Argomento: Re: Distribution in round-robin tournaments
playBunny: And in the round-robin tourneys the method is to take the list of rated players and spread them through the groups by going down the groups and then back up and then down again, etc. Our 8 players in a three group round-robin would then be 1-6-7, 2-5-8, 3-4 (or 1-6, 2-5-7, 3-4-8).
pentejr, alanback: The way they work is that the players are ordered by rating and the list split at the midpoint. The players on the two list sare then matched against each other. In an 8-player tourney, for instance, it would be 1-5, 2-6, 3-7, 4-8. This prevents the lions from killing each other too early in the game.
At Vog, where any number of players are allowed into these tournaments, not just a power of two, there is a bye for the top 2^whatever players and the very lowest rated must play to get through to the second round. Because the topmost players have had this bye and are in the second round they will then be paired 1-2, 3-4, etc, even though it's their first match of the tourney. (That's just to let you know how it works elsewhere should you encounter it. There are only power-of-two sized tourneys here, so that situation doesn't arise.)
Where does it tell us that there is seeding in these tournaments, and if it exists, how is it determined? I would guess that Czuch is telling us it is based on rating at the time a player signs up, rather than at the time the tournament starts?
I have moved to the top of the Hypergammon standings . . . I am amazed to find myself #1 in Hyper and Race, #2 in Back and Nack, # 10 in Crowded -- and I know I'm not that good!
Will someone take a look at this game and tell me about Sergeys last move here?
He is ranked quite high so I assume he knows what he is doing, but to me, since he doesnt have to gammon me why would he take such a chance on this move? It seems to have worked out for him, but I was surprised he didnt just cover up and go from there? to leave me with a chance to hit him back and even get a 6 1 seems really risky to me. But maybe thats why I dont do so well at this game? Thanks for your input!
playBunny: will test out escaping and defensive moves, and pay attention to the results :)
i will have to make a mental list of which blots are important and which arent :)
i know the 5 and 4 point in my own home are very important, i like the 22 point in my opponents home, i like the barpoints close to my home.
but thats about it :)
i will also have to learn the differences between playing GG and GS as i only play it as defensive and offensive, but i play most often too offensive, so even in GS i might be offensive :)
Hrqls: Grabbing your opponent's 5-point or barpoint is a strong defensive move but escaping is generally better.
That's about it at the start for GS and GG. but throughout the game you'll be thinking about the blot, preferably blots, that you're wanting and you'll be prepared to take greater risks to obtain those blots, unless that strategy become inapplicable.
A prime game is where both sides have a blockade, preferably a 6-prime and each has men trapped. The loser tends to be the one whose blockade crumbles first so timing is very important. If you get big dice and establish a prime but without having escaped your backrunners then find that they're boxed in, you'll also find that your opponent has got midfield blots to soak up a few dice rolls while you have none and must crush your prime.
a blot on 18 is bad, but what if my opponent rolls 6+1, he will make the 18 point no matter what, so missing those 7 steps and being send to the bar with his home open isnt that bad, but i will have a chance to grab the 18 point if he doesnt roll 6+1 (or 3+3) and i will roll a 6 (or 5+1, 4+2, 3+3)
i dont understand much about going for gammon or gammon save .. the only part i see (so far) is that with gammon save you have to escape with your backmen, and with gammon go you will have to block your home :)
Hrqls: "Gettin' the hell out of Dodge City" is a cowboy expression for getting away from trouble, in this case it's Marshall Opponent packing a loaded 6-point.
I always run with the 11-roll. It's a banked asset compared to stopping at 18 where the blot sits trembling in fear of being clobbered. When going for gammon you want to avoid a prime vs. prime game and escaping your men is part of that.
Variety is an excellent reason to try all the different openings and the robots will probably take 100 years to understand that one. ;-)
playBunny: 'dodge' is the possibility to being trapped in your opponents home ?
what if you try to play for a gammon .. dont you like to hold your backmen back a bit and build in your home first ? would that increase the possibility of 24-18, 13-8 ?
i still try it once in a while though as i dont like standard openings all the time :)
Hrqls: Aye, you get all that and it's still not as good as gettin' th hell out of Dodge.
