that newbees should have an approbation time and completed some games
before they get the privilege of unveiling what they are here for, on the boards .
check also my prophecy from 2ds ago on mem-only, advising how to set up filters . .. ~*~

It's just occurred to me that gammons and the doubling cube can be made part of the game here without Fencer having to lift a finger. It would just require a bit of cooperation between the players.

All it takes is a gentleman's/lady's agreement for the loser of a gammon or doubled cube to resign as many subsequent games within a match as required. A dropped 1-cube would mean resignation of the current game and a 2-cube the following game as well, etc. A gammon loss would similarly mean resigning the next game.

Messages would be sent to signal intent to double and then acceptance or rejection. I don't yet know whether a note can be sent as part of the game record without a move being made. If not then the message would have to be sent via the envelope system. The receiving player would then send it back as a note on the next move so that it becomes part of the game record - makes it official in the case of dispute. But that's only a procedure that need be done if you wanted to be strict about it.

Dishonourable players could be posted here and as much hot air expanded over the issue as anyone likes and/or can stand.

One interesting angle from this method that sites with built-in doubling cannot offer - the ability to continue the game after dropping the cube and the chance to say "Phew!" or "Doh!" when the result becomes known. ;-)

Hope this is useful to those who like the cube. I'd certainly like to use this system for gammon wins.

:-))

http://www.zerlett.de/uc.htm
The Unknown Cases . . "Stop The Madness" from the album 'Cuba' ... ~*~ .

I quoted him from the alanback message of 22.May 2005, 01:21:17. Was I wrong to lift a quote from Alan's quote? Yes? Perhaps I've misunderstood how this message board works? That's enough for Darnosock to dismiss me?

He can't be bothered to skip the humour - which is a poke tongue at Alan anyway (who strikes me as having a better sense of humour and doesn't have his head stuck up his ..) - and move on to the backgammon bits? But then I gather he's not that interested in backgammon anyway.

[shrug]

His loss. No more of my words will be wasted on him.

The message below was supposed to go to Darnosock, not to the board. Lol. Still geting the hang of this here site. ;-)

[Edit: As you can see I've since appropriated that message as a repository for links relevant to Backgammon. A much better use ]

.

______________________________
For beginners
Paul Money has written four articles.
Backbacker Backgammon has an tutorial. (Click the purple button at the top)
______________________________
Interesting BrainKing games
Examples of strategy and tactics have been added to this message.
______________________________
The Opening Moves.
Rollouts of the opening moves.
______________________________
Sites
Backgammon Galore - Hugely informative.
Peter Max Friis Jensen's Backgammon pages. A previous Danish champion, some pages are very technical.
Greg Cattenach's Backgammon pages including a question-and-answer forum.
Ric Gerace's Backgammon pages. Plenty of links.
Douglas Zare's Backgammon pages including an article on Luck
Mind Sports. And old site but has some interesting articles.
gammoned.com. Sponsored by Gammon Empire.
______________________________
Matches
gammoned.com - Expert Matches
Backgammon Galore - Kit Woolsey vs. Jeremy Bagai
GammOnLine - World Cup Match #1 and other stuff
______________________________
Quizzes
Backgammon Blunder of the Week
Ed's Backgammon Problems
Webby's Backgammon Quiz
Danish BG Fed Forum Quiz
Backgammon Brainbusters
Backgammon Problems
______________________________
Programs
Play online, right now, against Motif, a decent robot. (Java applet)
GnuBg - FREE, world class, comprehensive feature list
BGBlitz - World class, limited version free

after you started your msg by misquoting
I didn't see it worthwhile reading entirely.
on the 2nd day already on blocked and hide, great ~*~

danoschek: "Miles are standard, but just about nowhere else"
alanback: "miles" is a standard unit of measurement, but only in the US."

lolol. Excuse me!! And just who gave the Yanks the miles in the first place, may I ask??!! Britain is "just about nowhere else", lolol. Damn cheek!!

Aah, that felt good. So how was that for a fine display of nationalistic indignance, eh? ;-)

----------------------
Now, to the backgammon.

Walter mentioned two situations where a player cannot move, one being when a man is dancing on the bar because of a closed table. He says that the other "has probably never occured in Backgammon" so I'm inclined to wonder what he envisages. This gives us the third possibility of a player having one or more men stuck behind a 6-prime while all the rest are either on the ace point or have already been borne off. The first of these is uncommon but not rare while the latter is rare. (And the times when the trailing player actually wins from that position are *hugely* rare but *most* satisfying, lol. One of the backgammon book authors - sorry, can't remember who - witnessed this once and uses it to illustrate the never-give-up! principle.

I've only just joined here so I don't know whether an autopass rule would help or hinder the game flow. Certainly at Vog (www.VogClub.com), where I play regularly, the dice will always be rolled and a message shown for a second or two stating that I cannot move. Although this adds a delay to the game, it keeps intact the my-turn-your-turn aspect and I prefer that. Without this delay the board can change unrecognisably in a flash and I then have to spend much time working through the sequence of moves to get my mental board caught up with the real one. It's actually quicker to suffer the non-turn delay and keep my brain on track.

One thing that would be lost if an autopass rule were implemented and that's the ability of the stuck player sending an "Aaaggh!!" message or some such. ;-) Another thing lost (from autopass in a no-point-rolling situation) is the ability to see how many 6-6 rolls you've lost out on while stuck, lol, though this needn't be the case if those rolls are made on your behalf but without requiring the moving player to pause in their own playing.

