The cube is a relatively recent addition to an ancient game. Still, it's all backgammon today
I also agree that the cube should be an option, not a new type of game.

I disagree, I think it changes the game enough to be different.

If it's the same, we need to start giving 2 points for a gammon in a regular game (so a gammon would be like winning 2 games as far as ratings go etc).

grenv: A one point match should NOT count any more with a gammon or backgammon.
A 5-point match counts as a 5-point match, even if it's won with a backgammon and 8-cube (3x8=24 points). The final score doesn't matter, only who wins and the pre-set match length.
A "regular" game is a match to 1 point, making the cube and (back)gammons irrelevant.

Ok, point taken. I guess my point then is: Who would ever play a one point match? I don't remember ever doing that across a board except to teach my kids how to play.

It's a good exercise, since similar situations (the most obvious being when both players have one point to go) comes up quite often in match play, and calls for different strategies.
And a quick 1-pointer is fun too, but I will mostly play longer matches when match play becomes an option.

grenv: All the current backgammon tournament games are 1 point matches.

AbigailII: To what tournaments do you refer? On this site ALL backgammon games are 1 point matches.

jahaja: I remember when one of the highest rated human players on FIBS had the username onepointer because he only played one point matches. Knowing the fine points of checker play is like knowing the fine points of chess endgames: necessary but not sufficient to make one a well-rounded player. Adding the doubling cube is like adding a third dimension (anybody ever read Flatland?). And by the way, folks who have not played with the cube before would do well to read up on cube strategy before venturing into ratings land with the cube for a guide.

alanback: Nah, I'll wing it just like I learned Backgammon with out it. Why have some author take all my fun of learning the hard way? I'll wait until I either understand and can use the cube for winning, or until I just can't the hang of it and then I'll read what other people have to say about it.
Ratings, schmatings.

alanback: Yes, I've read Flatland, but I would consider the "extra" dimension the cube adds as the bad idea of seeing your own insides - YUCK! (whoever's read Flatland WILL understand)

indeed pro bg is a special variant ... it avoids the silly common hyperthread variation,
contrary to the spirit with no choice which of the dice to move first - probably invented by
ppl losing too much at solid rules, who even allow fiddling in the house after moving out ... ~*~

here are the rules

If you don't like them perhaps you could try a different game.

grenv: Those are the rules that I play by, though I have yet to ever play Backgammon with a doubling cube or even make bets on a game's outcome. I have two such books with rules and plans in them.
Jacoby/Crawford wrote one and Cooke/Bradshaw wrote the other. As far as I can tell, the rules are identical in both books. I liked your link. Your link clearly explains something that my books are vague about. When a player has his home base closed and the opponent has a checker on the bar, the player keeps rolling the dice. That is the rules as stated. Yes, some people call it autopass, but that's not what it is. I think if we got off this notion of autopass and just played the game like the rules it would solve the whole problem.

I request that Backgammon be played by the rules as stated in these three books. Since the experts have found common ground and most of the players on this site follow the same rules, so why not have the game here be played the same way?

I will state my proposal for when a person cannot possibly move. This is different than when he actually has a chance to move, but rolls numbers that do not allow him to move. Please keep this in mind while reading this.

As far as I know, there's only two ways that it could be your turn and no matter what numbers came up on the dice you would not be able to move. The only one of them that I've ever seen is when every point in the home base is covered and the opponent has one or more checkers on the bar. It is for this situation, a fairly common one, that I'd like this site to conform to the rules. The other situation is something that, though possible, has probably never occured in Backgammon and can be dispensed with. If was to occur it wouldn't last but a turn or two anyway.

The moment that it becomes impossible for your opponent to move no matter what numbers could come up on the dice it should remain your turn. Do not think of this is autopass. Autopass works differently and I'll explain later. Since it is your turn still, the turn stays with you after you've entered your move. The dice are rolled again, and you make your next move. If, after making this move, it is now possible for your opponent to have any chance of getting off the bar, your turn is over and it becomes your opponent's turn. If you still have your home base closed, then your turn continues and another roll is made, and you play as you have. Eventually, a point will be open with one blot or none and your opponent will have a chance to get off the bar. This will be the end of your turn. All the rolls are just one turn. There is no autopass. You can only leave one message while taking this turn and the turn is not complete until it is your opponent's turn. If you stop in the middle of this turn and log off or something, the moves that you've entered and then taken another roll on will remain done. During the next roll, if you leave during it, the site already has the dice stay the same and no checkers are moved until you enter the moves. Prior parts of your turn, once entered, stay. As far as the clock goes, it is still your turn and the time will stay with you and run down until you've made the turn that will allow your opponent a chance to move. This is not autopass, and no one misses anything and the game is played how people play the game everywhere.

