"Have Fun": I don't play for money on the Internet :-)

alanback: LOL would you accept a IOU if i didn't have any money LOL:)

Hrqls: Good points.

The strategy of using the cube is subtle, despite its apparent simplicity. Like all plays in backgammon, it depends upon the odds of various outcomes. These are easier to illustrate if one assumes a "money" game is being played rather than a match of finite length. In a money game, the winner of each game wins an amount of money equal to the agreed stakes multiplied by the value of the cube. So, for example, if we are playing for $1 a game and you win a doubled gammon, I owe you $4. Each game is self-contained so there is no match winning strategy to consider.

Now, assume we are playing a money game for $1 a game and after several moves I offer you a double. (Assume we are of equal playing ability.) You examine the board situation and conclude that your chances of winning the current game are only 40%. Should you accept the double, or drop it (concede)?

The intuitive answer is to drop, because you are more likely to lose than to win, and accepting doubles the stakes. But surprisingly, the correct action is to take the double. This can be shown mathematically.

If you drop, you will lose $1 immediately. If you accept the double and play on, you have a 60% chance of losing $2 (net value of minus $1.20). However, you also have a 40% chance of winning $2 (net value of plus $0.80). Therefore, the total net value to you of accepting the double is minus $0.40. Since this is better than the minus $1 cost of dropping, you should accept and play on.

Accepting a double actually increases the net value of the game somewhat, because after accepting you are in possession of the cube and only you can make the next double. This turns out to be a very significant advantage in some cases.

Nothingness: the doubling cube only makes sense in a match of more than 1 point

by declining the cube offer you will lose that game, but not the match (unless if its the last point your opponent needs)

in the end game when you are far behind your opponent, your opponent can offer the double, you will of course decline, and the game will finish a bit faster :)

in the end game when both are not that far apart, one can offer a double if he think he will win .. if he was correct then he wins double the points he would have otherwise won

the trick is to find where you will still win, and your opponent might still accept .. i you can notice that position, then you win double the points your opponent might win in the same kind of game, and you might win the match although your opponent might be of equal strength in backgammon without the cube

of course there is a bit more as alan explained : when the doubling cube is available you can also win gammons and backgammons .. a gammon (no men beared off by your opponent) is worth 2 points, without any doubling applied yet, a backgammon (opponent still has a men in the starting quarter or on the bar) is worth 3 points ... so a game which was doubled once and became a backgammon .. is worth 6 points :)

now the trick is to find out .. when you are winning a game .. wether you can turn it into a gammon (which will give you 2 points without doubling) or if you wont be able to do so .. if you double and your opponent declines you will only get 1 point .. but it is a certain point

the best way to learn it is to try it :)

Nothingness: You should read the rules again. If a player doubles, the other player must accept or concede the current game. If the opponent concedes, then the doubling player immediately wins the current game and receives a number of points equal to the current value of the game before the double. For example, if no player has previously accepted a double in the current game, it is worth 1. After one double is accepted the game is worth 2, after 2 doubles it is worth 4, and so on. If the opponent accepts, then play continues normally at the increased stakes. So it normally makes no sense to double when you are hopelessly behind, because you are just doubling the amount your opponent will win (and giving him the opportunity to redouble). A player who wins an undoubled game wins 1 point, unless the win is a gammon (2 points) or a backgammon (3 points). If the game has been doubled and accepted once, then a single game is worth 2 points, a gammon 4, and a backgammon 6.

Until the cube has been turned (i.e., until a double has been offered and accepted) either player can offer a double before rolling the dice on his turn. Once a double has been accepted, then only the player accepting the double can offer another double. In this way "possession" of the doubling cube passes back and forth between the players, changing hands after each accepted double in the current game.

One other doubling rule is the "Crawford Rule." The Crawford Rule states that, when one player reaches a score that is only one point away from winning the current match, his opponent may not double in the next game. After that game (called the "Crawford game", which BrainKing erroneously calls the "Crawford Round", the trailing player may double normally.

ok i really never got into backgammon. but i never undertood the cube? what is its purpose and how does it work. ive read many things in the rules but nothign really explains it. If i read it correctly you must accept a roll or you lose the game. but then what purpose do pieces on the board mean? if im down 120 pips to 1, i can say Double and win? that makes no sense. little help would be great thanks.

bouncybouncy: I didn't say you were cheating. However if one player moves slowly it is the OTHER player who is going to suffer. Or more accurately the player whose turn it is when sleep overcomes him/her will lose. This doesn't seem fair.

Even if I'm playing someone I know is moving every minute I still wouldn't set up 1 hour moves in case we don't finish before something comes up.

I would agree with Alan. If I were doing these kinds of games I would want to know that my opponent is aware of how it works and what's required in terms of a time commitment. There have been countless posts on the BK board of people - including experienced BKers - expressing "What does .. mean?" and "Oh, I didn't know that" with regard to the clocks. With newcomers to the site they don't even know to ask the questions.

