Czuch Chuckers: I believe right now a 21 point cube games counts the same as a 1 point cube game.

Now don't quote me on this, but I believe it will be something Fencer will look at changing some time down the road, but it is not high on his priority list. Again, do not quote me on this since I'm not 100% sure.

Hyper Backgammon is a pretty quick game, so a 21 point cube match is Perfect for this game:

Hyper 21 - Starts November 5th

= = = = = =

Plus since some do not know how to play with the cube, some practice tournaments have been set up where NO BKR Ratings will be effected - great way to jump right in and learn.

Oct 20 - 5 Point Cube Backgammon #1

Oct 30 - 5 Point Cube Backgammon #2

For those of you who don't know how to play with the backgammon cube yet, I created a backgammon 5 point cube tournament where no BKR ratings will be taken - so a great way to jump in and play with the cube.

http://brainking.com/en/Tournaments?trg=11751

LionsLair: yes, the "bug" where you have to use both dice has been fixed.

LionsLair: That actually came up a long time ago when Fencer was first introducing the game. Since the cube has been added to all the gammon games (6 versions currently), Fencer did not really want to add a variant for the cube version and double the number of games. (Then the question of doing it like other sites and make 3 points cube version a different game then a 5 point cube version, etc...)

In the end, Fencer liked the idea of making the cube an additional "option" to the game rather then making it a new game.

playBunny: I never thought of that, but I believe I understand what you are saying.

That is if I resign in a game where I'm currently only in "gammon", then I would only lose the 2 points. But that might be something I do because of how my men are setup, there is a good change that I might be "backgammoned" and lose 3 points - so beter to resign and get 2 points then chance losing 3 points. (At least that is what I think you are trying to say.)

If someone has a way the rules can be writen to be beter understood, I'm sure Fencer would be happy to accept any suggestions and/or corrections.

= = = =

WOW - playing a hypergammon game with a cube, I never thought about how easy it could be to be gammoned or even backgammoned.

playBunny: Yea, I'm always for things looking as "correct" as possible even though since I've never used the cube outside of computer games, I don't even notice anything as being out of place.

But that is the purpose of these suggestions - things that would be nice if it can be done, but not neccessary to play the game correctly.

frolind: Just so I understand how it works, if I double and my opponent accepts - then the "cube" will actually sit closer to that player then myself since the other play now has control of the cube, correct?

So at the start, the "1" should be in the middle - then after that, the 2,4,etc.. cube should be in the upper right / lower right of the board?

Fencer has been good at trying to fix any "bugs" and such which mess up the game play with the cube, but I know I have a couple of other suggestions and and sure others have minor suggestions also - so as an attempt to get them all in one place, please feel free to add other suggestions so we can get a list toghether for Fencer (when he gets some extra time).

1) Of course tournaments with the cube is my big suggestion, and Fencer already said this should come at some point.

2) Would be nice to have the current score up next to the playing board instead of buried down in the "game information". Maybe next to the points, have the current "score" for each player also

3) In the "Fished games of this match" section which displays who won each game of the match, would be nice to see how many points were won in each game (without selecting each game to see it there.)

Anyone else have any "minor" suggestions.

Fencer:

WhiteTower: You can classify me as one of those programmers.

I don't think I have ever introduced a new bug while fixing an old one. (Usually I introduce MANY new bugs while fixing an old one...)

UzzyLady: If you see them, post about it here - a link to the game, and what you want to do...... That way Fencer can see it and fix it.

Marfitalu: Looks like the system currently does not see that you can bear off chips soon, and in the process - trying to make you use both your dice.

Looks like Fencer will have to add the code of "if using the smaller dice leads to a point where you can start to bear pieces off the board, then allow it - otherwise ...."

FIBS rating - good for backgammon - http://www.fibs.com/ratings.html

I just think if the move is blocked, it would defeat the purpose.

I mean if I rool a 3 & 4, then I could (BEFORE SUBMITING) test many different moves / multiply moves with all my pieces to basicly determin where 2 or more of your pices are located - and in my opinion kind of defeat the purpose of the dark part of the game.

Where as if it allows you to move there, THEN if there is 2 more more pieces YOUR piece ends up in the bar - you will then only know of 1 place (insteald of multiply) where 2 or more of your pieces are located... and come with a "cost" since my piece would be put back to the bar.

Without that - I don't think it would be very "dark" nor very different then normal backgammon.

Here is my suggestion from June 2003 (Sorry Nof - I claim naming rights!):

http://brainking.com/en/Board?bc=26&ngi=16070

which was:

1. Dark Backgammon Race (or Regular/Nack/Crowded?)
- Basicly just like regular backgammon. You don't see ANY place that you don't have your own piece, so you will never be "blocked" and allowed to move to any place.