Autopass is a whole different thing, though in the situation I just outlined it is easy to confuse the two and I think that is why there's been so much arguing about it. In autopass, your opponent does have a chance to move, but rolls numbers that for the particular position on the board on that turn do not allow him to move. This happens a lot, even during one game it can happen more than a few times if luck is not your friend in that game. This site plays it the same in both situations ("Closed home base" and "chance to move, but unable to move") where every roll of the dice is treated as a seperate turn and must be entered with your opponent then having a turn. With autopass, a game site will look at the roll and determine that the player, though having a chance to move, rolled numbers that don't let him move, and will skip his turn and return the turn back to the other player. This is different than the closed home base, though not in the way this site treats both situations. I've seen the arguments about missing one's turn and the confusion about the checkers jumping around because of a bad series of rolls during a player's turn getting skipped. I understand that and can see why some people don't like the idea of autopass. Autopass is not how people play the game in person, either. If I have a chance to move, I will roll the dice and then get the bad news that I can't move. With the home base closed, I don't roll the dice and my opponent continues to roll and move until a point or blot opens up and then I get to roll the dice. Though I would probably use autopass if available, I don't really miss it and it only occurs sporadically during a game. Autopass also messes with the flow of the game and does indeed prevent me from leaving a message about my bad luck with the dice when it occurs. The closed home base scenario is a completely different matter though. When my opponent is able to do that, it is his turn until I have a chance to move. I know the situation and he can finish his turn and let me roll the moment something opens up. There's no reason for me to roll the dice and he could keep moving until he finally leaves an opening for me. Then it would be time for any message he might want to write and he'd finish his turn. Hopefully I can get off the bar and race home in time. If I'm still stuck on the bar, I didn't get autopassed because I rolled the dice when a point became open.

My proposal is:

When a player closes his home base and his opponent has one or more checkers on the bar it will remain his turn until his opponent has a possible chance to move. To help avoid any confusion, on the very move that the home base is closed the site might want the turn to go the opponent so that he can see the home base closed and know what has happened. This would also give him a chance to add a message about the opponent's good play or his own bad luck concerning the home base now being closed with him having a checker on the bar. After that, it would stay the player's turn until the home base was open.

As for autopass, we can do without it. It would be OK for some of us if it was avaliable, but it's not the panacea for faster play that some think it is. The closed home base would help speed play a lot during those times when someone has closed their home base and has three checkers in the opponent's home base. To avoid confusion, on the first turn of the home base being closed the turn could still go to the opponent so he'd know the game's current situation and not be surprised when it is his turn the next time. The moves could be recorded as they are now and nothing would be changed except to facilitate the flow of the game and make it more like you were playing it in person.

Walter Montego: With the doubling cube that wouldn't work. To cite from that link: Note that when a player is closed out, he does not forfeit his right to double.

Walter Montego: You keep saying "it's not auto-pass -- it stays your turn". Does that mean your clock doesn't stop, until you've opened up your home board -- because "it is still your turn"?

I rather have an auto-pass (or whatever you'd like to define it) in the beginning. That is, if I have lost the roll, I don't see the point in having to have to push the 'pass' button. I find it annoying enough to be tempted to write a bot that makes the passes for me.

Luke Skywalker: Is that concern not solved by letting the turn go the player on the move when the base becomes closed? Plus, there isn't a doubling cube on this site. Also, even if what you say is true for extended matches, it could still be implemented for single game play.

AbigailII: I covered the clock situation in the post. The clock continues to run for you when it is your turn.
I am attempting to show that there are two different scenarios for when a player can't move, but this site treats them the same. A closed home base is lot different than when you could move if the dice had been roll differently. Please read my post again. I tried to show both things, "Closed Home Base" and "Chance to move, but unable to move" as seperate things.

