I led 4-1 in a nine point match which had plodded along for more than an hour. I had the red checkers and a 2-cube in this bearoff position, and redoubled to 4 expecting to cash my 2 points. How was I to know that this benign bearoff position was just a few rolls from the end of the match?
My opponent glanced at the position and scooped the 4-cube. I was so shocked that a "WOW!" popped from my mouth.

"It's a take!" he said defensively. "It's a three roll to three roll position."

"But you've got 7 checkers left!" I declared.

"Mmmm...you're right", he admitted. "These darn bifocals messed up my vision. I just can't get accustomed to these new glasses."

This evening the backgammon gods were looking out for the visually impaired players. My opponent rolled a set of fours sandwiched between my 3-1and 2-1. The next thing I saw was a big, ugly, blue 8-cube lowered in front of me.

It looked like an optical illusion because my opponent was actually an underdog in this position, but his double was probably correct at this match score.

Should I take the 8-cube? Should he have redoubled to 8? Was my opponent was correct in taking the cube if it was a three roll vs. three roll position? Should I have redoubled to 4 in the first place? These are questions you might want to investigate . . . but not now. I have an entirely different assignment for you today. Your task is to study that picture with the big, ugly, blue 8-cube. I said the position looked like an optical illusion, but the picture really does contain an optical illusion. Your quest is to find it.

Need a clue? Think of the column title of some of Danny Kleinman's columns in CHICAGO POINT. Click here for the answer.

---