alanback: congrats! looks like you are setting the bar pretty high! I'll need to tighten up my boot straps and play a bit harder to catch you...
...again, well done! :o)

alanback: wow! very well done!

Well, however temporarily, I have reached LionsLair's goal of being in the top 5 in all 6 gammon variants.  Despite my previous statements, I'm not claiming to be the best in any of them, but perhaps the best all-around gammon player for the moment?

LionsLair: LOL never a truer word said.There is not many that say on top for very long.Thats what keeps all of us from trying:)

alanback: 6th!, now thats amazing!! you are who I am trying to catch!, or at least concidered to be in the same class as yourself, I have read a few of your articles over the years and have learned alot from you... you have made me challenge myself to be a world class gammon player...
...a BKR of at least 2000 is quite an accomplishment as well, ... I (being the student) will have to try to accomplish this as well... I love a challenge!
...congrats on your accomplishments... and keep an eye out, one day the student may best the teacher! ;o)

LionsLair:  Come and get it!  I can tell you it's hard to stay in the top 10, let alone 5, but right now I'm ranked no lower than 6th in any of the 6 gammon variants.  If you can make top 5 in all of them, you'll certainly be the best!

My latest milestone:  BKR of at least 2000 in all 6.

LionsLair: I think the answer to the first question is "no", however who says arrogance is bad?

can I brag a minute, without sounding arrogant?
...it has taken me awhile but I finally made the top 25 in ALL 6 gammon variants!!!
...I'm not stopping here though, my goal is to be in the top 5 in all of them! that might take a bit longer with a bit of luck as well!
...and of course I realize I just put a target on my back, but I think I'm up to the challenge, so anyone that would care to play a game, send me an invite...
...as always, happy gaming!

Carl: No I thought of this one, I don't know if it even exist as an official Variant, but, if not, I'll be the proud inventor of it and Fencer has then a nice unique game on his great site :).

Cloning Gammon: (Players think twice before capturing a piece)

Standard Backgammon or Hyper Gammon rules (Cube can be used).
There are no Gammons or Backgammons.
Each time you hit an opponent's checker, you MAY add one extra checker of your color to your bar, marked with an X.(the destination place for your captured checkers). If no cube is used, you MUST add one piece to the bar. These extra pieces count as Race pieces, so you can bring them in anytime you want.
You can move freely with the extra checkers.(they will keep their markers as long as any of your normal (non-marked) pieces is still not in your home area, see next section)

Scoring:
You must have only your 15 normal (non marked) pieces in your home area your bear them out. You are still allowed to move marked (cloned) pieces, but, if you do, the piece will lose its marker and you must also put this piece in your home area. If no cube is used, you must put all pieces in your home area first.

If there is no cube, the winner is that player who bears all his or her pieces off, of course.

When the cube is used, each piece after the 15th (or 3rd if playing the Hyper Gammon rules) you bear off, will score you a point (duplicated with the number on the doubling cube). If any player bears his last piece off out his or her home area (regardless of other (marked) pieces on the board), the game ends and that player also gets two points.

This one is pretty fun to play, maybe there are still bugs in it. At least, the Gammon rules are now totally messed up. If you have suggestions, message me.

Reasons for editing: Removing spelling errors.

joshi tm: Sounds like your talking about plakoto.Please,please fencer >:0)

The game of Backgammon is a nice feature here on this great site, but I 'm missing other gammon variants. In the variants BK offers the only difference is the starting position of pieces (and Anti gammon). There should be more variants available where the BG rules are really messed up.

Walter Montego: i like to play games for the games, although i like to chat as well :)

i start some games, and enjoy the playing and chatting, then the next day i come online to play a little .. but i only see games in which its my opponents turn to move .. i then join some more games so i have some to play .. etc. in the end i have enough games going on to keep me busy when i want to, but it requires more games than i could move in all at once .. so when my life gets more busy now and then i might get in a hurry which will hurt my chatting time .. but i will still enjoy the play :)

of course i can also join only fast moving tournaments, but i am slow sometimes as well (due to real life), so thats not a real option .. the only way i can see to give me enough games to make a move in when i want to is to join more :)

pgt: Though I tend to agree with how you approach playing games and this attitude, it is not the only reason for people to play games, nor is it the only way for others to have have fun. Playing lots of games and not communicating with your opponent is not how you or I like to play, but there's plenty of people that do play like that and it stands to reason that it must be fun for them. Maybe they think how you play is a showing that you need a life too. I can see the argument from the other point of view even if I do have trouble understanding why some play in that manner. I've seen this discussion in other places on this site and it generally gets down to name calling and resolves little. To each his own. The similar complaint is speed of play. We may not be able to communicate with opponents as we like, but at least we now have a choice in the speed of the games we play. These "actions points" that some go after are also another game on this site. I don't play them, but some people do. I no longer play Backgammon either, but here I am reading and posting to this board that is still on my favorite list. It is from when I did play Backgammon that I met a few of you and that's one of the reasons I like playing on this site.

