BrainKing - Diskussionsborde (Backgammon)

Emne: TTT

Tilpasset af Hrqls (30. Maj 2007, 13:36:32)

people who also play on dailygammon probably already know the TTT tournaments.
I am not sure if other players are familiar with it ?

summarized its a tournament in which every plays 1 match (of 1 game) against all other players (so if there are 20 players in a tournament each players plays 19 matches, giving a total of 190 matches)
you gain points for every match you play :
1 point for a single win
2 points for a gammon win
3 points for a backgammon win
0.5 points for a loss (single, gammon, or backgammon)

the player with the most points when all matches are finished is the winner of the tournament

this leads to some nice gammon play, players will take more risks to gain a gammon as they will still win 0.5 points if they lose (0.5+2)/2 > 1

what do you all think ? should we have it on here as well ?
(erik from dailygammon is ok if we have it on here as well)

30. Maj 2007, 13:21:52

Thad

Emne: Re: TTT

Hrqls: If everyone scores at least half of a point for each game win or lose, then why not score it 0 for a loss, .5 for a win, 1.5 for a gammon and 2.5 for a backgammon (or 0, 1, 3, 5 if you want to use whole numbers). Same, thing, yes?

Also, sadly, the tournament system here is not set up for the type of tournament you describe.

30. Maj 2007, 13:26:49

Emne: Re: TTT

Thad: not sure if its the same as the ratio is different .. but when i tried to make an example proving you wrong i couldnt find any quickly :)

i already talked about it with fencer and i think he likes it and its not that hard to implement.

would anyone like this type of tournament ?

30. Maj 2007, 13:30:10

Emne: Re: TTT

Hrqls: I don't like "TTT". Find a better name.

30. Maj 2007, 13:37:27

Emne: Re: TTT

Fencer: ok boss! ;) hmm .. does anyone have a fitting name for such a tournament ? (it encourages playing for gammon more than in normal tournaments)

GPT ? (gammon play tournament)

30. Maj 2007, 14:11:49

Emne: Re: TTT

Hrqls: I think "gammon tournament" would be good enough.

30. Maj 2007, 14:24:11

joshi tm

Emne: Re: TTT -> Gammon Tournament

Tilpasset af joshi tm (30. Maj 2007, 14:34:15)

Fencer: New tournament forms are always cool, now just add the Champions League tournament (first the group phase of n players in the 8 groups, first 2 go through (for a total of 16) then Double elimination with random setup)insert for n any number.

30. Maj 2007, 17:06:19

playBunny

Emne: Re: TTT

Tilpasset af playBunny (27. August 2007, 14:13:31)

Fencer: It's "Tric Trac Tourno". TTT is just a handy abbreviation, not the name of the format. As a purposely designed format, I think it would be appropriate to honour the name that the inventor gave it and unseemly to change it.

30. Maj 2007, 17:29:15

Emne: Re: TTT

playBunny: TTT might be handy in English but not in other languages. What if I say that it would be implemented only with our own name or I don't see a reason to do it?
Unlike some other site owners, I always think multilingual.

30. Maj 2007, 17:31:50

Emne: Re: TTT

Fencer: you dont change the name of backgammon either though .. so it might be correct to call it TTT as its probably based on tric trac ?

30. Maj 2007, 17:34:24

Emne: Re: TTT

Hrqls: But I don't like it. And I don't want to work on something I don't like.

30. Maj 2007, 17:36:49

Emne: Re: TTT

Fencer: In my version, "Triple gammon" sounds like a straightforward and self-explaining name.

30. Maj 2007, 17:37:22

Emne: Re: TTT

nabla: That's much better.

30. Maj 2007, 17:39:34

Emne: Re: TTT

Fencer: hmm .. just the name ? the rules remain the same .. we could even come up with a Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious name which could be abbreviated to TTT :)

30. Maj 2007, 17:50:05

Emne: Re: TTT

Hrqls: I checked on the French Wikipedia, the name is usually spelled trictrac. The game is played on a backgammon board, but its rules and especially its scoring system are awfully complicated. There is a whole chapter on the various penalties which should be applied when one of the players did a scoring error :-)
For it to be a good name, I think it would require something more mind-boggling than upgrading losses to half a point. Or maybe I missed the inventor's idea ?

