Backgammon

Chris Bray
Friday 09 July 1999 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

ONE OF the things that computers have taught us is that backgammon doesn't have to be beautiful to be good. The other evening I was the "Tempestuous Turk's" (TT) partner, and we had to play a 32 position.

There were three plays to consider: (a) 21/16, (b) 9/6, 9/7, (c) 5/2, 4/2. TT is a player of the old school: computers to him are just abacuses, forever to be treated disdainfully. For him purity is everything. Sometimes, as in this case, he puts it above a position's demands.

In this type of position the side that releases its anchor first is normally at a disadvantage as it leaves the other side free to attack. Thus play (a) is likely to be the weakest of the three. Play (b) keeps the anchor but at the risk of a direct shot. Play (c) is ugly, but has the great merit that it throws the pressure back on white as he is likely to have to leave his anchor or break his 10-point. For style it receives no points, but for efficacy it wins first prize. Sadly my powers of persuasion were not enough to stop TT when in full flow. He chose 21/16, for its "purity". I feared the worst, and with good reason. White rolled 61, hitting both our blots. We fanned with both men, and white redoubled. I dropped but TT compounded his error by taking, and was gammoned for his trouble - an expensive error!

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in