasoning being that I am way behind in the race and their blot is not going to be around next roll. It seemed clear to me that it was worth the risk of the blot in my homeboard. But, it turns out this was a BIG blunder and the correct move is to cover the blot and slot the 7. I don't have a good explanation of why hitting is so bad. In fact hitting is not even in the top ten plays! I did think maybe it had to do with the match score, but I analyzed it in an unlimited game format and it was the same.
Can anyone explain this one to me?
2 Replies
Even though you're trailing in the game, your opponent has a 4-pt board and you only have a 2-pt board with a blot.
If you hit, you end up with 3 blots overall and still a 2-pt board.
Who do you think will benefit more from a hitting war?
You'd be better to hold on the anchor (protecting you from being attacked and gammoned) and build your board.
uberkuber is spot in. If you look at the analysis results your opponentÂ’s gammon percentage soars to 42.3 vs the 8.3% after the correct one. Giving up the anchor to hit a blot before you have the forward position to contain that blot usually is not worthwhile.
This is especially true in this position since your opponent still has more outfield points to break, and hands more chances to leave a shot. Maybe if that blot were his last outfield checker, hitting might be correct (I think it would depend on the state of his board. If all his checkers were crashed down to the lower points and he had a couple open points, that argues for hitting. A five point board would argue for cutting losses and avoiding gammon).
