alanback: I would presume that you would get 1 point for a win in which you bear at least one checker off, three points for a win in which you bear no pieces off and of course 0 for the loss

"Snoopy": right now you have to agree to a draw

nabla: I think that the standard scoring system should be used.

Gr☺uch☺: Cloning is bad unless it serves some purpose. So in many cases you try to avoid hitting. But in some cases as in the game that I posted somewhere on here, I think it is advantageous to hit. Still a bit early to tell all the unique intracacies of the game.

As for variants, hyper could work but it seems that it would just turn into a match of complete luck. Race or crowded could work as could nackgammon. However, anti is not an option as games would never end.

"Snoopy": From what I have seen so far in my games, it is similar to normal backgammon. There are two differences. First, sometimes you avoid hitting to avoid cloning. However, cloning is sometimes good, if it enables you to have an advantage as in this game.

Cloning Backgammon (gambler104 vs. prettymama)
(moves 10 and 11). So I hope this helps a little.

nabla: I agree. It can be very confusing and if you don't pay very careful attention, it is quite possible to make a critical error. You could always look at move notation and judge from that, but that does take longer and you are more prone to making a mistake.

"Snoopy": What is the point of points in cloning backgammon?

Hrqls: Basically, I think that if you are an odd number of points away from winning a match, i.e. having 2 points in a 7 point match, you wait to double. Theoretically, your opponent should accept anyway, unless he fears a gammon. But you could get a drop that will help you have to play one less full game. On the other hand, it could hurt because you don't allow yourself to win the game with a gammon.

grenv: The cube decisions are definitely harder. But there is still a lot of luck even with the cube in hyper. In regular backgammon, a completely superior player will beat a weaker player 9 out of 10 times or more if they play a 7 point match with the cube. In hyper, I would say that number goes down to about 7 out of 10.

grenv: I wouldn't go as far as calling them essentially the same. The share many similar qualities but each has its own, unique strategy.

alanback: Well, I am not quite as good as you alanback, but I also hope to get there some day. I am top 30 in crowded, race, and hyper, but my backgammon and nackgammon rankings are rather low.

pentejr: I think that once you reach a certain level of checker play, the cuve becomes more important. A person who is horrible at checker play will not beat someone who is great at checker play regardless of skill with regard to doubling. But when the skill level of the two players are both high, the one who is a better cube player will often beat the better checker player.

Big Bad Wolf is right. If you win a game and then lose a game, your rating will be lower than if you lose and then win.