alanback: IMHO there are exactly three points that should be fixed in order to make a great backgammon site out of BK, where the experts would love to play :

1) Autopass and autoplay, regardless of the settings of the opponent, and which can trigger one way of the other even when cubing is an option.
2) A fair rating system.
3) A working .mat export.

2) and 3) are really easy to implement. The .mat export is almost done but still has an annoying bug, as for the rating system, adapting the BK rating system is just as easy :

A) Before putting the rating difference into the BK formula, multiply it by the square root of the match length (and then divide it by 5 if copying the FIBS formula, but that is not essential).
B) After calculating the gain or loss in rating, multiply it by the square root of the match length (and divide it by 5 if wished).

coan, you are right that Fencer might recalculate all ratings if he changes the rating formula, which needed a downtime the last time he did it. If he does it, I bet that I will lose my #1 spot to XXXXXXX (the unnamed computer user).
But frankly, I don't really care whether he does it or not. One way or the other, once the system is corrected, the ratings will converge to their accurate values in the long term, and what I care about is the long term.

Andersp, you are wrong in thinking that the problem lies within the higher-ranked players playing between themselves. Actually, the surest way to exploit the current rating system is to play 21-pointers against low rated opponents, when one wins non negligible rating points with almost no risk.

Andersp: i think the BKR system should be more fair if all players played low rated players too

If there's a proper rating system put in place then you'll find a couple of players who prey exclusvely on the low rated players. Will you complain then as well, at these rating manipulators?

playBunny:  Do you think it would be a good idea to have one rating for you sophisticated players and one for us who play any player?

Andersp: No, it works fine having one site for you lot and another, sophisticated, site for us.

playBunny: at least one who is happy with the Fencer's system :)

Andersp: playBunny plays Ludo on here, I tend to believe he doesn't care much about the Fencer system.

gogul: LOL...yes..i just checked his profile...but he also consider himself being a top player in backgammon :)

Andersp: Apparently happy with the rating system yet somehow desperately complaining about the high rated players!

gogul: The rating system applied to Ludo - that sucks more than with backgammon!!

playBunny: Wrong..i just suggested that we should have one rating for us brave players and one for the sophisticated....cant be so fun to know that you keep your rating because you dont play any player, is it?

Andersp: just checked his profile...but he also consider himself being a top player in backgammon

You've got to learn to read accurately. The top players at Dailygammon represent considerable expertise beyond mine. My profile says if you think I'm good (because I'm top rated here) you should consider that I'm only about the 50 mark at DailyGammon. "Top in backgammon" and "Top in ToyTown" are very different things!

As long as nobody complains about the players moving with high speed.... *95

Andersp: Wrong..i just suggested that we should have one rating for us brave players and one for the sophisticated....

Have you so conveniently forgotten that you whinge at every opportunity about high raters not playing low rated ones and have been doing so for at least two years?

cant be so fun to know that you keep your rating because you dont play any player, is it?

LOL. It sure seems to spoiil your fun, Mr "I Don't Care About Ratings"!

My lack of playing is a protest against the crap rating system. It's as simple as that. If you're so keen to see me play then get the Man's fingers busy changing the rating code.

playBunny: Sorry, my bad...but you agree that you are sophisticated? :)

Andersp: but you agree that you are sophisticated? :)
Reply (box)

Certainly I have my share of expertise. Having studied the game at the level of obsession for three years I should do! Yet I have a huge amount yet to learn, especially cube and equity mathematics. When I understand those aspects then I will consider myself sophisticated. But it's a relative term. Compared to someone who plays but doesn't study then you could say that I'm already sophisticated.

playBunny: So you study backgammon, but play Ludo?...was i right this time?

Andersp: I didnt notice that you are on strike until today,

I've said it here several times in the past. It makes sense that you'd continue to complain about me not playing (you've certainly delighted in noticing that much) if you've never heeded my reasons.

Has "the Man" changed the system or does he spoil your fun?

No, no, getting the Man to make changes is your task and for your comfort and joy (at least so you won't have to complain). It used to spoil my fun until I discovered DailyGammon and made it my home. I don't care what he does anymore. I have my Ludo matches to play ... for the next twenty years. There's complete fulfillment in that.

Andersp: So you study backgammon, but play Ludo?...was i right this time?

Yep, I just move the pretty coloured pieces around the track.

But I do have to admit that I've looked deeper into the game .. http://brainking.com/en/Board?bc=3160

Andersp:  On reflection, I might prefer to consider myself thoughtful rather than sophisticated.  playBunny is sophisticated.  

Andersp: Hope you can accept my apology for not noticing what you've been up to...sorry .