As for losing games. I'd rather win every game, but I can have fun even if I lose the game. Especially if it was a good game. Since I only play Chess type games, the nature of a loss is different than in Backgammon. At least in Backgammon you can blame your luck. You can sometimes say that in Dark Chess too, but in the other games I play, it's either your opponent played well, you screwed up, or both, when you lose.

Walter Montego: Iagree with Walter. We should see the initial message in the game, it is a bug, and it should be fixed! (Are you here, Fencer?)

But you make a very good point. How can you remember and carry on a meaningful conversation about a game - let alone a multi-game match - if you are playing 100+ games concurrently? I remember the game position of almost every game I play (except for one very boring game - with a fellow countryman - who moves about once every 2 weeks) because I never have more than about 30 or 40 games running concurrently. I think BrainKing is a brilliant site, and love meeting and chatting with people from all over the world, but if all they can say is "gl" and "gg" the I suggest that they get a life, reduce their quantity of games, and concentrate on quality.

Walter Montego: we often continue the chat in the message box, the replies simply go to the games notification message :)

Walter Montego: *nod* i often repeat my invitation message as first message :)

i often chat, but less when i am in a hurry .. the last 2 weeks were quite busy irl so i had less time to play and did chat little, but will be more again later :)

Hrqls: I often times have running commentary through a game or just a conversation that has little to do with the game we're playing. But it had to start with a greeting unless I'm playing someone that I've played many times before in which case we might just gab away. If I get no response to whatever I start a game with. I might type again to this person (not everyone knows about messages on the game pages, especially new members) and see what happens. If nothing, them no more from me except to say that, plus maybe a last comment when the game concludes. Language can be a barrier and I only know one, so I can understand when there's no reply for that reason. During a series of games, I still might say something about the just finished leg at the start of the next game. Something like, "That's one for you. Good luck in next game." But I don't always type anything and it will depend on what has been typed earlier between us.

It is this talking during a game that keeps me from playing hundreds of games, even if I only type in a fraction of my games. It's lots more time consuming to type than it is to find a move, though you might not think that from some of the stuff I actually type. :)

And let us not forget the bug that deletes the invitations and the acceptance message. Someone might have typed to you, but you never got to see it. So you think they're being rude or have some other reason for not saying hi or greeting you and reply in kind. Now the game is started and there's no messages. This is another reason why I usually type a message after the second move and always copy and paste the acceptance message when I play first. Yeah, right, Fencer says it's not a bug, but it'd be nice if all of a game's messages stayed visible.

i always wish 'have fun :)' and thats what the game should be about .. and what i really wish for my opponent (and myself) :)

if someone wishes me gl though i respond with u2, if someone wishes me 'good luck' then i respond with 'you too', etc :)

i dont think saying 'gg' or 'good game' or 'well played' at the end of a game when you won it is to rub it in .. its to tell the player who lost that he played a good game even though he lost, the dice might have been against him, even though he played well he still did lose due to some other factor, but that doesnt mean i cant tell him that i thought he played well :)

i often dont say 'gg' or anything in individual games in multigame matches though :)

jryden: I agree that the "gg" thing is overdone. In the situation you describe, I usually say "Thanks for the match" or something similar - it highlights that I have won, and "suggests" that perhaps my opponent should resign.

Personally I really dislike "gl" and "gg" - if my opponents can't write out a some real words, I'd rather have silence - though I do make allowances for non-English speakers. And not all games are "gg's": a good game is one which was either close, or had some special interesting feature about it - like dramatic changes in position or fortune - probably less than 50% of games. If one player - and I don't care whether it's me or my opponent - has had two pieces blocked on the bar for a dozen moves, no auoto-pass, and an elapsed week or two against a slow opponent to actually resume "playing", then by no stretch of the imaginagtion could it be called a "gg". Likewise an opponent who strings out a lost game for a dozen unnecessary moves without resigning does not deserve a "gg".