30. Maj 2007, 17:51:57

Emne: Re: TTT

nabla: i dont know the inventor's idea either
i am playing trictrac on a dutch site now (i didnt know of the game before yesterday) and its different from, backgammon

i dont know why mike named it trictrac .. but to me it feels 'not-right' to change its name (at least not without contacting him ..which i dont know how to do as he seems to be on a long vacation)

30. Maj 2007, 17:58:24

Emne: Re: TTT

AlliumCepa: hmm .. the capital S gives me away .. i have to admit i copy&pasted it :)

30. Maj 2007, 20:27:24

Thad

Emne: Re: TTT

> And I don't want to work on something I don't like.

And that's what keeps this site from being supercalifragilisticexpialidocious!!

(although it's pretty good) ;-)

30. Maj 2007, 17:39:33

Emne: Re: TTT

Hrqls: By the way, have a look at BrainKing in Turkish, backgammon is translated to tavla and I am sure there are more languages which don't keep the English name.

30. Maj 2007, 17:41:28

Emne: Re: TTT

Fencer: ah ok .. i thought tavla was slightly different .. but thats my mistake as i did leanr backgammon on here and all my 'knowledge' of backgammon comes from this site ;)

30. Maj 2007, 17:35:56

Emne: Re: TTT

AlliumCepa: Don't scare me again.

30. Maj 2007, 17:36:19

whirlybabe

Emne: Re: TTT

Fencer: Tric Trac isn't actually an English name. *4* If it were me I'd change "Tourno" to the nearest equivalent in the target language but keep the "Tric Trac" that Mike gave it.

30. Maj 2007, 17:39:08

Emne: Re: TTT

whirlybabe: "Tric-Trac" and "tournoi" are French, but we would say "Tournoi de tric-trac", not "Tric Trac Tournoi". I never heard of remotely similar rules in the old game of tric-trac, but I am no specialist of game history.

30. Maj 2007, 13:56:02

AbigailII

Emne: Re: TTT

Hrqls: What is the point of scoring 0.5 for a loss?

30. Maj 2007, 13:58:13

Emne: Re: TTT

AbigailII: it encourages people to take more risks .. it encourages them to play for a gammon (instead of being content with a single win)

you need to win at least a few gammons to make a chance to win the tournament

30. Maj 2007, 14:07:20

joshi tm

Emne: Re: TTT

Tilpasset af joshi tm (30. Maj 2007, 14:07:53)

Hrqls: Sounds pretty cool! Well, except for the name game, but how about man-to-man tournament?

Also, a loss should cost 0.5 points instead or give nothing...

Could something also be done for points games like Froglet, Go or Cheversi? Winning better (higher difference) causes more points.

30. Maj 2007, 14:26:45

Emne: Re: TTT

Hrqls: I would welcome new tournament formats, but as for backgammon they should include the doubling cube to be of interest for me. So this one doesn't appeal to me.

30. Maj 2007, 15:05:21

Emne: Re: TTT

nabla: the doubling cube isnt there .. but gammons and backgammons are still counted

its all single game matches though

(the luck factor is still bigger than in a tournament with a doubling cube though)

30. Maj 2007, 16:17:06

joshi tm

Emne: Re: TTT

Hrqls: Should be possible for all points games too, the difference in points is added to the winner's total.

Sounds really cool. Then we can see who's best at Cheversi. (of course double games)

30. Maj 2007, 17:07:32

Emne: GGT

joshi tm: yes ... would be nice somehow to add to the bkr the difference with which a game was won (nice for froglet :))

this Grand Gammon Tournament has that .. but the main purpose is to let the players focus on gaining gammons .. its a nice training :)

(at least it helped for me :))

30. Maj 2007, 17:26:18

Emne: Re: TTT

AlliumCepa: the TTT i refer to exists of single game matches without cube .. its nice for its aggresive play and the gammon training

a tournament with another scoring system as you describe would be fun as well :)

30. Maj 2007, 17:34:46

Emne: Re: TTT

AlliumCepa: You are right, it is completely compatible with cubed matches. Indeed, it should be implemented a scoring system, not a tournament system.
Now as Thad pointed out, the half point for a loss is not very natural and it would look better and be completely equivalent to have loss = 0, single = 1, gammon = 3, backgammon = 5. But I propose even better : single = 1, gammon and backgammon = 3. Simpler, closer to normal backgammon, and counting backgammons has always been quite irrelevant anyway, it occurs so rarely that it count for virtually nothing in the equity calculations, except in the 2-3 last moves of some games.
As a scoring system and not a tournament system, I support it.

30. Maj 2007, 17:15:51

playBunny