Do you play Backgammon with friends in person? Is not how I described the two and how they are dealt with how you play the game with your friends? Can't we have the game played that way here? We don't need autopass as I've defined it, but I'd certainly like the Closed Home Base to work as I've described. Just because it looks like you might be missing a turn when you're really not is something to keep in mind. With "Chance to Move, but Unable to" and autopass enabled, you would miss turns and I'm not for that. Or at least, I don't see it as part of Backgammon as I play the game though I could play with it in effect. I want to roll the dice if I can possibly move before I roll. If there's no way I can move, what's the point of wasting time rolling them?

AbigailII: Some sites take autopass to the extreme. They have the dice rolled way in advance and even calculate the moves a player will make and move them for him. I would never want this site become like that. I want to roll and move the checkers and chat as I would in a regular game. Having one's home base closed is part of the game and I think this site should incorporate the play to match how it goes when people play together. Autopass is not part of the game, but something that is used to facilitate internet gaming. It is used in other games too.

The owner of this site is against autopass, but I think he doesn't see the difference in the case of Backgammon because the effects of keeping the turn with one player who has closed his home base are so similar to autopass that it causes confusion and they get lumped together because of it. I tried to explain how I view the differences in the post with my proposal. Perhaps I'm not as good of a communicator as I'd like to be?

Walter Montego: In other words, if you wouldn't roll the dice in a real board situation, then you don't get to here as well.

See, i explained it in 3 lines for those without the attention span to read your original post :)

Of course the doubling cube counts, so if you can double you always get a move.

grenv: Thank you for your summation. Yes, that's it! I would set the game up to match regular play as close as I can. Autopass is not a part of regular play, but keeping the turn with the home base closed is.

Walter Montego: Autopass is not a rule, but a convenience. Naturally during over the board play, a player does not roll when he could not possibly move. In that situation, if we wished to double at any time, he would simply say so before the opponent's next roll. When programming for this siutation, it would be desirable to give the opponent who is shut out the opportunity to double (if that option is available to him under the rules and is meaningful) or to resign. It might be possible to give a player the option of checking a box to forgo those options in a given game or in all games.

alanback: You guys seem quite worried about someone missing their chance to double while sitting on the bar with the opponent's home base closed. It's hard for me to imagine that this would happen as this is a very disadvantagous type of position to find one's self in, but for the sake of arguing and pretending that the doubling cube is here, I'll go along with it. As I said, when the home base is first closed, the opponent would get to see it as if it was his turn and he'd have to do what we do now when we can't move. If he really wanted to double, he'd have his chance. After that, the player would finish his turn and then it'd be the opponent with checker on the bar's turn. If he still has thoughts of doubling, say a point is open with a blot on it, this would be his chance to do it. Otherwise, he rolls the dice.

All of you that want this doubling cube have to realize that when your opponent has the cube it means you are the one that has the option to double the stakes. On this site, that would mean when your turn comes up, the dice have not been rolled yet. This would be so to afford you the chance to double. I imagine you'd get a two buttons []double or []roll the dice. If you click double, the dice aren't rolled and the turn passes to your opponent who must decide to play on with doubled stakes or resign the game at the current stakes. I can see lots of strategy in making these decisions during an extended match and this is probably why so many avid Backgammon players like the doubling cube in the game. I believe Fencer said he will keep the current version of the game too. So when creating a new game or tournament, you'll have check boxes for the cube or not. Even if the cube is not chosen, I would still like gammons and backgammons count in a series of games. I like playing for them during a game and avoiding them if my opponent is trying for them. Even without the doubling cube, getting gammoned in a two or more game match ought to count for two games. That's how I've always played the game.

The doubling cube is something I've never played with and am anxious to try it out. I hope my learning curve is fairly steep, or I might be ruing typing this someday. :)

Walter Montego: All good, except that when you have the cube, it means you can double and your opponent cannot. At the start nobody has the cube.

And it is quite possible that doubling is a good move when you're stuck. For instance I am down to 1 piece and it is stuck. I was previously trying for a gammon, but now that is impossible so I just double.

grenv: Doesn't what I proposed cover this situation?

Walter Montego: Yes, but i was just answering your comment:

"It's hard for me to imagine that this would happen as this is a very disadvantagous type of position to find one's self in."