And I like Grenv's tennis match analogy - let's not "shake hands" between individual games in a multi-game match.

jryden:  You need a macro program :)



Or, keep a notepad open on your desktop with common phrases that you can cut and paste into the message box ...

jryden:  You need a macro program :)



Or, keep a notepad open on your desktop with common phrases that you can cut and paste into the message box ...

jryden: LOL good point

Had to jump on this one. I hate the 'gl' thing myself. Not because I don't wish my opponent well but mostly because I like to sit back in my chair with my feet on my desk and my hand on my mouse. When the dreaded 'gl' shows up, I now feel obligated to take my feet _off_ my desk, sit up and type 'u2'!

Now, my real pet peeve is the 15-20% of my opponents that have calcuated that they have indeed won the match and type 'gg'. Wait a minute! Shouldn't the loser congratulate the winner? Are you congratulating yourself or simply rubbing my face in it? I think I would prefer it if my opponent typed 'I WON I WON!!!'

bouncybouncy: Personally I will always say "good game" or something like that at the end of a match.

To do so at the end of a frame in the middle of a match is kind of like shaking hands at the end of the first set in tennis.

Thad:  Great idea!

There are alot of players that dont even wish "Good Luck" or "Good Game" whether they win or not, kinda leaves me feeling abit dispondent, and jsut think they are mardy bums

grenv: I agree that most of us say "good luck" when we might not really mean it, especially in backgammon, where the luck of the dice has a strong outcome on many games. Do what I do, say, "Aloha". ;-)

alanback: Of course "wishing" good luck doesn't intend to influence the dice, but does seem to indicate a desire that your opponent be lucky. This is falacious at best.

Pontificate merely means to speak in a dogmatic manner, it doesn't imply infallibility. In fact given it's derivation it's surprising it doesn't mean exactly the opposite.

grenv:  If you have already realized that it's just a game then you get my point already.  I was speaking to my own ego and the egoic behavior I have witnessed in myself and others.

Pontificating?  I make no claim to infallibility :-)  Or are you suggesting that I put my foot in my mouth?

I wish my opponent good luck as a courtesy; I don't intend to influence the dice one way or another.  

alanback: Actually I am always wishing myself good luck, why on earth would I want my opponent to get all the luck? If you deny that you are fooling only yourself.

Of course at the end it's only a game so how come all the philisophical pontificating?

pgt:  I try very hard to wish my opponents good luck, and to mean it.  When I'm not under the control of my ego, I usually succeed!  The important point is to recognize that the self and the ego are different, and to simply be aware when one's actions are dictated by ego.

My original post was copied from my posting on the Dailygammon message board . . . my intention is to help make the game more enjoyable for everyone!

alanback: And do you wish your opponents "good luck" (or the even the worse "gl" for the typing-inhibited), not really meaning it, and hoping that you yourself actually get all the good luck? (I now respond to "Good luck" with "Have fun" or some similar friendly greeting. Anybody who wishes me "gl" simply get "tfwmgl" or similar decipher.)

What the? Did I wander into some other board by mistake?

skipinnz:  Sure it does.  But that pain is in the ego, not the soul.

alanback:Nah it still sucks to lose LOL

I have found that the pang the ego feels when a match is lost goes away much more quickly when I type "good game :)" and sense the enjoyment my opponent will feel, not only from winning, but from being congratulated by the loser.  Backgammon being the way it is, you're going to lose a lot of games no matter how good you are.  It's good practice for dealing with the fact that the world doesn't always send us what we desire, at least not immediately.  We play to share the excitement of not knowing what the next dice roll will bring, as well as the pleasure of playing well, not to mention the camaraderie we find here on BrainKing.  There have been many occasions when I have remained grumpily silent as the last rolls of a losing match played out.  Those negative vibes I send out make me miserable without affecting my opponent much, if at all.  

Since we are all one soul, the success of any of us is the success of all.  This is one way to feel that directly!

Namaste

skipinnz:  So I see.  Will have to read more carefully.  Since the title was "BG for Experts", I assumed the cube would be used.

alanback:Looks like only the finals match is 7 points with doubling cube.

I'm playing in a tournament that was supposed to consist of 7 point matches with the doubling cube.  However, the matches have been set up as single games.  Is there any way to fix this?

