nabla:  I hadn't thought about the contact part -- though one would rarely resign in such a case.  Otherwise, nabla and pB have got it right.  

nabla: yes, that's how it's done. for some reason i thought the resign-function was messed up on brainking. (and never resigned in those situations) but i found an example of it: Backgammon (kd5svqJT vs. saeco)
but do you actualy lose a backgammon for a timeout even if it wasn't possible to lose one if the game was played till the end?

saeco: How is that an example?

playBunny: he resigned the game and lost a gammon. how is it not an example for the possibility to do just that?

saeco:  Because you are correct that he lost a gammon (2 pts).  The score was 4-1 before the game started and 6-1 afterwards.  He cited it as an example of a backgammon (3 pts).  He also said that the result was impossible if the game were played out, which is incorrect; gammon was not only possible, but likely.

alanback: i think i kind of missed your point. i just thought that you couldn't resign and lose (just) a gammon even if there wasn't any contact and you were clear of your opponents home. then i found the game i posted as an example for the possibility to do that.
but of course, if there is contact you can't resign and lose just a gammon.

saeco: he resigned the game and lost a gammon. how is it not an example for the possibility to do just that?

If you had agreed with me then there would have been no query but you agreed with nabla who qualified what I said with the claim that backgammon gets lost if there's still contact. It thus seemed as if you were saying that you had an example where backgammon was awarded.

Frankly I'd be surprised if there a contact-derived backgammon . I don't think BrainKing does that and I don't agree with nabla that it should do that either. If you've escaped your opponent's home then a backgammon is very unlikley. It's by no means guaranteed even with 4 men on the bar. I think the number of generously awarded backgammons simply because there's contact would far outweight any lost points from players who might have won a backgammon but only get a gammon.

saeco: but do you actualy lose a backgammon for a timeout even if it wasn't possible to lose one if the game was played till the end?

Not on all occasions. If you alredy moved a piece off the board, then you aren't going to lose a gammon I think, but if you didn't - well, then it's backgammon time. I lost 5 points in this triple gammon nack game on a time out for example:

Nackgammon (netvenus vs. Gordon Shumway)

Gordon Shumway:  You certainly should not have lost a backgammon.  Now that you mention it, I think all timeouts in Triple Gammon are awarded 5 points.  But I don't think the backgammon would be awarded outside Triple Gammon, and saeco's post is an example of that.

alanback: In this game I shouldn't even have lost a gammon... ;) Well if you always lose 5 points on a timeout I think that should be stated on the Triple Gammon rules page, shouldn't it?