Chuck Bower: 24/22, 9/3*.Damage control. That's one of the values of an anchor, andnever more true than here. Even after making the barpointBlue's offense is pitiful. Hitting twice just delays theinevitable, at best. Running out seems too optimistic whengammons count. After 24/22, hitting appears to give Whitea few more problems than the pure 13/7.
Doug Doub: 24/22, 9/3*.
Survival is key here. Blue is in really bad shape andneeds to try to avoid getting blown away. Making the defensive 22pt stopsWhite's prime from getting any stronger and reduces the value of the spareson White's 6pt. After that, 9-3* has some potential to be productive, whiletaking away half of White's roll.
Neil Kazaross: 24/22, 9/3*.
A truly awful position with a difficult decision. I think White needs tograb the 22 anchor with the 2 and look around for the 6, with the best 6then being 9/3x. If White hits both checkers he lacks distribution to allowmuch good to happen and the ace point blot won't be good in any back gamescenario. If White tries to move forward by 22/16, 11/9 he simply doesn'taccomplish very much and has no anchor and leaves many shots.24/22, 9/3x for me.
George Klitsas: 13/7, 9/7.
A very tough problem. I quickly reject any move that hits on the 3 point (even the double hit) and remain with 22/16 11/9, 13/7 9/7 and 24/22 13/7. The latter is sophisticated enough but not good enough in my opinion. Blue is ready to accept a possible backgame, if hit by White (with 6's and 4's ) but it's against the probabilities that Blue will be able to anchor on White's 2 point and, even if he anchors, the timing is fragile and White can possibly worsen it if he just slots the back of his blockade. Between the other two alternatives, I prefer to make my bar point (13/7 9/7) starting my own blockade. Of course, if White gets lucky, I can be crushed without an anchor. Still, this does not seem very likely, since White will be reluctant to break his prime in order to point on me and he will hit lose only with threes.
Snowie: 24/22, 9/3*.
I can't afford to not make the defensive three point, and the hit withthe six is all that is left. My play leaves a lot of blots and shots,but if I am hit maybe I can fall into a back game. If I don't make theanchor, I risk an attack from which there will be no recovery.
Marty Storer: 24/22, 9/3*.
As in Problem 1, Blue will eventually need an anchor.The 22 is the best available, so it makes sense to take it. Ifnothing else, it's backgammon insurance. Actually it's much morethan that. If Blue can make the 22-23 double anchor, he's still quitethe underdog, but that double anchor is the most he can expect to getout of this horrible position. If Blue hopes for forward improvementafter a double hit, he's a cockeyed optimist! In this situation,defense is critical.
Bob Stringer: 24/22, 9/3*.
White's position is so strong that 24/22 is mandatory. After that,9/3* looks clear, since anything else gives him too free a hand.Also, I *have* to start making points in my inner board, and sinceanything I play gives White shots, this is as good a time as anyto do it.
Kit Woolsey: 13/7, 9/7.
Making the defensive three point leaves White too many hitting numbers,and I don't want another checker behind White's prime. My playavoids direct shots at the checkers on my side of the board andmakes a potentially important point. White doesn't have to roll a killingattacking number, and if I can survive the next roll I will have a chanceto put something together.
Chris Yep: 24/22, 9/3*.
White has 12 men in the attack zone, a strong 3-point board, and a strong prime. Blue is vulnerable all over the board. I would feel uncomfortable with any move not making an anchor, so I choose 24/22. With the 6, I prefer 9/3*. It gives White about the same number of return hits as 13/7, but gives Blue a better chance to start an offense when White misses.
Summary: The panel solidly went for the anchor without worrying aboutthe blots. I guess it does make sense to employ some damage control here.
