playBunny: yeah, but I was thinking of something you could use to limit players in a tournament for example.

TC: It's the same thing using different words.

# of moves per day (i suggest calculating the last months average rather than entire history)

divided by

number of games you are playing now

The "now" part is very important... since it will show the real time value. if someone pares down his/her games the number will go up.

What happened to the idea of rating people... moves per day / # of games currently running.

If this number was >1 you would expect a move per day, but a number of 0.1 would be a move every 10 days and you could avoid those players.

:)

lostpawn: Sure, but in the history of sports, games etc... is there any precedent for a competition lasting more than a year?

My fault I guess for joining a tournament with a 7 day limit... but it was more than 3 years ago when I didn't know any better.

Even something simple like starting the next round when winners are known in the current round would probably make a big difference.

And, yes, 1000 games seems silly - how is that fun? Surely 100 is enough so you always have a turn waiting - more seems like a waste.

alanback: I'm still playing in a tournament that started October 2005!!!! It's called "the first doubling cube tournament" or something like that.

I think tournaments probably should blow up after a year and running games continue on as "friendly's" on the assumption that nobody cares about the result any more.
:)

playBunny: yep

aaru: Shall we play chess without a king next?

and i can't delete it unfortunately. I thought delete was an option.

Czuch: hmm. maybe so... i thought it was obvious, but could be wrong.

Thad: Seems like you should redouble

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).

Andersp: Yes, performance is a real problem here. May go to other sites where there i don't need to wait forever for the page to load

Puckish: me too

nabla: good point on the low points, you need to basically add pip counts for checkers on the 1 or 2 point to be accurate. Alternatively you can look at the number of average moves left and calculate the odds variation, but that gets complicated.

Thad: I suspect sitting in a bar drinking beer would be a slightly higher priority. It would be for me.

Thad: exactly. Everyone needs to prioritize their work. This seems like something that is a low priority since it doesn't actually affect the game in any meaningful way.

Thad: Very good. So there must be at least one such game i would think

playBunny: I don't think you're saying anything meaningful here. Yes, this is my way.. I resign in a lost position. I never said others had to do the same.

On the contrary you are saying that others might be offended at my actions and request that I play out the game. Wouldn't this be a case of them asking me to do it their way, not the other way around?

Since you're smart enough to realize this, you must in fact be joking and/or enjoying a silly argument.

Czuch Czuckers: Correct, as in the law where the test is always "the reasonable person". If someone is unreasonably offended that is their problem not mine.

playBunny: The reason to finish a jigsaw is to look at the picture I assume, perhaps show to others?

Anyway this is clearly an aesthetic endeavor, whereas a game of backgammon is a contest. Once the contest is over it should be ended. Better yet, the next frame should be started so that the moves actually mean something.

Again, chess is set up this way (we don't need to actually capture the king) as are most sporting events (we don't play all 7 games in a series once one team wins 4) etc.

Czuch Czuckers: I've got a good analogy. it's like wanting to play another move in chess after checkmate, just so you can derive the pleasure of capturing the king. :)

Of course, to you, deriving pleasure from moving the last piece off is ridiculous enough, so people who value it that strongly can only be ridiculous squared in your eyes, and thus deserve all disrespect due them, right?

Correct.

playBunny: I'll be as polite as you like, but I won't waste my time continuing a game that's already over. Not to mention it wastes my opponents time.

In fact it's boorish and impolite in my opinion to keep going, or to demand that others keep going in order to satisfy your own ridiculous need for moving the last pieces. Kind of like needing to have the last word... :)

playBunny: Totally disagree... waste of time. I will always resign in that situation regardless of opposition. If you're that worried about playing the last piece you are free to block me, in fact I encourage it.

nabla: It may be difficult to calculate accurately enough to resign the first turn that it's impossible to win, but it becomes obvious when you're each down to a few pieces. At some point in most games you will resign even live on a board. :)

rod03801: I resign as soon as I can't change the result (so for instance when I avoid the gammon but can't win). There is no etiquette to the contrary, in fact over the table you would always stop the game and quickly start the next frame in the set.

and i never say gg until the MATCH is finished, not the frame.

