Help for a novice
Alex Whitehead
I have just started looking at backgammon seriously and I was hoping
for a few pointers.
First off, can anyone recommend a good book or three discussing
backgammon strategy? I am particular interested in books with greater
statistical analysis.
Secondly, are there any good computer programming opponents out there?
Particular for the mac, though the IBM might be ok.
Thanx for your help,
-=david
Mark A. Maxson
In article <1991Aug03.0...@netcom.COM>, do...@netcom.COM (Alex Whitehead) writes...
>First off, can anyone recommend a good book or three discussing
>backgammon strategy? I am particular interested in books with greater
>statistical analysis.
I recommend a book called "Backgammon for Blood". I haven't seen this book
for years (never lend books out! never lend books out!) and the author's
name escapes me, but it's very strong on tactics and the statistical
analysis behind openings.
Best quote: "The Lover's Leap [roll 6-5, move 1-12] is well-named. It's
suicide."
Anyone seen this book, and/or particularly know the author's name?
Mark A Maxson Digital Equipment Corporation max...@subway.enet.dec.com
(212)856-3258 2 Penn Plaza 9th Floor NYC,NY "It'll have to be boneless"
The Squire, Phish
>Best quote: "The Lover's Leap [roll 6-5, move 1-12] is well-named. It's
>suicide."
What makes you say that? I prefer it in opening play, especially over the
alternatives...
--
++Christopher(The Squire, Phish); (805) 542-0336/H | Home of the 20K .plan
ch...@hypnos.calpoly.edu (129.65.62.35) 756-2005/W | Finger at your own risk!
-----------------------------------------------------^-------------------------
I hereby disclaim EVERYTHING. Flames to /dev/pooperscooper.
Mark A. Maxson
In article <1991Aug3.13...@zeus.calpoly.edu>, ch...@zeus.calpoly.edu (The Squire, Phish) writes...
The author of 'Backgammon for Blood' argues that by moving your point too
quickly out of the opponent's inner table drastically reduces your odds
of sustaining a back game. If the game devolves into a simple race, and
you're behind on doubles and large rolls, you loose this opportunity to
reclaim a win. ARRGH! Dennis somebody-or-other is the author.
BTW, I screwed up the notation - Lover's Leap is 24-13. Apologies.
Kevin Podsiadlik
>In article <1991Aug3.13...@zeus.calpoly.edu>, ch...@zeus.calpoly.edu (The Squire, Phish) writes...
>>max...@subway.enet.dec.com (Mark A. Maxson) recently informed us:
>>>Best quote: "The Lover's Leap [roll 6-5, move 1-12] is well-named. It's
>>>suicide."
>>
>>What makes you say that? I prefer it in opening play, especially over the
>>alternatives...
>The author of 'Backgammon for Blood' argues that by moving your point too
>quickly out of the opponent's inner table drastically reduces your odds
>of sustaining a back game. If the game devolves into a simple race, and
>you're behind on doubles and large rolls, you loose this opportunity to
>reclaim a win. ARRGH! Dennis somebody-or-other is the author.
So what does Mr. Somebody-Or-Other suggest one do with a 6-5 opener? When
I first started learning the game, the book I learned from stated that there
was one, and only one, sane play with a 6-5, and that was the Lover's Leap.
I haven't played backgammon at all seriously for quite a few years now, but
the game can't have changed that radically.
13-7, 13-8? 24-18, 13-8? 24-18, 8-3(shudder)? 13-2(cower)? I never seem
to recall a 13-8 that ever did me much good. And the alternatives just seem
to get worse as I go along.
--
Kevin J. Podsiadlik | "Half my brain attached to my seventh
Internet: ham...@ais.org | vertebrae, and the other half in a
| hermetically sealed jar under Jesse
Also: 71460...@compuserve.com | Helms' front porch." -- Rash Limburger
Idiot Savant
I second that recommendation, although I think the book is out of
print now- I've been looking for it for my wife for five years now...
Mark A. Maxson
[edited]
>I first started learning the game, the book I learned from stated that there
>was one, and only one, sane play with a 6-5, and that was the Lover's Leap.
>I haven't played backgammon at all seriously for quite a few years now, but
>the game can't have changed that radically.