Now when you move to a place that is open, your piece stays there. If you move to a place that only has 1 opponent piece, you take it like normal gammon. If you move to a place that has 2 or more oppenent pieces, your piece will be placed back to the bar like it was taken out.

So this game would involve a lot more strategy - making you want to set up many places of 2 or more pieces to take away your opponents pieces when they land on you.

I believe this would be better as Dark Battleboats Race. Also I'm debating if it would be good to hide the opponents dice or not.

alanback: It started on Feature Request board - suggested to continue it here. I was thinking we talked about it before.

Vikings: Yea, but that would defeat the purpose of "hiding" your opponents pieces. I mean if you know you can't move a piece to a certain place, then you would know where at least 2 of your opponents pieces are. (And with a lot of trial-error before you submit, you could learn a lot.)

I think if there was going to be a "dark backgammon" version, then if you place 1 or more of your pieces on a space that already has 2 or more of your opponents pieces, then your pieces should end up on the bar. Then you will only know after you submit of 1 place where your opponents pieces are, and lose position because of it.

playBunny: see... this is why there is no point to have this debate again.

It is against the official rules of backgammon

--- AND ---

It is current allowed on BrainKing with their current rules & limitations.

So even though you may lean towards one side of the debate then the other, other people are going to disagree - so depending on what side you lean towards is if you think it is cheating or not. (So again, there is no correct answer to the debate - except that it would be nice if Fencer corrects the rules and then states that those are the rules for now on.)

playBunny: Is there any reason to have this debate again?

Marfitalu: Just search back - that has been debated many times before here.

It is of course against the "official" backgammon rules that you should move with both dice if possible.

But it is a known problem on BrainKing that it is allowed - so some have said since it is allowed, it is OK to do on here. Other say that even if it is allowed, to be true to backgammon - you sould not do this.

Which is correct? Well like I said, read back and check out the debate... both sides are correct in a way. :-)

My personal feeling: Cheating? No, I would not call it cheating - unsportting - possible. But then again, you have to assume that the person was paying attention and knew there was another move to make. I've done the 1 move thing without even noticing until after it was pointed out to me. When I'm playing quickly, I spend about 10 seconds looking at each board as I move... so it is an easy thing to not notice.

Pedro Martínez: Looks like the time had not even started to count down in the games with Basic01 - unless I'm missing something, maybe that is something you need to add to the Bug Tracker.

Czuch Chuckers: You might want to look at my reply on the tournaments board if you have not seen it yet.

how it is setup, it could take up to 4 hours - and more then 5 people signup, then add up to 5 more hours to it.

wayney: Well about 2 hours sounds right. The opponent has an hour, and he had an hour - the other person used almost all their time also along with chuck - so a total of 2 hours is about right.

I don't think any games took (much) more then 2 hours.

You would have to ask Fencer the exact times, but like Czuch said - I'm sure there is a script that runs every so often which "time out" games which are past their limits.

I don't think it is every hour - maybe every 5-10 minutes? Again, that is just a guess.

I was watching the "live" games and did notice that a couple of you were at 0 minutes left - but even still without them timing out, it looked like the tournaments worked very well - and pretty quick.

The tournament will actually start about an hour after the deadline time is reached.

Since at the start time, the tournament is put into the "waiting" mode. Then 1 hour later, the tournament will be created.

wayney: There is currently a bug similar to that in the bug tracker:

http://brainking.com/en/ReadBug?bgi=411

Actually if you wanted - you should add your game to that list.... to give Fencer another example to look at which might help fix the bug.

pgt: That is an interesting idea I have not heard before, and it seems like it could be an good idea. Will have to think about that some more.

bumble: Yea, Fencer talked about it - not sure how high it is on his list. Something like removed from the ranking list after 2 months (Pawn) or 3-4 months (Knight & above) - or something like. Of course play one game, and back on there - but at least keeps the player active a little bit.

Czuch Chuckers: Actually someone once told me that is was a very good strategy to "control" your own 5 space (in your home area) - and what Pedro posted, it sounds like gnubg agrees.

Myself, I would not do that. What I would do is spilt up the double and control 2 areas - for example in your games Czuch, instead of your move, i would have moved 2 pieces from 12-16, then moves 2 other pieces from 19 to 23.

Czuch Chuckers: I would probable make a move like that.

How I see it, your opponent is probable going to put you on the bar for awhile where you get to sit and do nothing. So now, hopefully you will get some moves in with him sitting on the bar - hopefully putting you in a beter situation in the end where a quick run can still keep you in the game.