Lol. Apology accepted if given. It's hard to tell with you when you're such the joker.

I wasnt thinking about you at all when i asked Alan about sophisticated, but all of the sudden you popped up.

You're the one who applied the "sophisticated" label to me. My contribution was about "High vs Low", specifically "players who prey exclusvely on the low rated players" and that could have been made by anyone. The rest was the usual you-and-me banter.

playBunny: "Top in ToyTown", I like that expression !

what is the accepted real "king" of backgammon websites?

Czuch: Yep, for turn-based play it would be DailyGammon. For live play it's probably GamesGrid. I've never played there but I understand that several World Class players have an account there, Paul Magriel, for instance.

playBunny:  I agreee that GamesGrid is the gold standard for real time play, and Dailygammon is the unchallenged leader for turn-based.

i am bearing off already, 1 piece of me is on the bar, my opponent isnt bearing off yet but has some pieces back to send me to the bar

i can send one of the pieces of my opponent to the bar .. but i can also leap over it

what should i have done ?
(i sent his piece to the bar)

the position can be found here : Backgammon (Hrqls - incognito)

Hrqls: That is a tough call... but to me, i think you should have skipped over it. Putting him on the bar takes away his double 1 roll, and his 2 1 roll from hitting you, but any other 2 roll hits you anyway, and then you still have that one checker left around to get you later.... I think though it doesnt really matter, since it is only a matter of some time before you win this one no matter what!

Hrqls: Hit everything and fry up some gammon! except that gammons don't count, so just hit and have fun. It's Hypergammon with 1 man versus 4. He doesn't stand a chance.

Hrqls:  Took me a minute to figure out that the 4-2 wasn't your roll.

I agree with Czuch, there's nothing to be gained by hitting.  You're already well ahead in the race and you have no board.  Your one goal is to get past his back men, and hitting makes that harder, not easier.  Unless like you he rolls double aces and dances against a one point board ...

alanback: there's nothing to be gained by hitting.

Sure there is. Fun!

Your one goal is to get past his back men, and hitting makes that harder, not easier.

Is that true, though? It's not just getting past his back men, it's getting all his men off before the opponent does. Failing to hit gives 19 pips to the opponent. How many rolls would that save the opponent in equalising and getting ahead? That must be weighed against the extra chances of 4 men and a one-point table detaining the blot sufficient to win.

Actually, one possible continuation after not hitting is that the opponent rolls 2-4 and moves 12/10*/6 to make the 6-point. But even if it's a non-hitting 6, that's the 6-point made. Thus, after not hitting, 17 rolls will give an immediate two-point home table. That's four times the chances of dancing, and the splendid 6-6 off the bar is lost.

there's nothing to be gained by hitting.

Sure there is. Wins!

playBunny:  It's differences of opinion that make horse races!

Why don't you ask gnu?

alanback: But of course.

Rollout 1296 trials, 2-ply for 12 plies, 0-ply thereafter
# .. Move ......... Equity . (Diff) .... Win ... WinG .. WinBg ---- Lose .. LoseG . LoseBg
1 .. bar/19*/15 ... +0.976 ............ 98.8% .. 66.1% ... 4.2% --- 1.2% ... 0.0% ... 0.0%
2 .. bar/15 ....... +0.954 (-0.022) ... 97.7% .. 43.9% ... 1.1% --- 2.3% ... 0.0% ... 0.0%
Std Err ............ 0.001 ............. 0.1% ... 0.6% ... 0.4% --- 0.1% ... 0.0% ... 0.0%

And if the move is bar/15 followed by 42: 12/10*/6 the chances drop:

Rollout 1296 trials, 2-ply for 12 plies, 0-ply thereafter
# .. Move ......... Equity . (Diff) .... Win ... WinG .. WinBg ---- Lose .. LoseG . LoseBg
1 .. 12/10*/6 ..... -0.930 (-0.046) .... 3.5% .. 0.0% ... 0.0% --- 96.5% .. 27.1% ... 0.2%

playBunny:  If I read that right, the hit is better?  Cool, thanks.

playBunny & alanback & czuch: thanks! after reading your comments you had me convinced that i should have jumped over instead of hit .. i wasnt sure what to do when i made the move but i hit the checked just because i like to hit and to go for gammon although it might make no sense .. and even if i hit the checker and was hit back again later .. it might just prolong the game a little more ... i thought

so that was my reasoning for hitting .. quite impressive eh .. very well thought and analyzed ;)

but gnu proved me right!!!!!!!!
(ok gnu would have made the same more ;) ... i wouldnt expect that after your comments .. its something i will keep in mind ..)

can we also find in the roll out of gnu why hitting was better ?
(i am not used to reading gnu roll outs)

Hrqls:  Gnu doesn't give explanations!  All it can tell you is (according to its algorithms) which move produces the most wins ... assuming both players play like gnu.  PlayBunny's explanation is as good as you are going to find.

alanback: ok thanks :)
now that you know gnu's rollout .. how would you personally move ?