>
>13-7, 13-8? 24-18, 13-8? 24-18, 8-3(shudder)? 13-2(cower)? I never seem
>to recall a 13-8 that ever did me much good. And the alternatives just seem
>to get worse as I go along.
>
and forgive me, but I don't want to be in the position of trying to recreate
the book from ten-year-old memory (Never lend books out, never lend books
out...), so I will not prolong the argument, more than to say his overall
objective is to point up on 5 as early as possible, and a blot on 7 is
well worth the risk in order to achieve this. A roll of six or one covers
the blot (1/3 probability), and rolls of two-one,three-two,one-one, and
three-three achieve the goal and remove the blot. Three-one achieves the
goal and leaves the blot. Four-three makes the 4 point, also desirable.
That's a lot of favorable followup material, providing you don't get hit
(which is, regrettably, almost an even probability. 6,5 is a lousy roll.)
On the other hand, if you do get hit, you've forced your opponent to
surrender point 1 in your table, it's early in the game, and you have
two men in and a third on the bar for the back game.
In the Leap, by moving a stone off 24, you abandon the opponent's 1
point and are unlikely to reclaim it. The ideal back game involves holding
24 and 22 in the opponent's inner table - you already have 24, so why give
it up on the first roll, before you can determine if you'll have to play
the back game? Suicide, says Dennis Somebody-or-other, and he is persuasive.
Don't run until you know that you can win a run.
Roughly a third of backgames will be victories. That's a lot of hope to
throw away on the first roll of the game.
Geoff Kuenning
A. Maxson) writes:
> In article <1991Aug03.0...@netcom.COM>, do...@netcom.COM (Alex Whitehead) writes...
> >First off, can anyone recommend a good book or three discussing
> >backgammon strategy? I am particular interested in books with greater
> >statistical analysis.
>
> I recommend a book called "Backgammon for Blood". I haven't seen this book
> for years (never lend books out! never lend books out!) and the author's
> name escapes me, but it's very strong on tactics and the statistical
> analysis behind openings.
>
> Best quote: "The Lover's Leap [roll 6-5, move 1-12] is well-named. It's
> suicide."
>
> Anyone seen this book, and/or particularly know the author's name?
I seem to have lost my copy, but I certainly wouldn't recommend it.
Strong on tactics? Hah! I'd sure love to get that guy in a game for
money; if he followed his own advice, I'd clean up.
The classic text is Paul Magriel's "Backgammon." Magriel is (or at
least was) a math professor and won consistently at tournaments back
when I followed such things.
--
Geoff Kuenning ge...@ITcorp.com uunet!desint!geoff
Elliott C Winslow
It was written by a Bruce Becker (or was it Decker?). It was pretty
bad. He certainly showed beginners that there was more than trying to
play safe, but some of his ideas are rubbish. Not to say that they
might not work out for a while...
By the way, I'll probably tend to speak with what appears to be
glaring authority -- I'll try to tone it down every now and then...
:-)
---
Elliott Winslow IM {uunet,xylogic}!world.std.com!ekw
(718) 429-5793 {apple,pacbell,hplabs,ucbvax}!well!ekw
Elliott C Winslow
max...@subway.enet.dec.com (Mark A. Maxson) writes:
>The author of 'Backgammon for Blood' argues that by moving your point too
>quickly out of the opponent's inner table drastically reduces your odds
>of sustaining a back game. If the game devolves into a simple race, and
>you're behind on doubles and large rolls, you loose this opportunity to
>reclaim a win. ARRGH! Dennis somebody-or-other is the author.
Sorry, 6-5 running is a big strategical advantage. Ever try to jump a
prime (see below) with *two* checkers? That's why one man back is an
advantage, because it threatens to get to *NO MEN BACK*!
As for back games -- so what? Better to think of that new checker on
the 13 point as ONE MORE MAN TOWARDS A BACK-GAME-CRUNCHING PRIME.
Of course I'm not saying it's always right to run, especially when the
opponent threatens to clobber your other guy. But it isn't there on
the opening roll.
(Def: a row of points with 2 or more checkers on them, such that
they constitute a block requiring the other side moving up to the edge
then over (with a 6 if it's a 5-prime, etc.). Of course, a 6-point
prime *can't* be jumped, and can only be "outprimed".)
u171...@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au
"The Backgammon Book" and was written by Oswald Jacoby and John Crawford.
My copy was published by Pan Books in 1975 - and at least in Melbourne
is fairly easy to get 2nd Hand.
It is especially good for the beginner being simply written, but at
the same time giving a excellent introduction to strategy and statistics.
It also contains an good history of backgammon, and a complete set of rules
for both standard backgammon and variations like 'acey-deucy'
and chouette.
The authors are well qualified both Jacoby and Crawford won several
international backgammon tournaments - and Oswald Jacoby was on the
committee that first wrote down the rules of backgammon in 1931.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Patrick Wilken
E-mail: U171...@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au
Mr.Pleasant
>It was written by a Bruce Becker (or was it Decker?). It was pretty
>bad. He certainly showed beginners that there was more than trying to
>play safe, but some of his ideas are rubbish. Not to say that they
>might not work out for a while...
I have to agree that some his ideas don't always work, but the majority of
them will allow to to wipe the floor with conservative players. At any rate,
it's a good introduction to the risk aspect of the game and should start the
reader down the path of considering moves on the basis of risk and payoff.
Anyone who reads these books just to memorize moves probably won't be helped
much by the book (and probably isn't much of a player anyway.).
--
icertainlyhopethatmycommentshavenotoffendedyouorboredyouormadeyoufeel
unconfortableinanywayifihavepleaseacceptmymosthumblesinceredeepestly
regrettedapologysohaveareallynicesunshineyhappyheyyippyhihokindaday
Peter Barbee
>>The author of 'Backgammon for Blood' argues that by moving your point too
>>quickly out of the opponent's inner table drastically reduces your odds
>>of sustaining a back game.
>
>the 13 point as ONE MORE MAN TOWARDS A BACK-GAME-CRUNCHING PRIME.
I agree. Back games are great; when you don't have any other choices.
_Every_ time you commit yourself to a back game you are offering a gammon
as your cost for losing - and with virtually no chance to get a gammon
for yourself. That's a lousy bet by my standards. And if you don't
commit yourself you're unlikely to be able to keep your home board strong
enough to provide more than a minor nuisance should you get the hit.
On Books: Has anyone read _Paradoxes and Probabilities_? I think the
author is Jacoby but the book is at home. I used Magriel's _Backgammon_
as my basic text.
Peter B
Jeffrey Spiegler
>> max...@subway.enet.dec.com (Mark A. Maxson) writes:
>>>The author of 'Backgammon for Blood' argues that by moving your point too
>>>quickly out of the opponent's inner table drastically reduces your odds
>>>of sustaining a back game.
>>
>>As for back games -- so what? Better to think of that new checker on
>>the 13 point as ONE MORE MAN TOWARDS A BACK-GAME-CRUNCHING PRIME.
>
>I agree. Back games are great; when you don't have any other choices.
>_Every_ time you commit yourself to a back game you are offering a gammon
>as your cost for losing - and with virtually no chance to get a gammon
>for yourself. That's a lousy bet by my standards. And if you don't
>commit yourself you're unlikely to be able to keep your home board strong
>enough to provide more than a minor nuisance should you get the hit.
I consider myself lucky to have found Bruce Becker's "Backgammon For Blood"
a few weeks ago at a used bookstore. In chapter 5, "Insidious Openings",
he describes why he dislikes Lover's Leap (quoted w/o permission):
The 6-5 move: For the 6-5 move, I bring two men from 13, one to
8, and one to 7.
Other authors recommend moving one man from 24-13.
This alternative is called "lover' leap," though no one seems
to know why. I pondered this for a long time, and then it
suddenly dawned on me: a lover's leap is a death jump, and
that's exactly what this is. Play this throw in this fashion,
and you are virtually destined to doom. Not only do you have
the disadvantage of breaking up your 24 point, but the handicap
of effectively immobilizing yourself: you have no flexibility.
Six men on the 13 point is a hazard; the only faintly
reasonable claim for this move is that your man is "safe."
True, but so what? Not only is this a game that will be
very hard to win, but it is also going to be very dull and
plodding, and too often you will find yourself at the bottom
of the cliff.