Oh, and in case anyone wants to look at all current games:

http://brainking.com/en/StartedGameList?bms=0&tp=25

Honorable mention (still going):

http://brainking.com/en/ShowGame?g=560197

And even a little longer then the one in the previous post (still ongoing also):

http://brainking.com/en/ShowGame?g=751978

Still going:

http://brainking.com/en/ShowGame?g=370322

From what I understand, unless someone really comes up with a good reason not to do it..

I think his plan is to just introduce the new option to use a cube in the current backgammon game (and then hopefully in Nack, Race, Crowded, and Hyper) - where a user can choose to play a cubed game for something like 3-21 points.

So at this point, I don't think there is going to be 2 "versions" of the games - just an additional option to the regular game.

Anyone have any suggestions or comments? Post them now so Fencer can read them! :-)

Just so I make sure I have this correct, here are the current "problems" with the backgammon game.

1) If a player can, they have to use both dice. If that requires him moving a certain piece first to make sure the 2nd dice can be used, it must be done. If a piece can be moved to block the use of the 2nd dice, that move should be forbidden so both dice are used.

2) If A player can only use one of this dice, but has a choice of which dice to use - they must use the higher of the 2 dice.

Is that correct or am I missing anything?

Here are some notes that I wrote up awhile back about the double cube. If you see anything below that is wrong, or needs added - please let me know!

= = = = = = = = =

Some random notes about double cube:

Good match point games would be 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 15, 21


Scoring:

1) Winning a single game is worth 1 point.

2) IF you bear off all your men BEFORE your opponent has borne off any, then that is called a "gammon" and you score double points (2 points if cube is still on 1)

3) IF you bear off all your men and your opponent still has one or more men either on the bar or in your home area (6 places nearest where you bear off), then that is called a "backgammon" and you score triple points (3 points if cube is still on 1)

NOTE: As long as the person has borne off 1 man, even if now some of their pieces are on the bar - it is NOT considered a gammon or backgammon - since at least 1 piece had been borne off.



Double Cube: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64

1) Either player can decided to offer the first double (to 2 points) At that point the opponenet has the option to accept (bringing the game worth to 2 points, or decline - and forfeit the current game for 1 point. If they accept, then only the opponenet will have the option to re-double - bringing the game total worth up to 4 points, if their opponent accepts.

2) Double cube is NOT AN OPTION on the very first turn. So if a person wins the "roll off", they do not have the option to offer the double. The person who lost the roll off will then have first option to offer the double.

3) If a person is 1 point away from winning, there is NO POINT in asking them if they want to double - since 1 point will win the game for them. (IYT still asks if they want to double at this point and it annoys many many users!)

4) When the double cube reaches the point where it will win the game for a person, there is NO POINT in having the option of doubling anymore for the player. So if it is a 5 point match, and the cube jumps to 8, then there is no need to offer it anymore.



Crawford Round:

1) If either player reaches a score which is only 1 point away from winning the match, the next game is played as a Crawford Round. In a Crawford round, the double cube is NOT USED and the winner will only score the standard 1 point. Crawford Round only last for 1 game. After that 1 game, the double cube can then again be used for the rest of the match.



Other Things needed:

1) Need a way to resign game for MAXIMUM cube value without resigning the game (to help speed things up) So if I still have men on the bar and try to resign, it would be for 3 points. If I had not borne off any men and resign, it would be for 2 points. If I have at least borne off 1 man and resign, it would be worth 1 point. (values are for when cube is still on 1)

So possible when they try to resign a game, a "are you sure - this resign will cost you X points" should come up so they don't think they are resigning just 1 point when they may be resigning 2 or 3 points.


2) Need a way to resign COMPLETE MATCH


3) So basicly when the turn comes to a player, they will have the options to: Roll Dice, Double Cube, Resign game (for current max value), or Resign complete match. Plus I guess the current options of a draw of complete match would also be needed.

= = = = = = = = =
Plus if you scroll back far enough, Alanback made a pretty good post about the subject, which I'll repost here:

A doubling cube is an object used to record the current value of a game that has been doubled one or more times. It's shaped like a die and has the numbers 2, 4, 8, 16, 32 and 64 on its six faces. A player who wishes to double the value of the game picks up the doubling cube before he rolls his dice, and offers it to his opponent with the side labelled 2 facing up. If the opponent accepts the double, he "owns" the cube and places it on his side of the board. The owner of the cube can choose to double at any later time when it is his turn, before he rolls the dice. He would offer it to his opponent with the "4" facing up. The original doubler then owns the cube, and can double again on his turn, and so on.