Cardinal's BG for Experts

swordswisher:  There have been times when I was so convinced that the dice were running strongly against me that I actually went back and compiled statistics on doubles,etc., only to learn that the distribution was well within the norms for random events.  Of course, it's harder to determine who got the right roll at the right time ... some of the bg programs such as gnu and Snowie will compute a luck factor.

swordswisher:  There have been times when I was so convinced that the dice were running strongly against me that I actually went back and compiled statistics on doubles,etc., only to learn that the distribution was well within the norms for random events.  Of course, it's harder to determine who got the right roll at the right time ... some of the bg programs such as gnu and Snowie will compute a luck factor.

alanback: Yeah it always seems players who roll double 6's against you 3 times in a row outnumbers how many times you do the same by about a million, but we're always exaggerating stuff like that.

At some point in its development, every backgammon site has to post a public statement that its dice are truly random.  It's a sign of BrainKing's maturity that Filip has completed that necessary ritual now.  It is a universal truth that backgammon players will always, always, complain about the dice, always, always think they are treated unfairly when the dice go against them, and always, always, think they are finally  being treated fairly when the dice run in their favor.  When we play on a real board and can see the dice being rolled, we can only blame fortune for our problems.  However, when we play online, we don't see how the dice rolls are generated, and conspiracy theories grow like weeds in a garden.  It's human nature!  But that doesn't mean the dice are really fair or unfair; those are meaningless terms when it comes to random events like dice rolls.  It is absolutely a law of nature that one player will get better dice than the other in any given game, virtually all of the time.  That is not the result of hidden malevolent forces, but the operation of the laws of chance.  Everything that can happen will happen eventually, given enough time, and over the relatively short run everyone gets about the same dice.  What differentiates players is what they do with those dice once they get them!

i just got back from my holiday and would love to join the team tournaments of backgammon and hypergammon :)

are there any strong teams that could use me to join their squad ? :)

I have played this offline, and it's lots of fun.

Setup and moves as in standard backgammon.
Opening roll as in standard backgammon, the one who wins the opening roll moves the given dice.

On every roll after the opening roll:
When the dice are rolled, only the player on roll (from now on I'll call him "Player A") gets to see what he rolled. Before Player A makes his move he must tell his opponent ("Player B") what he rolled, or he can bluff and say he rolled something else.
Now Player B can either accept or reject Player A's claim.

-If Player B accepts, Player A makes his move using the dice he claimed to have rolled. Player B will never know if it was a bluff or not.

-If Player B rejects, and Player A was bluffing, Player B gets to choose what dice Player A should use.

-If Player B rejects, but Player A was not bluffing, Player A can choose what dice to use.


This is the only difference from standard backgammon, so it might be easy to implement.
It also works well in cube matches.

Some other Gammon variant suggestions I have, but of course each would take more programming and such so would be more time to make are:

1) A mix between Tabula gammon and Russian Gammon. Basicly like "race", all pieces start off the board - BOTH players race the same direction around the board, bring in their pieces in the same area - can only move their pieces 1/2 way around the board until all of their pieces have entered the board - 2 dice only - no special double rules - rest of the rules like current gammon/race rules.

2) Domino-Gammon - I have since seen some other versions talked about, but linked are the rules that I have made up for the game.

Plus is was recently suggestion on the feature request board, these:

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

Plakoto Express (well not requestion, but will include it here) - http://www.bkgm.com/variants/PlakotoExpress.html

Moultezim - http://www.bkgm.com/variants/Moultezim.html

grenv: Of course you are right ! Theory says that if White has beared off all checkers except his last which get hit, then he is a 92% favourite to win the game. It is probably even worse with an open 6-point and 5 checkers on the 1-point. So it is very clear that Black would have had to reject any double by White. I was just imagining the case where Black would have taken the double !
Agreed with alanback too, the double should happen just after that gammon was not possible any more.

grenv: As white I would have doubled at move 35, once gammon was out of play. As a matter of principle black must pay to play for a miracle. Psychologically, black is very likely to drop and pat herself on the back for saving gammon.

The only other thing I noticed on a quick scan is that at move 29, black should have moved a blot to the midpoint (black's 12 point) in order to give herself a return shot in the event white rolls double six.

nabla: Perhaps it's not too bad. Had he doubled should Hannelore have accepted?

nabla: I wouldn't double either.