Luke Skywalker: Yes, this argument about the superiority of the metric system goes wearing upon me. Though I am one of the few people that can multiply 16 X 12 X 5280 in my head or use a calculator, I see no reason to. Looks like a little more than 960,000, make it 1,013,760. And before you whip out how many millimeters in a kilometer to show how easy the metric system is, just how often would one need to make such a calculation in real use? Let's take something a little more practical. Exactly how much is a third of a yard? A foot? A meter? See, we usually only use three decimal points, but in the standard system a lot of fraction are eliminated because it has so many prime divisors. Even the mile can be divided evenly by 11! Which will give you 480 feet or 160 yards. Try that in your metric system.

Mike UK: Alberta, Canada used to use the Imperial measuring system, but since they went metric they now use the U.S. gallon! Such confusion when I go there. Took me awhile to discover that the fluid ounces of the Imperial system and U.S. standard are not equal. Then there's miles per liter instead of miles per gallon.

I believe the metric system has been the standard of the United States since the 1880's, yes 1880's. Amazing how fast it's been adopted by us regular people. The metric system is no better than what we have now and has a lot of drawbacks, why change?

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?

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.

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

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. :)

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.

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.

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.

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.

BIG BAD WOLF: A draw is not a possible outcome of a game of Backgammon and I believe should not be allowed under any circumstances. I feel the same way about this in Keryo Pente too.

As for resigning a game. As it is played now with each game being valued at one point, it doesn't matter. If gammons and backgammons are counted it will make a difference when playing a match and the match is where it takes more than one point to win it. The problem with playing a resignation as giving the opponent the maximum value would be to cause the games to continue on when a player knows he's going to lose, but not get gammoned. One of the sites listed James Hird, I believe Daily Gammon, has a way around this. When someone resigns, the opponent gets to decide on the game's value. If the resigner is asking for a one point loss and the winning player thinks he has a chance at a gammon, the resignation is not allowed or the resigner must accept the two point loss. This option should keep a moving along.

Fencer : Let me see if I have your stated intentions right.

You are going to add options to the Backgammon that already exsists here that will enable people to play with the doubling cube or continue playing the game as it is now without creating a whole new category of Backgammon called "Pro Backgammon"?

grenv: Stupid me, I just play the games. I had never thought of delaying them while losing. An interesting way to achieve a high rating, but when the crash comes it'll be a swift one. Holding the top spot is the trick. I was top for one day in Extinction Chess and am still the top rated in Dark Chess after a year. Though I think that won't be the case much longer. Still nice being the top rated while it happens. If I win a few more games my Backgammon BKR will pass my Dark Chess rating.

redsales: You speak soothe, my son.

As redsales says, it a good deal for the money if you want to play more games.

alanback: As we're both Rook members, you might not realize what happens to Pawn members when playing a Rook member that uses autovacation. I'm playing his opponent in a game of Dark Chess that has a four day time limit on it. The time has run out three days in a row now. As you say, it just adds another day to the time and doesn't time out the game. A right nice feature if you ask me, even if it can be abused. The advantage of being a Rook member is having unlimited amount of games if I choose. A Pawn member has a 20 game limit. If he's playing a few people that move slow and a few that are on vacation, that doesn't leave many games to play. Some people only log on once a week or so, so it can make for some slow games if like to play a move a day. This is why it can be frustrating if your opponent logs on, but doesn't move in your game. As I said earlier, when you have hundreds of games going it takes awhile to get to them all. Even if you play games that don't require the study that games like Dark Chess or regular Chess do, a lot of games is still a lot of moves to make. His opponent is also playing those kind of games besides Backgammon. I'm sure he studies the particular game with me a lot, though the stage it is at now will begin to move a lot easier than just two moves ago because of what has happened in the game.

I'm not sure what you mean by only being used once. As far as I know, you can use all of them consecutively until you use them all up.

alanback: That's easy to answer.

Autovacation.

wayney: I'd not be so quick to interpret it as deliberate poor sportsmanship even if that is the effect of it. He has five games going with me and he doesn't move in them when he's online either. Backgammon really should be played fast. Chess and it's variants can take more time per move than Backgammon if you want to win when you play. The solution is to not play hundreds of games at a time or to spend more time on the site making more moves. He has a lot of games going, so you might want to cut him some slack, and next time not play him. Of course, if these games are tournaments games that you're talking about, you're stuck. Having a Pawn membership can really hurt when you have some slow tournament games going.
If you have some slots open and want to play me a couple of games wayney, I usually move everyday. Seems like you and I played a couple not too long ago. Want to play a couple more?

JamesHird: Then it will show that an Anti-Hyperbackgammon game will not be playable, or will it? Does the fact that they are cooperating in keeping the game going as long as possible make a difference than if they were playing to be the last one with a piece on the board? Maybe they could play a game with that objective in mind to demostrate the feasibility of playing it Anti style?

http://brainking.com/game/ShowGame?g=695478
I just sent all three of vaiza's blots to the bar in one turn in Hyper Backgammon and I did it coming off the bar myself. Has anyone else ever had this happen? I also happen to have a point guarded in my home base, so it is possible that those blots could stay there for a turn or two.

rod03801: Instead of it being negative, as in moving backwards to normal Backgammon flow, why not have the third die as one that the player can use in either direction at his option?
As for rolling triplets, I'd just count it as double instead of triple, so it'd give you six of the number rolled. That'd still be a good roll. I'd also not count doubles using the third die, just count them when the doubles use only the original two dice or there'll be way too many doubles in the game.

grenv: That's bull, you paid the dice guy more than I could afford. :)
Lots of skill in getting double sixes when it's the only point open and you have two blots drinking at the bar and hitting one of mine one the way out.
Congratulations on your tournament win. You pulled a rabbit out of your hat with this one. I had you pegged for third place at one time during it.

Blackadder Mr K:
Regular Backgammon 19 moves no resignation all blots off, I lost the game:
http://brainking.com/game/ArchivedGame?g=594012

Hyper Backgammon after 21 moves, looks like I'm losing it on the next turn as I didn't roll what I needed:
http://brainking.com/game/ShowGame?g=600158

I'm not sure what you mean by the spirit of the game. Some games there's lots of drinking and partying at the bar, other games we just go on our merry way and pass each on the street. That's just how Backgamon goes.

All hits, all the time.
Is it possible to win in three or four turns with the right rolls of the dice? I have a game going with pgt that's already made it to move 20! Longer than some regular games of Backgammon.

I always thought Acey-Duecey was the only variant of Backgammon, and on this site it is about the only one that isn't on it! Any chance of getting it?

Hi JustTina, sounds like our game is the one we got restarted, eh? Seems to be working so far. I'll play off all my games tonight and see if the game counter has started working for that game too. See you at the game.

I would like the blots to be placed differently or mark or colored different. As the game goes along and my opponent sends me to the bar, it just heaps them altogether. Only thing is, they play differently. Some can kick it, while the new arrivals have to get off the bar right away. Can be very annoying not being able to easily tell one from the other. Is this just me, or does anyone else have a problem with the drunk blots pestering the sober ones?