It's your choice, really. The difference in the rollouts is -0.039. The factory settings for GnuBg don't even classify it as an error. Doubtful moves start at -0.040. But for me, given that I start Doubtful moves at -0.008 and Bad ones at -0.050, it's clearly a weak move.
everyone always plays 24-13 when they get 6+5 as opening roll, and all roll outs show that to be best as well
but what about 24-18, 13-8 ? that way you can develop your backmen a bit, make sure there wont be a block around 18, and you have a nice setup at 8 and 6 in case you roll a double or just to block your home
DragonKing: Given the choice I'd recommend without. Get a good understanding of chequer play first. Part of the use of the cube is to terminate games so that you don't risk the percentage of losses that exist at that point unless you opponent is willing to pay the price. Without the cube you'll be playing into those situations and thus learning about them.
I spent 12 or more months on chequer play alone before I took on the cube. It worked for me. Others who did both, well it'll have worked for them, too, lol. But I'd say the ASAP aspect precludes the cube. I'd imagine that overall progress will be slower if you're advancing on two fronts.
Hrqls, grenv: I agree. You accept a double because you have reasonable chances of winning more than you lose by dropping. Very unlikely in this case. You'd have had to hang on while he emptied his table and meanwhile you'd be destroying your own. You wouldn't have been able to contain any blot that you might have hit.
Hrqls: Taking the double would have been a major mistake.
Looks like he's going to win a single anyway, very little chance of a gammon. Some small chance you could come back and win though so doubling is probably correct.
Hrqls: how can i search through more than 10 posts ?
There's a search box to the right of the message box. Stick in a keyword - something that you're likely to have said and hit the button. (In fact it takes regular expressions if you want to get fancy - and that probably really confuses people who use RE characters without realising!)
playBunny: hmm i had a nice game in which my opponent had a lot of pieces off already and me trapped .. but i still won the game .. i think i showed it on here .. but i dont remember with whom i played the game or when .. i will see if i can find it back :)
Does anyone have any particularly memorable games - because of something spectacular, or very unusual, or that seems like a good example of some strategy or tactic. Examples of the former would include incredible dice, games where all of your blots get hit but none of your opponent's. Examples of the latter would include blotfests (early fights which result in a Nackgammon-type situation), blitzes, prime building, back games.
I'm going to add a section to the Backgammon Links for such games. The more the merrier.
playBunny + Hrqls: I leave for one day and this board gets off track . . . who knew that a backgammon board would get into hypothetical geneto-biology. ;)
playBunny: lol! isnt there a difference in smell between male and female ? i should ask the mosquitoes, they always pick my gf first :)
(but she isnt blonde ... so maybe its not the sexe but the color ?)
DragonKing: Yes the stratergies are very different. Though the dice will decide if you play an attacking game or defensive. Best way to find out is to play, you'll soon notice different ways to play.
If the rules to Backgammon and Nackgammon are the same- I assume that the correct strategy for Nackgammon is slightly different from a godd Backgammon game- because of the two extra chequers? Are there any general principles for Nackgammon that differ from Backgammon. (I finally noticed I can set GNU to play Nackgammon.)
playBunny: I agree it depends on the position, and what knowledge you gain, however I would err on the side of caution if you aren't sure.
pentejr Yes, the %age changes slightly depending on the match score, but not as much as you might think. You also have to account for gammons either way so a simple percentage is not useful until both players have borne off.
What you need to do is work out the chance of winning for each match score (there are tables) and figure it out from there.
So in a 9 point match, ignoring gammons, if I refuse my chance of winning from 0-1 is about 44%.
If I take the double I will either be at 0-2 or 2-0. The chance of winning from 0-2 is about 37% and, conversely, from 2-0 is about 63%.
So if my chance of winning the first game are currently x, then my chances of winning the match if I take are .37(1-x)+.63x = .37+26x
So to equalize to teh 44% chance if I drop, then .44 = .37+.26x
.26x = .07
x = .07 / .26
x = about 27%