There's one player (in Linetris) who delights in winning games against newcomers who don't know that they must stick to the game like glue or lose it. What a great welcome he gives them to the site; their first experience here is to get shafted!

For me it wouldn't be fun or acceptable for anyone to lose to me because of the time. Each such win would be a cause for regret if I could have helped the opponent avoid it. Clear notice in the game invitation would be one part of that. With a new opponent I'd ask them on the first move what they understand about the clock and time constraints. I'd do it then so that I could delete the game if it turns out that they didn't realise. In other words I'd make it my responsibility, not theirs, to avoid winning because of the clock.

That's not to say that you should, just that I would. Part of it is that I care about my opponents but another part is that I care about my games stats. A 66% winning ratio isn't of such value if it includes too many non-playing wins. Others don't care two hoots about their stats. ;-)

alanback: A player p;icked up an hour game of mine from the waiitng room, we played the game then he asked ifi would play another with him, i said yes but only if it wasnt an hour limit, becasue i was going out, so he sent me a day limit. Now, surely its common sense, to check your time limits before you accept, whether the invitation is sent directly to you or is picked up in the waiting room.

bouncybouncy:  Probably true.  Since I generally don't pick up games in the waiting room, I don't have enough experience to know whether the time limits are obvious.  I have occasionally carelessly accepted an invitation sent directly to me with short time limits, but so far I have always noticed it in time to delete the game. 

alanback bouncybouncy: I agree with these two posts.

alanback: The warning is in the time though isnt it. All the games that are in the "waiting room" clearly state the time limit which that particular game will run, surely it is up to the person to carefully check the time of the game before they accept it.

bouncybouncy:  It's certainly not cheating if both players are aware of the time limits and agree to them.  Since extremely short time limits are not "normal" on this server, I think it is good practice to call the opponent's attention to them, perhaps in the title of the game.  Otherwise, a person could accept a game inadvertently under circumstances where they would have to time out, presumably spoiling the game for both sides.  After all, we don't play games primarily to win them, but to enjoy the company and competition. 

Whether it's "cheating" to set up games without a warning is a matter of opinion.  I think it's unfair if it operates as a trap for the unwary.

"Have Fun": They arent bothering me in the slightest

grenv: Yes, but they know the time limit, if they decide to take slow moves, then it is their problem not mine. So if i set up a load of one hou games, and say a few time out, does that make me a cheat then ???

bouncybouncy: Don't let these hot shots get to you here:)

bouncybouncy: Yes, I guess if you moved quickly, but all it would take is a couple of slow moves to throw the opponent off. I would think a fisher game with a 6 hour limit (no bonus) would achieve the same with no possibility of being screwed.

alanback: Oh yes, sorry he did time out, but he knew the playtime, but all the others were played within the limit

grenv: LOL how could you ever guess that he he LOL:)

bouncybouncy:  I just looked at your games from today, and the very first one I looked at (also the most recent) was a timeout by your opponent.

Earlier today i set up 9 games all with one hour time limits, they were all played, and nobody timed out.

DARK PHOENIX: How can you play a game of backgammon with 1 hour limits? Chances are you would need sleep before the game finished, so the winner is just the person who stays awake the longest.

Um!! Huh!! Let Fencer deal with it.

"Have Fun": Um ... what's the Dice?

"Have Fun": Huh?

Its the Dice.Time has nothing to do with it.Sure if you time out you no how you lost.Opponents tell me Oh I just got lucky.Thats a bunch of CRAP.I don't mind loosing a game or 2 but not game afer game Thats what i call CHEATING

Walter Montego:  In this case, Fencer has apparently drawn his conclusions, and I have no reason to disagree.

alanback: The Fischer clock works quite well at eliminating the use of the clock to a player's advantage. The time parameters chosen make a difference. You can start with some amount of time which doesn't matter too much. The bonus time selected will in a many move game be near the average time per move. The maximum when reached will be the most time one player can take between moves during a game. If you don't move for awhile your time will drop as it does with the other timing methods. To get more time for your clock you have to move. That's what the bonus does. None of this wait until the last minute and then get 7 days to move again. You'll only get the bonus time if you try that. Of course if the bonus is set high at 7 days that's what it'll be. You have to experiment and find the times you like for your favorite pace.

If you see 5/1.6/15 it means a starting time of 5 days, a bonus time of 1 day 6 hours, and a maximum time on your clock of 15 days. I use these parameters or similar ones a lot. It comes out to about 8 moves per 10 days not counting your initial 5 day start. The maximum 15 days can be reached with 8 or 9 moves in two days from the start. This gives either player the abilty to leave for two weeks without timing out if he can just make a few moves in his game. Obviously both players could be online and finish a game in less than an hour. If one person plays slower than 1 move every 30 hours, he'll lose time and then have to start moving faster for fear of timing out. There's plenty of other time parameters you can use too. Depends on how you like the game to progress. I would certainly recommend using a Fischer clock for any tournament as it keeps the slow and fast players more or less together, especially when compared to the use of the standard vacation timing method. For playing one on one, it's up to how you and your opponent get along or want the game to go. Fof friends or people you've played many games with, you'll know what you like. Newer opponents will depend on yourself and what time limits you like until you've played a few times.