The move I recommend for this throw is surprising in its
statistics: here, the 7 blot can be hit in the seventeen
ways I've talked about before; six of these, you will recall,
are at the expense of what would otherwise be a strong move
for your opponent. But against this, thirty of your throws
on your next turn will make a point, and four more of them
(5-3, 3-5, 5-4, 4-5) will even make the 3 point, if you want
to cover it this early. (Only the 5-2 or 2-5 throws do
nothing.) These are very good odds in your favor, and it's
well worth making the move this way--even if the alternative
was not as bad as it is.
I've been playing 6-5 this way for a while, with good results. There
are other novel openings in "Backgammon for Blood" that are worth
examining. Becker's book emphasizes risk vs. potential payoff, and
evaluating risk in terms of what your opponent must give up in order
to slam you.
--
Jeffrey D. Spiegler |My opinions are my own, |ss...@convx1.lerc.nasa.gov
Sverdrup Technology, Inc. |<-- not these folks', |(216) 826-6705
NASA Lewis Research Center |<-- nor these folks'. |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Simon Woodhead - Technical Consultant
On 3 Aug 91 18:02:10 GMT, sc...@scotty.life.uiuc.edu (Idiot Savant) wrote:
>max...@subway.enet.dec.com (Mark A. Maxson) writes:
>>I recommend a book called "Backgammon for Blood".
>
>I second that recommendation, although I think the book is out of
>print now- I've been looking for it for my wife for five years now...
_BfB_ is ok; I don't think you can go past "Backgammon" by
Paul Magriel for the best introduction to the game and its
strategy. For more advanced players, "Advanced Backgammon"
by Bill Robertie is streets ahead of the rest.
Do any of you people subscribe to "Inside Backgammon", a
bi-monthly magazine by Bill Robertie and Kent Goulding ?
I can't recommend it highly enough. Anyway, one of the
things they do is analyse and report their findings on
backgammon programs. I won't violate their copyright by
posting their analysis of all the available programs, but
they rate "Championship Backgammon" from Spinnaker, and
available for IBM-compatibles, as the best. And it's
only US$35!
They also sell books, annotated and unannotated matches,
boards, precision dice, videos, out-of-print books etc.
To subscribe to "Inside Backgammon", mail US$40 to
Inside Backgammon
PO Box 294
Arlington, MA 02174
USA
Overseas rates are US$45 surface mail, US$60 air-mail.
And worth every cent.
No, I don't have anything to do with this publication,
I'm on the other side of the world!!
Have fun,
Simon si...@Aus.Sun.COM
Ray Ager
>
>In article <1991Aug03.0...@netcom.COM>, do...@netcom.COM (Alex Whitehead) writes...
>>First off, can anyone recommend a good book or three discussing
>>backgammon strategy? I am particular interested in books with greater
>>statistical analysis.
>
>I recommend a book called "Backgammon for Blood". I haven't seen this book
I have this book, my Bruce Becker (I think!). It's an entertaining read and
you can learn a few things. However, I agree some of the strategy is flawed,
the 6-5 opening being an example. At every tournament I've played at
*everybody* makes the Lovers' Leap.
You have to remember that "For every expert there is an equal an opposite
expert". Don't take everything you read as gospel. As your game improves you
can evaluate suggestions for yourself and decide on *your* best move. Just
because you find something in a book doesn't necessarily mean it's right.
Some moves come in and out of fashion. For example, most books from the 70's
say that making your 3-point with an opening 5-3 is wrong - too far
advanced, too early, etc. Nowadays, most people seem to do it, and it
doesn't seem to matter that much. Becker, I think, recommends slotting the
5-point. Personally, I still bring 2 pieces down from the 13-point.
Much better to understand the *principles* of backgammon and be able to
apply them (if only I could:-}).
--
Ray Ager ag...@rtf.bt.co.uk
...uunet!ukc!axion!rtf!ager
Root Boy Jim
>
>>So what does Mr. Somebody-Or-Other suggest one do with a 6-5 opener?
>>
Every time I do this, my opponent (Sun gammontool) hits my blot.
The probability of this happening as 16/36, or 4/9.
A distance of six is the worst odds for survival.