Posts with insults have been deleted. Let's stick with backgammon issues....thanks.

thank you - obviously that restricts me less than others ...
true backgammon rulez - I have spoken .... ~*~ ...

danoschek: Obviously? I have thought of your posts in varying degrees of obtuse, disjointed, fractured, or nonsensical, but I'm not sure if they've been insultive on too many occasions. Take for example your recently deleted post. I really couldn't make head nor tail of it, and though I felt you meant something bad towards grenv, I also wasn't able to say that for sure. If you're saying that it's so obvious that the moderator has chosen you to delete, then perhaps you know you better than I'm able to read into whatever it is that you type from time to time. I believe quite some time ago in a different galaxy, you and I had quite the little argument in the Gothic Chess discussion board about speaking clearly to your audience (My view point) or holding to your art whether or not people understand you (Your view point). As I pointed out in arguing my side of it, if you speak clearly people might disagree with you, but they will know what it is that you are talking about. And I quite frankly do not understand what a "real backgammon" or "true backgammon" is that you refer to. If anyone on this site knows his Backgammon and adheres to wanting it played by expert standards, it would be grenv. I ask that you please explain yourself in terms that I might understand.
Thank you.

but after a while I'll get my hidelist tuned perfectly, promised Sue ...
still I'm surprised sometimes when ppl have no life but speculating about mine. ~*~ .

This is a board to discuss BACKGAMMON. Let's keep it that way.

Actually we were dicussing backgammon, the cube etc etc, until Danoschek interrupted with no added value.

grenv: Just like you just did?

Just pointing out the source of the problem.

grenv:granted ! the source of the problem which pointed itself out so nicely
is indeed often a rumpelstiltskin perpetually&fixatively looking for trouble, worst
with a clue of backgammon, same as of board rules, like the warrows on a spire ... ~*~

much more than for the sake of pleasance, any opinions about real backgammon ? ~*~ _

danoschek: You must really enjoy pointless and nonsensical insults.

all: Since very few people here has anything interesting to say about Backgammon and is infested with idiots, I'm taking this board off my favorites list.

Adieu...

danoschek: Got any more of that stuff you'd like to share with the rest of us? It might make it easier to understand you :-)

What is this backgammon thing you keep rattling on about?? ;-)

still looking perfectly nice,
much better than with a public fart
who tries to make his smell reference. ~*~

same rules which are customary in tournaments here. just that pre-emptive sorting
of dice is not required - you may indeed choose which first - additionally, after you
started moving out you may move inside the house only from the topmost triangle yet
~*~

danoschek: I still have no idea what you mean. You can already swap the dice to use them in the order you choose; there is a glitch on this site which allows a player to use the smaller of two dice, if either but not both can be used; also, to use one die in such a way that the other cannot be used, even though there is a move available that uses both. Is that what you are talking about?

Are you suggesting a rule that allows bearing off only from the highest possible point? (Or that you can't bear off from a point if a higher point still has checkers?) That is not a standard backgammon rule, at least not in the international game.

Kannst du es auf Deutsch erklären?

basically it's what I mean. you may choose which of the dice to use first freely, no need
to bother with hypothetical impossibilities later, that's just part of the game. moving only
from the topmost triangle means AFTER you started moving out stones from the board- ~*~

danoschek: But what do you mean by the topmost triangle?

Suppose both players are bearing off. I have 2 checkers remaining on each point in my board. I roll 6-1. Under standard rules, I can bear off two checkers, from the 6 and the 1 point. Are you suggesting that should be illegal?

nope that's okay - but if you have five checkers 3x on 5, 1x on 3 and 1x on 2
and roll 5/1 then you take 5 out once but must not make the others safe by moving 3-2 ...
still 5 is the highest triangle and you have to move from there i.e. 5-4 - no fiddling. ~*~

danoschek: OK . . . I understand at least partially. That is not a standard rule, of course. Although it does remind me of what I was once told about the way the game is played in Persia.

hehehe - could be ... for me it was surprising how little it's known in the states,
since we all play that way and our main minority the turks use to use the same rules ... :)
it levels the disadvantage of the backhold strategy compared to 'fast' and 'blockade' ~*~

danoschek: If it's that popular, then it would be nice to see it here as a variant. We would need a full writeup of the rules, of course.

yeah that's exactly what I have been suggesting since two years - btw faced just
worthless babbling back from the same pertinent source as latestly - won't control now if
again he used his default insults calling everybody with some fantasy moron or paranoic
~*~

the anti-fiddling rule about highest triangle counts not earlier than
you removed your first piece ... you may freely arrange the house until
you decide to move out - but from that moment on, sorting is required ... ~*~

that is the rules for bearing off in acey-duecy

alanback: I deleted my post and apologise for bringing personal disdain into a public forum.