
www.Usenet.com
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
"Rod Gramlich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "Paul Little" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > I see that opinion is split over at In The Hack. A lot of people seem to > > like the tap play... or are they all just your teammates, Rod? > > I see that (i.e. mixed opinion in The Hack ...... in fat, it's not even > mixed opinion - there seems to be two trains of thought). That was the first > time I've ever used InTheHack ... and the response was terrific. In fact, > the site moderator/manager asked if I'd make it (the scenario thingy) a > weekly thing). And no ...... that wouldn't be team_mates. The one's that are > computer literate are to busy playing cribbage & backgammon online to bother > with ng's and chat rooms etc. > > cheers, > rod > > > > ;) > > > > Paul > > > > > > Most of InTheHack either plays at a high level, or speaks as if they could. I made the assumption earlier, maybe incorrectly, that this was a league game, rather than a Super League game, the league level being that at which I usually play. I think that the peel's the right shot for most teams -- not many teams wiill put up that many perfect guards. I thought initially that that would be the right shot, regardless of the level of play, but now understand that there is a huge end available for the team that knows they can make the tap. The thing is that you may have top make 3 consecutive taps, and then settle for a draw to the four for one, should they make all their draws to the top four, which is also unlikely, in league play. I'd still rip the guard, but can appreciate those with the shotmaking ability and confidence, calling the tap, and their reasons for doing so, as it would end the game with a big end. My concern is that you can give up a big end, and end up down in the game, if either of your last two shots don't work out. With the lead, it's not worth the risk, IMO.
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |