My goal was to get into the top 50 in all gammon variants except anti and then start an invitational, multi-point, random gammon tournament with those 5 variants, inviting only those who were also top 50 in all 5. Even that list was very small at the time--5 or 6 players when I looked. But I'm not there yet, and alanback is leavning. Oh well.

Thad: in december we had a somewhat similar list.

i dont think the 'show subject' link worked at that time already .. and i am not sure if alanback was on this site for real already :)

anyway here are 2 posts with lists :
http://brainking.com/nl/Board?bc=26&ngi=448298
http://brainking.com/nl/Board?bc=26&ngi=448120

KotDB: I suggested those to Fencer once. He didn't seem to interested. :-(

I would LOVE to have them on my main page right between my 'Your best BKR' & 'Your best rating positions'!

Thad: Yes, it is. It's too bad BrainKing doesn't use the Glicko rating system -- we could get RDs into the mix.

Perhaps, rather than looking at BKRs directly, we should look at percentile ranks.

KotDB: Your second point is an excellent one.

I suppose you could compare each player's BKR in each game to the mean and find out who has the highest weighted average above each mean, highest deviation, or something similar.

This is getting quite complicated. ;-)

Ouch. I didn't mean to post that all in bold. If I weren't a pawn I would fix that.

Thad: Yes it would seem so, but I only skimmed the thread since so many messages were new.

But I disagree that the rating would be provisional just because one type was missing or low number of games. We need to stipulate that the games are essentially the same for this exersize.

grenv: Might I suggest the following:

BKR * games played for each variant.

Then add the total and divide by total games played.

Isn't that what I said? ;-)

Might I suggest the following:

BKR * games played for each variant.

Then add the total and divide by total games played.

People playing only one variant are therefore not punihed and a somewhat realistic BKR is reached (i.e BKR based on 25 games not counting for as much as one based on 500 games).

KotDB: Weigh the BKRs based on the number of games of each type played. That should give a decent BKR for all types. If a player has not played at least four (since that's what BK requires to have a rating in any game) games of each particular variant, then they would be unrated for purposes of this discussion and if they have not completed at least 25 games of each type, then they would be provisional. I'm not sure if anyone has completed enough games of all types, but perhaps someone else can look that up. ;-)

Chicago Bulls: No, not zero. The default BRK is 1300.

Yes, of course it's a question of definitions. This whole thread has essentially been about how to define overall strength in these five games. I've proposed one plausible quantitative definition. It's obviously not perfect; it inherits all the flaws of the BKR system, and it may have additional ones. I'm not convinced it's the best definition, but I haven't thought of one which is clearly better.

KotDB: One reasonable measure of overall strength might be average BKR across the five games. I doubt you'll find anyone who can top alanback's 2160.

And what if someone has not played 3 variants for example? We will put 0 to calculate his mean BKR value? So i don't think this is a reasonable way.....
And to measure what...? Overall strength? How do you define overall strength......?

alanback: Leaving on top? Well yes if you define top as the top 5. But no, if you define it to be number 1. If you define it as the best overall with statistics on Brainking then probably yes.....
If you define it generally then no, we don't know for sure.....

You said: "I have been in the #1 spot in most of them at one time or another in the past"
The point is: If you start reminiscing the past for successes then you are already history!

Anyway it's a shame you will leave, but oh well. You know better:-) Do you intend to return someday.....?

SafariGal: But what if no one ranked #1 in one game has sufficiently strong credentials in the others to be considered the best overall player? As it turns out, of the five top-ranked players, only arpa has established BKRs in all five games. Do you really consider 54th, 4th, 10th, 1st, and 24th better than 5th, 3rd, 2nd, 5th, and 4th?

One reasonable measure of overall strength might be average BKR across the five games. I doubt you'll find anyone who can top alanback's 2160.

SafariGal: Well, I asked for your opinion and you gave it. Thanks for your view. One reason for my posting was that I did feel somewhat deficient in not being #1 in any variant.

However, as has been pointed out, I have been in the #1 spot in most of them at one time or another in the past. Most recently I was #1 in Backgammon Race about a month ago.