I didn't see playBunny say he wouldn't play him, just that he was complaining about how this person happened to acheive some of his victories from how it appears. The player did defend himself here, so maybe there's more to it. You know the trouble caused by making assumptions based on incomplete data. None of the others listed have spoken up, so perhaps there's a good reason for Fencer's actions concerning them. Fencer can see every game and draw his own conclusions about the appropriateness of how someone is conducting their games.

As I've said in the past, I will not play games where a major part of the startegy is the use of the clock to win. You said so for yourself, but there are plenty of people that like having the clock as part of the game. It is certainly within the rules to use the clock in this manner, even if I disapprove of it.

alanback: LOL and i hope he gets the rest of them on this SITE.

DARK PHOENIX:  The Bunny is mighty, but not almighty.  Only Fencer has the power of life and death over your account.

Then , Can Bunny restart my BKR rating in Backgammon ??( Delete my games in Backgammon )

Walter Montego:  I can't imagine ever agreeing to a 1-hour game with an opponent I knew was manipulating the system.  Perhaps a 5-minute game, so there could be some assurance that the game would be completed in a reasonable time.  I don't know how Fisher clock games work, but that might be a solution also.

Of course, PB has expressed no interest in playing a match of any sort against this opponent.

alanback: Maybe playBunny will agree to a one hour game, or they could certainly play with longer time limits. Maybe a series of games, eh?

DARK PHOENIX:  In my opinion inviting a player to a game with a 1-hour time limit without clearly warning him of the unusual terms is just as much cheating as is collusion over ratings.  In both cases the win is not earned by good play but by extraneous factors manipulated by the "winner".  Which is not necessarily to say that I believe you.

I don't cheat ... These games was lucky for me ... My opponent don"t see time in a game ( it was 1 hour per move ) and If he log out and don't log in this hour I won this gme ... Meabe in your eyes I'm look like cheater but I don't ... I have too lucky in these games ... If You can Bunny we could play Backgammon ... You will see that I 'm not a cheater ... Could you write private message ??

alanback: I think he will play you. Maybe lower your BKR.That will get LL a little closer to you;)

"Have Fun": Lol. It could be said that it has a lot of RRRs. ;o)

alanback: LOL now what was the... original of idiom;) ME not being a educated man LOL;)

Pedro Martínez:  More of a euphemism ... the original is the idiom ;-)

playBunny: "pain in the bum", LOL, what a lovely idiom....:)))

alanback: I doubt that Fencer will change any of the actual BKRs. It's probably too complicated a web to unravel and when Fencer eventual gives us a real rating system and recalculates all the BKR histories (lol, are you reading this Filip?! ), having to program in such anomalies would be a real pain in the bum, I expect.

It is a pity that they've affected other's ratings, especially the lower rated players who've been leeched from, but hopefully the fact that they've no longer got any public incentive will mean that they'll stop playing that game in the future. What I'm not sure of is whether Fencer sent them a message or simply implemented the chart ban.

playBunny:  That's interesting, and pitiful.  It doesn't appear that florin has been stripped of his BKR -- which is relevant to me since I challenged him when he reached #1.  I wonder what will happen with that match.

"Have Fun": To be honest, i never thought people could be like that, maybe i am just the type who like to see the best in everybody, how wrong can we be aye

bouncybouncy: It has got unreal the amount of CHEATERS on this SITE!!!

playBunny: ah right, ok i understand now, I did have florin on block anyway, but that was for a different reason. I have been playing laurentiu for some time, but he will now go on my blocked lisyt. I cant be bothered with people like this.

bouncybouncy: Each of those links shows the Finished Games list. If you look down the Number of Moves colums you'll see lots of games with very few moves. Open any of these and you'll see that it's been resigned. All those resignations pump up the rating of the "winner".

Looking at florin's list you can see that he's been getting a monthly boost from hitlerica since June. That took him to #1 on the ranking table recently which is when his shenanigans became noticeable. DARK PHOENIX was the newest #1 until this morning. It was easy to see that he'd been playing the same game along with his two accomplices.

playBunny: Excuse my ignorance, but how do u know when somebody is a cheat or not?

A feather in the cap for Fencer. He's just made the first use of a new "Ban From Charts" feature and has removed two sets of rating cheats from the charts!

Group 1 - ROMANIA, laurentiu, florin, ROMANIAN Boy, hitlerica

Group 2 - DARK PHOENIX, el diabolique, zapdos

LionsLair and Hrqls:  Thanks very much.  I'm already about to drop perilously close to #6 in Nack, so success is a temporary and relative quantity!