Even that doesn't last long, and any given day can only be used once

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.

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

Yup, very few free rides in this life!

redsales: true .. it was the main reason why i bought my rook membership (it doesnt cost much) .. so i could play more games .. even if my opponents wait a bit .. and so i could join more than 1 tournament :)

(and of course so i had access to the graphs .. which were just added then and managed to pull me over the line ;))

Hi !
I do agree.
My blocked players list gets longer,,,,

I'm so sorry for my slow play but it's difficult to change this.......
Specifically about wayney:
Yes things was exactly as you described, but you should know this: I remember the situation: i was at university and in a class with a PC in front of me. And i was stealing some time playing games here, when my teacher was leaving(of course i should make different things). But many times (and this is one of yours) i was about to play a move while at the same time he appeared. So i have to quickly close the window and leave.......

You spoke about bad sportsmanship, but what really i could gain if i will deliberately delay the game.......?!?! Waiting for the end of world perhaps....? But even then i would not win the game.......! I'm not an idiot. I can accept the loss........And that was not such case

Walter described the situation perfect! Some Pawns that only have 10-20 games expect from their opponents to play quick. But they should think deeper.......... Just look at my main page and try to find your game. It's a complete chaos!!!!!

Walter you were worng on one thing: I don't study our game a lot, i don't even look for more than 1 minute..... If i spend even 5 minutes studying each game, then i will have to spend 5·50 = 250 minutes = 4 hours per day at Brainking. Clear madness.......

Personally, I believe the madness is playing 350 games at the same time. How can you maintain context, or even care about the outcome of the game?

And the worst has yet to come. I calculate around 130 new games are coming from my signed tournaments in the next 2 weeks......
But it's not so difficult to handle as you think. Try it.......!
Of course the consequences are compains about slow play. But i'm improving...........

I don't have any interest in handling it. I believe it to detract from the enjoyment. I actually like caring about my games and putting a little thought into them.

Also I am never short of moves to make, even with 30 games going so why would I bother with more?

you can't sggest that because people have more than 30 games going that they don't care about them. I care about all of my games, ok im not the best games player, but i take the same amount of time thinking on nearly all of them.

Chessmaster1000: I just wonder how many people actually believe Chessmaster's comments?
Not too many I suspect

???? Why NOT believe him ?????
Jeez.

i understand his reasons ... i also play in secret some times .. mostly play from work .. sometimes outside the breaks .. i often have to hide my window as well .. and sometimes have to close it at once

therefore i always try to have more than 1 day time for my first game to time out .. even better would be 2 :)

my number of games varies between 100 and 200 .. now working towards 100 again ...

its easy to play a lot of games of backgammon and variants ... thats why easily join those tournaments .. i hesitate a bit more about froglet/reversi types ... and dont even dare to try chess and variants much ;)

i dont need 350 games to have a nice number of games waiting for me ... but i think i will be lacking games to play when i am below 100 games
for me 350 games would be madness for sure .. but al depends on the types of games started .. and the skill of a person in the games which he did join

wayney:
He,he. I don't care if you believe me or not. I just say what has happened....... I don't ask you to believe or anything like that....

Anyway if you want quick play then after our game i will not participate in tournaments where you join and not the opposite, not because i hate you or i've been insulted (No! I never feel that way..) but because i don't want people to have problems with me. Or perhaps i will do one other clever thing: Play faster.........
I don't really know. For the moment i would not join on any more tournaments as more new games will not be easy to handle anymore although this makes me feel bad...........

Actually as long as you play within the tourmament's game limit I don't think it should be a problem. The biggest problem I have are the people that are actively playing but still using up auto-vacation days because they can't get to all their games. I think this is an indication of having too many games going. Since Chessmaster hasn't been doing that we can't really complain i think.

oh yes, i agree if you can't make all the moves in your games in the time limits its ridiculous playing that amount, but i can get through 250 -300 fairly easily within the day

in defense of Chessmaster, he is an honorable opponent and extremely talented many variants. I think he may have got himself in over his head with all the games he's playing. I played him first when I was a pawn and he annoyed me to hell. But after awhile, I realized it wasn't just him and, like grenv, I only take games with under 3 day/move limits. It could be a lot worse. There is a famous game on BK where one of the top ranked chess players is going to lose a game (down a bishop in an otherwise symmetrical endgame). Not only did he message his opponent saying that in revenge for having his draw offer spurned, he will move at the last minute every move in their 5 day/move game to prolong the game more than a year, but also is offering a draw every move as a further annoyance. It is shameful when so-called top players resort to those tactics. I guess you can see someone's true colors by how they behave when they lose. Chessmaster has never done anything like that, to my knowledge. So just take it as a lesson, as I did, to selectively play games with the proper time limit.

redsales: You speak soothe, my son.

here's a good example, Walter is the top rated dark player and I had lost 20 games in a row to him before I lucked out. Our chats were equally cordial no matter when he won or lost. After awhile, you get to find the right opponents. Most are good, but there are bad apples out there.

redsales: Whoever could that be prolonging the game? Shouldn't that be grounds for expulsion from the site?