SafariGal: i wouldnt be surprised if he was #1 of one of them in the past though :)

alanback: it would seem fair to me that someone claiming the "top" would at least be #1 ranked in 1 of the variants. It appears to me you are not!! So I refute your claim. Your claim is a personal assessment of yourself and others and it not the perception of others. I would consider you "very very good" at best. Far far better than I

Vikings: hehe .. he will just tumble down head first ;)

alanback: you can't leave, you aren't on top of all of your stairs

alanback: Well, I am not quite as good as you alanback, but I also hope to get there some day. I am top 30 in crowded, race, and hyper, but my backgammon and nackgammon rankings are rather low.

LionsLair: I hope I am here long enough to see you accomplish your goal!

LionsLair: dont worry, i will be there with you :)

(maybe i already was in the past ? ;))

alanback: leaving on top is a good thing, but given a little bit of time(because I haven't completed as many games as yourself) I think I can make it into the top 5-10 players in 6 of 6 of the gammon variants(including anti-)
...and if not, the level you raised the bar to will be fun trying to accomplish...

TMG is showing some of the matches live from the World Championship in Monte Carlo.

Chicago Bulls: I would amend your comment to say that eventually neither of us will care to make any claims, since we will have left ego behind; otherwise, I can't contradict you!

alanback: I'm presently in the top 5 in all 5 positive gammon games, and there is nobody who is ahead of me in two of them. Anyone else have a better claim?

I have one: I claim that there is a number of years from now that both of us will would not be able to make any more claims....
While many can question your claim nobody can do the same with mine....

I've decided to quit playing here and on Dailygammon to save time for other interests. Since I'm finishing my games and tournaments, I'll still be around for quite a while; but as I survey my standings here, it seems to me I have a pretty good claim to be the top player of gammon games (excluding antibackgammon) on the site. I'm presently in the top 5 in all 5 positive gammon games, and there is nobody who is ahead of me in two of them. Anyone else have a better claim?

Hrqls: Yes i posted my post on the Brainking board, and he said the same, but thank you anyway. Lo)

WatfordFC: i asked fencer and he told me that such tournaments (with entry fees (brains)) wont be removed over time .. they will just keep waiting until enough players are signed up

he will fix this so that the tournaments will be removed after time and when that happens then the players will get their entry fees returned to them

WatfordFC: ah ok ... then i dont know either .. good question :)

Hrqls: The brains are deducted as soon as you put your name down for the tournament.

Vikings: Yes i am sorry, i didnt explian it correctly, yes your correct , i was talking about a non-started tournament.

Vikings: lol .. neither do i .. even the 2 of us combined have zero brains ;)

Hrqls: don't ask me, I don't have any brains

Vikings: ah! thats true .. never thought about those tournaments which dont start :)

when does the player actually pay the brains ? when the tournament starts or when (s)he signs up ?

Hrqls: I think that she is talking about tournements that some people sign up for that never get enough people to start and eventually time out on the tournement page

WatfordFC: when doesnt a game go ahead ? does a game ever stop without giving a winner & loser or as a draw ?

If you sign up to a game where brains are required for the entry fee, and the game doesnt go ahead, do you get your brains refunded?

we made many moves per day.. .lol... took a lot less than 22 years.. lol ... also was over way before any action points...

grenv: I hope that you are a good mathematician who do bad sums

Matarilevich: Yes. April 12, 2052

grenv: Could you calculate the end of this match?

Matarilevich: 3 days per move x 996 x 2 + vacation = about 22 years. Good thing they moved a little quicker, but still.

WatfordFC: 996 x 2 = 1992 + win = 1997 points for $$$ Jason $$$

Matarilevich: OMG!! lol WOW

WatfordFC: Maybe Jason us Sharon 996 moves

Does anybody know what the most moves in anti-backgammon is??

grenv: Okay, I didn't consider that distinction. I was just looking a the bug list and saw a similar comment about it related to crowded. Well then, good for me :)

jryden:not illegeal as you used both dice , just good luck you could bear off.