Here is an explanation of the doubling cube and of gammon and backgammon from Backgammon Galore!

I forgot to mention in an earlier post that multipoint matches would require the system to recognize gammon and backgammon as well.


Doubling
Backgammon is played for an agreed stake per point. Each game starts at one point. During the course of the game, a player who feels he has a sufficient advantage may propose doubling the stakes. He may do this only at the start of his own turn and before he has rolled the dice.
A player who is offered a double may refuse, in which case he concedes the game and pays one point. Otherwise, he must accept the double and play on for the new higher stakes. A player who accepts a double becomes the owner of the cube and only he may make the next double.

Subsequent doubles in the same game are called redoubles. If a player refuses a redouble, he must pay the number of points that were at stake prior to the redouble. Otherwise, he becomes the new owner of the cube and the game continues at twice the previous stakes. There is no limit to the number of redoubles in a game.



Gammons and Backgammons
At the end of the game, if the losing player has borne off at least one checker, he loses only the value showing on the doubling cube (one point, if there have been no doubles). However, if the loser has not borne off any of his checkers, he is gammoned and loses twice the value of the doubling cube. Or, worse, if the loser has not borne off any of his checkers and still has a checker on the bar or in the winner's home board, he is backgammoned and loses three times the value of the doubling cube.

Walter Montego: I was talking to Fencer the other day about this.

What he would NOT like to do is create a different game for the (Pro) "cubed" gammon games - since it would take more stats and stuff, plus it would just multiply into a version for the other gammon games (Pro Nack, Pro Race, Pro Crowded, Pro Hyper.)

What he was thinking if I understand it correctly, is just add a new option for the current backgammon game.

Option like: Points using the cube: (3-21)

That will go along with the current non-cube options of: (1)Normal game (2) wins match (3)points match (4) games match.

Doing it this way will make it more easy to add to each game type rather then having to create new games.

= = = = =

My suggestion is if it is done this way, is if possible, put the point total next to the name (So instead of just saying "Backgammon", mabe have it say "Backgammon (5)" - meaning it is a 5 point using the cube match.

Plus look on the bright side - since he held up losing all his games, his rating will be worse then if he would have lost the games in the first place - so they are only hurting themselves & their rating.

- - - MODERATOR - - -

Lets get back to discussion Backgammon and Gammon variants please.

Chances are, yes. You (higher ranked player) will lose more points on the lost game (to a lower ranked player) then you will gain winning a game (against a lower ranked player)

Beraun: I agree with Hrqls - and when you see someone resign instead of win, and when you see moves that will not hurt the other player - I would suspect that the 160 out of 167 wins is a little tainted.

HyperGammon

So far, after 50 games it is pretty even.

White won: 24 games

Black won: 26 games

Without a cube, luck would play more into a game - but like furbster said - would probable be just as fun without the cube.

One of the reasons I suggest Hypergammon is that is uses the same rules as regular backgammon, so little new programming would be needed.

Some other Gammon variant suggestions I have, but of course each would take more programming and such so would be more time to make are:

1) A mix between Tabula gammon and Russian Gammon. Basicly like "race", all pieces start off the board - BOTH players race the same direction around the board, bring in their pieces in the same area - can only move their pieces 1/2 way around the board until all of their pieces have entered the board - 2 dice only - no special double rules - rest of the rules like current gammon/race rules.

2) Domino-Gammon - I have since seen some other versions talked about, but linked are the rules that I have made up for the game.

Just curious, how many would find a game like HyperGammon a good addition to this site?

HyperGammon: http://www.bkgm.com/variants/HyperBackgammon.html

Basicly just like normal gammon, except each player only has 3 pieces.

= = = = = = = = =

Someone (CurbYourEnthus) made 2 accounts - played 25 games of backgammon race, played the 3-4 moves to get a rating, and moved to the top of the rating list. Back in October, it was mentioned to Fencer - and Fencer banned all the accounts involved. I believe Fencer was going to remove this person from the ratings list, but either forgot or has not gotten to it yet.

I suggested something like this at some time... somewhere.

Basicly my thoughts are you can see your opponents dice, and that is about it.

Basicly played just like regular backgammon, with this additional rule:

If you move one (or more) of your pieces to a space which has 2 or more of your opponenets pieces, YOUR pieces get sent back to the bar. (Since you can't see your opponents pieces, this is a possibility)

I think it would be fun with regular backgammon, but I think it would be even more fun as Dark Backgammon Race.

The only time a person passes is on the first roll - and that is only if they lose the roll. (That is each player rolls 1 dice - high dice goes first, so if your opponenet gets the lowest dice, they have to "Pass" to you so you can start.)

win more game