AlliumCepa: For example a checker on the 8 point requires 2 moves. if you roll 6-5 each time you will need to use 2 5s at least, which is 10 on the dice to move 8 pips.

Better way would be to see how many moves each piece needs and make sure a maximum of 50% 6s are used.

So the 2 back checkers each need 4 moves (8 6s total)
The 5 checkers on 13 each need 3 moves (with no 6s needed)
The 3 checkers on 8 each need 2 moves (again, no 6s - 2 4s will do)
The 5 checkers on 6 could be moved out in 1 if 5 6s are used.

So,,, with 13 6s, 6 4s and 15 5s I could move them all out. That could be done with 13 6-5s and 4 5-4s (which would trade some 4s into 5s which is ok). Trading the 5-4s for 6-5s wouldn't help.

Thus 17 moves is the minimum with no doubles.

Thad: She probably would have rolled more doubles, but that was the end of the game.

Nope, probably not. 1/6 in fact. ;)

Thad: Yes indeed, advance the back checkers and move the 13-10 or 6-3 or 8-5.

However if you need a gammon my first suggestion might still be better. )

Thad: double 3s should move 8-5(2) 6-3(2) probably. Possible 13-10(2) in some cases, particularly if you can hit an opponents piece.

Thad: Just makes it worse. The dice are rolled and they STILL won't make a frigging turn. arg

playBunny: well spotted. Let's get rid of this user shall we?

Does anyone know why I can't roll the dice in this game?

Backgammon (grenv vs. fisher)

Family Man: Looks like a bug...

on the other hand you can win the match with a gammon...

fakar10: Thanks. I must say it's not real obvious, with all those tabs, where things are, let alone know when some new setting appears.

AlliumCepa: autopass is available in settings? where?

Andersp: Once upon a time Fencer said he'd never implement auto-pass.
Now we have a half-way implementation (which is better than nothing since at worst you can't use it which is the same as before).
In the future with enough pressure from players it will be implemented properly.

Andersp: Well that's silly, if it's not working it's because it's not implemented properly. Should be anyone who wants to use it can... whenever they want.

Please nobody suggest that it be abandoned, only fixed.

Family Man: Staying on the game until it's your opponents turn should probably be the default behaviour. However you'll soon get to it again, and when it's the only game left where it's your turn...

Czuch Czuckers: The risk of backgammon is quite small and usually negligible when making calculations (unless you're a computer).

Czuch Czuckers: Nonsense. Use of the doubling cube is a skill in itself. It has the opposite affect you describe.

And another thing... you were 4-2 up in that match at the time, so complaining about lack of luck seems a little silly. Go and look at how you got the 4 points in the first place.

Czuch Czuckers: If you are up 4-2, there is no difference between losing 1 or 2 points: The next frame is for the match anyway, since you would double immediately next frame.

Gr☺uch☺: More likely you tend to notice when the luck is against you, but not when it goes for you.

BIG BAD WOLF: In this position 7/2(2) 6/1(2) is probably best overall, however in your case the match was down to the last frame, so gammons don't count.
Therefore I believe your move was better for the reasons you state.

Czuch Czuckers: Actually there are good techniques for counting pips across the board using patterns and a little math. Do a search and you'll find a few.

Czuch Czuckers: In my humble opinion, that is a silly game. The odds are part of the game. I suggest using the cube for a more skillful game.

Gr☺uch☺: The rules are arbitrary and don't work well. As a result the game will never finish if played properly by both players.

Czuch Czuckers: I totally agree, very dumb. Obviously not play tested before introduction to the site.

Czuch Czuckers: I'm playing my first couple of games now, and it seems a little silly all those pieces on the bar. Could take years to finish at the rate I'm going, and I agree that the scoring seems tricky to understand. Don't think I'll play again.

playBunny: Ok, I admit I must have starting glazing over the lengthy description and missed that part. I retract the statement.