(i sometimes wonder why some experts advice a certain course .. and when i try to play that way i will fail because i dont make the correct followup moves .. so its not always wise for me to follow gnu's advice :))

Hrqls: lol. In this case that isn't an issue since every move you make is essentially forced (except for whether to hit, but assume yes in most cases and you should be fine).

Hrqls: it might be not wise to hit later one if i get sent back all the time and my opponent has moved a bit further

or it might be wiser to hit just then

ah well ... since i started playing hypergammon i hit most of the time :)

I have a few Backgammon variant ideas that I would LOVE to hear feedback from anyone about how it could be good/bad and such..... since I would also like to suggest them to Fencer as possible game ideas.

#1: Double & Triple Choice Backgammon - Details of the game can BE FOUND HERE - but basically each player has 2 (or 3) rolls already rolled in which you can choose which one of the rolls to use each turn. Your opponent can also see all of your possible moves in advance of their own move. This brings a lot more strategy into the game since you can see all possible moves that your opponent might make in their next turn before you make yours.... but how good can you plan ahead?

#2: Dark Backgammon. Each player starts with 10 pieces. The pieces are setup like they are in Backgammon Race (all 10 on space 1 & 24 on the board).

You can NOT see your opponents pieces

You can NOT see your opponents pip count

You can NOT see your opponents dice roll
You can only see where your pieces are.

If you move your piece to a space with 0 opponent pieces on it, your piece stays there (just like normal backgammon)

If you move your piece to a space with 1 opponent piece on it, you send it to the bar and your piece stays there (just like normal backgammon)

If you move your piece to a space with 2+ opponent pieces on it, your own piece is sent back to the bar.

Since it is "dark", you will not know the results of your move until you "submit" the move. So lets say you have double 5's, and you move 4 pieces from space 1 to space 6 - and hit submit. If your opponent already had 2 (or more) pieces on space 6, ALL 4 of your pieces are sent to the bar.

It should be a fun cat-n-mouse game

#3: New Russian Backgammon - Just made up the name, but it is a mix of Tabula and Russian Backgammon

So same as Tabula EXCEPT use only 2 dice & normal double rules apply. (roll double 4's, move 4-4-4-4)

So same as Russian Backgammon EXCEPT no choice of reroll of first roll, and no strange double/invert/roll again type of thing. Just regular good-old normal double rules.


= = = = = = = = =

AGAIN - Please feel free to comment good or bad about either of those 3 ideas. The first 2 are games that I have written. The double/triple choice seems to work well in real life. The Dark is not very easy to test in real life. The New Russian rules are basically the same as on the sites lists - other then the small tweak in the rules by myself which I think make the game more playable without having new strange rules to get in the way.

coan.net: The double/tripple choice games seem like they would be good workable games.... I agree that it would employ different strategy, but not necessarily more?

Just thinking out loud here... It seems that in regular backgammon you have to plan for the possibility that your opponent can make any roll, and then work from the statistics of each one.... in your game, you have only two or three possible rolls, and they are all equally likely, since they have already been rolled.

So in that sense, there would be less strategy, since there would be fewer options to worry about.

But I am sure there would be other strategies that would come into play that dont in regular backgammon. I would give a game like this a try!

How does the pinning thing actually work?

Plakoto is here at last.Have fun.

It's frustrating when a new game arrives and the rules aren't there!!!

If someone knows the rules, could you post them here?

rod03801: You can find how to play here:

http://bkgm.com/variants/Plakoto.html

I'm guessing the rules are the same here.

coan.net: Thanks... So, starting on the #1 Pip and pinning are the only differences, correct?

And I assume this point:
"Pinning the mother checker: The last checker on your starting point is called the mother. If this checker gets pinned by the opponent before it has left the start, the game is over and you lose two points. The only exception is if the opponent still has checkers on his starting point, since in this case his own mother is still threatened. A game in which both mothers are pinned is a tie."
only applies in multi-point matches. (The losing 2 points part).

And if it is a multi-point match, there is no doubling cube? I wonder why?

Does anyone know good strategy for Plakoto?

My one question is.

When I have an opponent pinned am I allowed to use that pip in my moves? The rules say the opponent may not use the pip, but if my man is on top, may I use it?

Answered my own question in game. The pip can be used as normal. I have 2 of my checkers on top of my opponent.