Chouette Strategy
matt...@my-dejanews.com
playing in chouettes. Does anybody know of any or would anyone volunteer to
give any here? I've hardly played in any chouettes but I would imagine that
the strategy has to be different than a head to head money game in terms of
playing based on your opponents or teams strengths. I would think money
management would be an issue if you're under bankrolled. How does the box
decide who to double and who not to double? I noticed that there was a new
event at the Worlds in Dallas, a chouette tournament. How is it run? Similar
to a poker tournament or poker ring game?
Thanks, Matt
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Albert Steg
> There doesn't seem to be much, if any, published material on strategy when
> playing in chouettes. Does anybody know of any or would anyone volunteer to
> give any here?
One obstacle is that rules for chouttes vary considerably from town to
town, or even from table to table. Chouttes offer some of the most
entertaining bg situations, depending on the rules and dispositions of the
people playing.
....... I would think money
> management would be an issue if you're under bankrolled.
Possibly the most important piece of backgammon "strategy" you're likely
to hear is that if you're "underbankrolled" for your chouette, you should
either play with fewer people in the chouette or you should get into a
chouette for lower stakes. Anytime you start messing with your cube (or
checker) strategy because of a concern over the $ amount at stake, you are
*hemorrhaging* equity. If it's a take for one cube, it's a take for all
five. --It's defensible to "take some/drop some" if you are genuinely
uncertain of whether it is a proper take -- or for other reasons involving
consultation rules. But dropping cubes as a means of "money management"
is, well, a terrible way to manage your money.
Albert
Harald Retter
matt...@my-dejanews.com schrieb in Nachricht
<6smbuo$juv$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>There doesn't seem to be much, if any, published material on strategy when
>playing in chouettes.
I remember this topic captured by a chapter in "Vision laughs
at counting", by D.Kleinman, a must-have anyhow.
Regards, Harald Retter
Ian Shaw
contains one chapter about playing chouettes. I don't play them so I did not
play close attention but it went something like this:
Theoretically, cube descisions are as for money play, but:
The team often doubles earlier to put pressure on the box, who stands to
lose a big chunk of cash in 1 go. This is to induce an early drop.
The box should try to create dissension in the team. This involved tactics
such as doubling the advisors but not the captain, which can have the effect
of altering the "correct" checker play for the various players.
Any use to you? Personally, I can't see why you'd want to play a chouette
and sit around waiting to be captain or box. Why not just get another board
out and play for yourself?
Ian
matt...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<6smbuo$juv$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>There doesn't seem to be much, if any, published material on strategy when
>playing in chouettes. Does anybody know of any or would anyone volunteer
to
>give any here?
[snip]
Albert Steg
<ian....@riverauto.co.uk> wrote:
> Theoretically, cube descisions are as for money play, but:
> The team often doubles earlier to put pressure on the box, who stands to
> lose a big chunk of cash in 1 go. This is to induce an early drop.
Only against a weak box. This example highlights the importance of
playing within your means. Any competent player in the box who is greeted
with a raft of early cubes will gleefully scoop them up, beavering when
appropriate.
>..............Personally, I can't see why you'd want to play a chouette
> and sit around waiting to be captain or box. Why not just get another board
> out and play for yourself?
Well, it depends a lot on your surroundings, your edge in the game, and
how much you enjoy the company of the people you're playing with.
Chouettes can be delightfully sociable events. When you aren't sitting in
either of the "hot seats" you can be grooving on the band that's playing
in the bar, or flirting with people at neighboring tables. You can be
ordering a half-dozen oysters. All the time you've got one eye on your
cube, so you aren't wholly out of the action anyway.
Having said that, I do like to limit the chouettes I play in to four
players so that nobody spends too long sitting on the periphery.
Albert
Claes Thornberg
Kleinmann's excellent "Vision laughs at counting" deals with chouette
strategy in some detail, if my memory doesn't fail me.
"Vision laughs ..." can be ordered through Carol Joy Cole
(c...@flint.org).
Regards,
Claes Thornberg
matt...@my-dejanews.com
just seems in a chouette you might be playing the players more, rather than
assuming everyone plays optimum cube strategy. I heard from someone, while
watching a game, that the captain should be very agressive with the cube so as
to get in box as soon as possible. Is this true?
In article <asteg-03099...@asteg.tiac.net>,
as...@tiac.net (Albert Steg) wrote:
> In article <6smbuo$juv$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, matt...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> > There doesn't seem to be much, if any, published material on strategy when
> > playing in chouettes. Does anybody know of any or would anyone volunteer to
> > give any here?