My vote at this time would be for autopass to be an option that *both* players must select. And, if it can be explained easily enough (your explanation made perfect sense to me, Walter), to have two autopass options - for there *is* a valid distinction. I might accept a no-point-rolling autopass but would never want a your-roll-goes-nowhere autopass; it would be experienced as a disconcerting "jump" in the game.

----------------------
No doubling cube? Ah, well I can live without it. My apprenticeship consisted of learning how to beat an aggressive bot in 3-point matches. I would never have learnt proper chequer play if the cube was a factor unless I accepted everything - and then I'd have got hammered. Once I got to a decent rating I decided to take up the cube. Then Wham! Bam! my rating took a hell of a knock, lol. I'm still getting the hang of the cube. Maths of cubing?? Ha ha. I'll just use intuition for now thanks; I'll do the maths in a year or so ... maybe.

I thoroughly recommend learning the game without the cube until you reach a stable level and then introducing it. You'll reach game states that you'd otherwise rarely reach - because either you or the opponent drops before you get the chance to explore. Or you have to suffer, as I did when I first came up against players who knew a decent backgame, from having to accept the cube and an almost certain loss - just to find out how the game situation will pan out.

But gammons and backgammons don't count? No chance to smell the SIZZLE?? This ain't real backgammon yet, then. :-((

----------------------
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

Grenv gave the example of when you have borne off most of your men and one of the last few gets hit and stuck on the bar. Then, doubling from the bar will win the game unless the trailing player wants to pay the price of risking you escaping too soon and racing home to a win.

Another situation is in prime-vs-prime games where you have the better timing - *because* you have a man stuck on the bar - and you know your opponent's table is going to have to collapse. You may collect another blot or two if the table collapses untidily and you certainly get free and home to bear off before having to release your opponent. It's often a no-brainer drop if you're the player with the collapsing table.

----------------------
Non-backgammon point. What's with the poxy little message box that's only three lines deep and 60 characters wide. That's using about 2.5% of the available screen space - and that's on the smaller monitor! Jeez. It's a most annoying and yet common web design blunder, well that and marquees, and Flash graphics, and putting the [Move] button at the bottom of the page below a load of stuff that doesn't change so I have to scroll down to make each move, and .... oops, I'm about to go off on one .... better stop now. ;-))

I shall comply with the rules of the tournament I choose to sign up for - very easy.
and although it's almost alienmath for me to make milespergallon from liters per
hundred kilometers I shall do it whenever an american friend needs a favour. ~*~

danoschek: Well, there is a certain geographical factor -- miles are standard in the US, but just about nowhere else. If you wanted to speak of an international standard for measuring distances, you would refer to the metric system. Similarly, the rules which are used in international tournaments are "standard" for that very reason. It's not that they are better than other rules; some rules had to be picked, and these are the ones. "Standard" does not mean "best", it means "most commonly used or accepted" - and that is not a subjective matter but a matter of objective fact. This is why I qualified my statement be referring to tournaments only -- in casual or money play, the rules are what you make them, and there is no standard.

Another test for whether a rule is "standard" is whether you are expected to follow it without prior agreement. Most people who play for money in the US use the Jacoby Rule. In some clubs, Jacoby rule is "standard" so that if you sit down to play and don't agree otherwise, the rule is in force. This often takes me by surprise, since in my home club Jacoby was not followed unless the players agreed upon it in advance.

There is no standard without context -- "miles" is a standard unit of measurement, but only in the US. Similarly, in international tournaments, we play backgammon by the accepted international rules, including those that allow "fiddling"!

some call even 'miles' standard - but even iterative insisting won't make it true. ~*~

danoschek: Except for a few remaining glitches, and with the notable exception of the doubling cube, the rules played here are the standard international tournament rules.

I derogate that so called standard ...
here you got to play according to our standard rules or
to stay out of the standard tournaments - fully free choice. ~*~

Vikings: No mention of that rule at the following rules site: http://www.bkgm.com/variants/AceyDeucey-American.html

However, I'm willing to bet that there are many, many variations of acey-deucey that can claim legitimacy. There is no international standard for acey-deucey as there is for backgammon, I don't think.

danoschek: I think I'd rather not play that rule. It eliminates choice and makes the game almost robot style when bearing off. At least it seems that why just from hearing you guys describe it. Kind of like being forced to trump in Pinochle. It doesn't seem like a good rule, but it is what makes Pinochle the game that it is. Perhaps, I'll try this other bearing off rule and see it makes the game better for me or just different. It will certainly affect the strategy toward just about having all of your checkers home. I could see delaying getting the last one or two just to advance some of the others in before you get them all in. Sometimes I want to move an interior checker and others I'd bring the higher point in.

Vikings : I've never heard of playing Acey-Duecey that way. Least way the few times I've played we didn't do that. Next time I talk to my brother I'll bring it up and see what he says. Amazingly I've never played him Acey-Duecey or Backgammon and likes both games. I suppose I'd better get me a Backgammon set, eh?

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

that is the rules for bearing off in acey-duecy

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 ... ~*~

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
~*~

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.

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: 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.

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: 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?

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: 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?

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
~*~

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

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?? ;-)

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...

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

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 ... ~*~

Just pointing out the source of the problem.

grenv: Just like you just did?

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

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

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. ~*~ .

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.

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

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

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."

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

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.

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: 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.

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: 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.

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?

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?

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.

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.