comments on instructional materials

[Robert Koca]

1) It is sometimes not clear to me what cube protocol was used
when rollout results are mentioned. Are there some conventions
I am missing?

2) One thing I've been trying to do recently is expand my library
of reference positions for over the board use. Are there any good
annotated matches available in which comments include how expert players
use these. For example, when to be in a reference position mindset and how to
adjust for differences between reference and actual position.

thanks, Bob Koca
bobk on FIBS
ko...@bobrae.bd.psu.edu

[David Montgomery]

In article <95061317...@bobrae.bd.psu.edu> ko...@bobrae.bd.psu.edu (Robert Koca) writes:
> 1) It is sometimes not clear to me what cube protocol was used
>when rollout results are mentioned. Are there some conventions
>I am missing?

I don't think there are. Nor can there be, really, as different
positions call for different approaches, and as the computer tools
for analyzing backgammon positions become more sophisticated, there
will be even more options.

I would like to encourage everyone (both here and in backgammon
publications) to specify the details when giving rollout results.
Assuming a JF rollout, that would mean: 1) identifying the program
(JF, not EXBG) and version (if there is more than one); 2) the
number of rollouts; 3) truncated or complete rollouts; 4) if truncated,
the horizon; 5) if not truncated, the settlement limit and the results
with the cube in the relevant positions, including cubeless results;
6) if a play vs. play comparison, whether the same random seed was
used for all plays (note that JF doesn't do this unless you specifically
enter a non-zero seed). All of this would really only take one
sentence, like:

"For each play I did 1296 20-ply truncated rollouts with JF 1.0, using
the same random seed for each."

> 2) One thing I've been trying to do recently is expand my library
>of reference positions for over the board use. Are there any good
>annotated matches available in which comments include how expert players
>use these. For example, when to be in a reference position mindset and how to
>adjust for differences between reference and actual position.

I haven't seen anything like this in the literature. There are only
a few references to reference positions in the annotated matches I've read
and even then the comments usually go like: "I knew this position
[reference position] was a take, and the game position looks a little
better for me, so I took."

Seems like an interesting idea, although I'm not sure if very much
in the way of general comments could be made. Beyond establishing
reference positions, an important goal is to determine for each position
what the relevant features are, and how important changing
each of them is to the correct strategy (for checker play) or equity
(for cube play). And a goal beyond that is to find categories of
positions such that within a category, the features behave in the
same way.

>thanks, Bob Koca
> bobk on FIBS
> ko...@bobrae.bd.psu.edu

David Montgomery
monty on FIBS

[USRobots]

Hi all,

I agree with bobk that a set of reference positions with
exact equities would be a valuable reference tool. As an
inexperienced player, this knowledge is the biggest weakness
in my game. I'd like to improve my cube handling without
having to accumulate years of experience!

Robertie's "Advanced Backgammon" has some reference positions,
but his comments are minimal, and he deals with money play
only. Meanwhile, "The Doubling Cube in Backgammon" might
be getting somewhat outdated, and was written before the
neural net era.

I remember that Kit Woolsey once posted the fact that most
expert players maintain a set of such reference positions.
With Jellyfish's help, it might be reasonable for somebody
to put together this type of reference book. I, for one,
would buy it, assuming it carried a reasonable price!

Thanks,
USRobots
usro...@aol.com