- - - MODERATOR - - -

Lets get back to discussion Backgammon and Gammon variants please.

BIG BAD WOLF:
Here is something on topic:
Both players have a 31 at their starting roll in a Backgammon game and both make the 5 point of course....
The next roll is 53 for the player on turn. Should he make his 3 point or............?

Chessmaster1000: i would play 13-10 13-8. How'd I do?

Chessmaster1000:
I get so tired,,,
Why not play for the sake of the game ?
Why keep on calculating all the time = boring game.
Sorry that I spoked I must learn to keep my big mouth shout,,,

Chessmaster1000: I'd play 13-8 24-21

Blackadder Mr K: Would you make the same statement regarding chess? Backgammon can be analyzed just as chess can -- only backgammon is more interesting (to me) because of the random factor. Personally, I don't have a lot of patience with analysis; but some folks enjoy it, and I understand why.

There's an easy way not to get tired of analysis -- don't read it!

Pedro Martínez: I think we've come up with the top 2 choices, along with Chessmaster's making the 3 point. Which is best though? Probably close.

We haven't considered the match score either.

No my choice is not to make the 3 point! That would be a small(perhaps a little larger than small) mistake. I just asked as a quiz which is better. The best is "13-8 24-21" with "13-8 13-10" being a little behind. Making the point on 3 is clearly the 3d choice.....

Many novice people think that making points inside our board is always good, but there are many examples(the above was one) that this is wrong.

And even worse there is the famous Magriel's 53 starting play with "13-10 13-8" which is now believed to be worse than making the 3-point. I could say that although Magriel's recommendation is too close, making the point is stronger for various reasons and with less disadvantages.....

And even more worse, is that there were (perhaps there are) players that were slotting at the 5 point with a starting 53!?!? A huge mistake in my opinion. OK the five point is the five point but if you get hitted then you have nothing......And you have to hit again as an advanced anchor on 5 is waiting for your opponent, altough this should not be the main concern about the game.......

Chessmaster1000: Ok. Just as interesting is what is the best opening play with 6-4? It's not that clear cut as some would believe.

"24-18 13-9" along with "24-14" are the best choices in single game matches. Perhaps the best is the first but i almost always prefer the second. I'm a runner at 64.......

BUT when you are behind with 8-2 for example in a 9 point match or you need to cover a gap, then you should make the 2 point and try to get a prime. There is not other choice......So here since there are no gammons, making the 2 point is something not so desirable.......

Ah, but many roll outs show that making the 2 point is virtually equal in single matches, and better when playing for a gammon.
It suffers from possibly leading to a gammon for either side so running is best if you want to avoid a gammon.

alanback:
No , I don`t do the same statement regarding chess but I don`t like a game to be analysed to it`s death,,,
But why read analysis ?
I do try to read all because it`s fun to get angry !

Blackadder Mr K: Hey, if you don't like analysis why bother even reading this board at all? Take your anger management issues to the "silly arguments" board.

grenv
This is even to silly to talk about,,,

Blackadder Mr K: That's one thing we all can agree on ;-)

Winning streak update: 13 straight over 8 days, a 62 point gain and first place!

alanback: very nice.
Maybe you should try playing Chessmaster.
He is self proclaimed best player in the world

wayney: (Still mad about me (because i didn't play quick our game).....?)
I don't support that! I support that i'm at the same level with the best players.........Not above or below........
Perhaps i'm wrong of course......

alanback OK lets suppose what you said is true. But why? The rating page Braiking supposedly based, doesn't give any bonus for winning streaks.....So what is happening it's a mystery..........

Chessmaster1000: No mystery. If you win several games in a row, your rating goes up more than if you win some, lose some . . . It also helps that I have been playing some excellent players, including yourself!

Hmm OK, but i thought that the way your(our) BKR change, is based only on the current opponent's BKR and not on the "history" of the previous opponents you played......
Fencer can you verify that a winning strike increases the normal BKR's increasement of a win......?

<8+8+8+8+8 > 8+8-8-8+8
The individual adjustments have nothing to do with the current history, but the sum is higher after a winning streak.

The < was automaticly inserted because of the >...

But the individual adjustments is the BKR itself! So after you complete a winning strike you have a bonus......?
And what are all these 8's mean.......?

A winning strike means you have done well lately, and the rating reflects that.

Chessmaster1000: No bonus for a streak.

So you mean that "it seems to us" that the BKR will increase more after a winning streak, than if we won without any streak, so we are wrong.......

But that's not what alanback says: He says that the increasement WITH a winning streak is higher than that of without any winning streak.......
While you say that if you win 5 games in a row (=8+8+8+8+8) then you will have (obviously) more points than 4 wins and 1 lose (=8+8+8+8-8). But this is not what we are saying here..........

Whatever.

Hmmmmm OK. I understand............!