>A roll of six or one covers the blot (1/3 probability),
I can't let this go by. The probability of getting a one
on either of two dice is almost 1/3 (11/36).
The probability of getting at least a one or a six
is 20/36, or 5/9.
Even if you disagree with the author of B. for Blood's strategy,
you can at least learn how to compute the odds correctly!
As you mentioned later, there are lots of other ways to cover.
In fact, 30/36 or 5/6 of the rolls will cover.
BTW, while I often run with my back men, doing so allows free access
by my opponent to his inner table. If he can make all six points
and then hit just one of my men, well, you know how it turns out.
--
[rbj@uunet 1] stty sane
unknown mode: sane
Fred Goldrich
>I recommend a book called "Backgammon for Blood". I haven't seen this book
>for years (never lend books out! never lend books out!) and the author's
>name escapes me, but it's very strong on tactics and the statistical
>analysis behind openings.
>
>Best quote: "The Lover's Leap [roll 6-5, move 1-12] is well-named. It's
>suicide."
>
>Anyone seen this book, and/or particularly know the author's name?
>
>Mark A Maxson Digital Equipment Corporation max...@subway.enet.dec.com
>(212)856-3258 2 Penn Plaza 9th Floor NYC,NY "It'll have to be boneless"
Yes -- "Backgammon for Blood", by Bruce Becker
Avon Books, a division of
The Hearst Corporation
959 Eighth Avenue
New York, NY 10019
My copy is from 1975, can't guarantee that the information
is still current.
-- Fred Goldrich
--
Fred Goldrich
nytim!marob!fr...@uunet.UU.NET
Dave Jones
> I recommend a book called "Backgammon for Blood".
Me too! If enough people read this book and played as it teaches, I
might even come out of retirement. During the three and a half years that
my sole source of income was backgammon winnings, I really came to love
the sight of that book under an opponent's arm!
> I haven't seen this book
> for years (never lend books out! never lend books out!) and the author's
> name escapes me ...
Bruce Becker I think it was.
Thomas R. Weimer
>
> In <35...@datum.nyo.dec.com> max...@subway.enet.dec.com (Mark A. Maxson) writes:
> >
> >>So what does Mr. Somebody-Or-Other suggest one do with a 6-5 opener?
> >>
> >He recommends 13-7,13-8.
>
> Every time I do this, my opponent (Sun gammontool) hits my blot.
> The probability of this happening as 16/36, or 4/9.
>
> A distance of six is the worst odds for survival.
>
>
> Even if you disagree with the author of B. for Blood's strategy,
> you can at least learn how to compute the odds correctly!
>
surprising, and maybe some of them are just there because no one
ever does them (never underestimate the power of surprise), but in
the case of the 6-5 opening and some others, if you read closely,
much of his rationale is based on the fact that a significant
percentage of rolls which hit you are rolls which would otherwise
be very strong moves for your opponent. My vote is still out
on Becker, but I thought this particular point was interesting
(not necessarily sufficient justification, but interesting).
TRW
Elliott C Winslow
>Granted, many of Becker's suggested opening moves are a little
>surprising, and maybe some of them are just there because no one
>ever does them (never underestimate the power of surprise), but in
>the case of the 6-5 opening and some others, if you read closely,
>much of his rationale is based on the fact that a significant
>percentage of rolls which hit you are rolls which would otherwise
>be very strong moves for your opponent. My vote is still out
>on Becker, but I thought this particular point was interesting
>(not necessarily sufficient justification, but interesting).
If you go through all the responses to 6-5, you'll find a funny
phenomenon -- the rolls where the 2nd player comes out with a 6 to the
18-point to try to control the outfield (6-2, 6-3 and 6-4, and
optionally even 6-5 and 5-1 (at least that's how I play them)), that is
against a running 6-5 -- well, gee, they *HIT* against BB's play! The
rolls 5-4 and 4-3 and 3-2 might suffer a bit, but I don't think by
much.
The main flaw of the book is the assumption that you're playing an
opponent who doesn't understand the rudiments of proper strategy, for
example playing against many men back. It's the same deal with opening
6-1 played 6-5, 13-7, as per Brad Sherman's posting recently: it works
well against weaker players, but against a certain level of competency
it just makes you some 5%-or-so underdog.