>
> One obstacle is that rules for chouttes vary considerably from town to
> town, or even from table to table. Chouttes offer some of the most
> entertaining bg situations, depending on the rules and dispositions of the
> people playing.
>
> ....... I would think money
> > management would be an issue if you're under bankrolled.
>
> Possibly the most important piece of backgammon "strategy" you're likely
> to hear is that if you're "underbankrolled" for your chouette, you should
> either play with fewer people in the chouette or you should get into a
> chouette for lower stakes. Anytime you start messing with your cube (or
> checker) strategy because of a concern over the $ amount at stake, you are
> *hemorrhaging* equity. If it's a take for one cube, it's a take for all
> five. --It's defensible to "take some/drop some" if you are genuinely
> uncertain of whether it is a proper take -- or for other reasons involving
> consultation rules. But dropping cubes as a means of "money management"
> is, well, a terrible way to manage your money.
>
> Albert
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
Harald Retter
matt...@my-dejanews.com schrieb in Nachricht
<6t62q1$787$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
<SNIP>
> I heard from someone, while watching a game,
> that the captain should be very agressive
> with the cube so as to get in box as soon
> as possible. Is this true?
Hm, if you are the captain and feel to be the strongest player,
there should be nothing wrong to lose your market, if the box takes,
fine, if not, you own the box against a bunch of weaker players.
Of course the value of the cube has to be considered. For example
if you own a 16 cube and its a proper double/take, do not wait
to double the box out next move, this game has priority.
Regards, Harald Retter
Ed M
stronger players. It is an equalizer. For example, lets say there are 3
stronger players, and you. When you are in the box, you will not have the
help of the stronger players. All other times, you will. Keeping things
simple, you will have assistance from the stronger players 3/4 of the time.
This is why it is an equalizer.
Michael J Zehr
Some of his collected articles also discuss chouette strategy, for
example the "Wonderful World of Backgammon."
Chouette strategies depend heavily on the specific cube rules being
used. Some variations include how many cubes are being used, how many
cubes have to be taken in order for a game to continue, whether team
members can consult after their cube is turned, whether and when people
can buy out other people's cubes, etc.
Most of these strategies only come into play when you have players of
noticeably different skill levels. For example, if you're a strong
player on the team, with a weak captain against a strong box, when
consultation is allowed after your cube is turned, you might want to
double much earlier than usual. You then get to consult with the
captain and the box can take less advantage of the captain's weakness.
On the other side of the board, if there's a single strong player on the
team, the box might drop that person's early double in order to play out
the rest of the game against the weaker field.
There are also changes in take/drop strategies based on who is going to
be the next captain. A strong captain followed by a weak team member
might take later than usual in order for the chance of playing as box
against the weaker player, and in order to avoid being on the team when
the weaker player is captain.
Conceivably this might swing normal strategy far enough that you might
find a cube being dropped that in a one-on-one game isn't even a double!
The strategies can become more and more complex when you take into
account what the other side is thinking, tuning your strategy to your
opponent's viewpoint of who is strong and weak at the table.
Chouette playing is a different kind of backgammon, just as straight
money play is different than match play. Some people might find it more
enjoyable, others might find it less so. I personally have had many
pleasant summer evenings in a chouette in Harvard Square (Hi Albert!),
keeping one eye on the cube and one on all the people wandering past.
Happy playing,
Michael J. Zehr
Chuck Bower
Ed M <edNOSPA...@rust.net> wrote:
From a monetary standpoint, I'm not sure I'd call this situation
"an equalizer". Sure, 3/4 of the time you're playing for one unit with
three helpful(?) partners, but 1/4 of the time you're playing for THREE
units and no "bodyguard". You certainly can LEARN a lot playing in a
chou with stronger players, but don't expect to come out of it unscathed.
Chuck
bo...@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu
c_ray on FIBS
Albert Steg
> I've never played Chouette, but I have heard it is a good way to play with
> stronger players. It is an equalizer. For example, lets say there are 3
> stronger players, and you. When you are in the box, you will not have the
> help of the stronger players. All other times, you will. Keeping things
> simple, you will have assistance from the stronger players 3/4 of the time.
> This is why it is an equalizer.
Again, this depends on the chouette rules. Where there is unrestricted
consultation between the team players at all times, you idea holds, at
least somewhat. Here in Boston, as in many other towns, the "crew" can
only lend advice/guidance to the captain after their individual cubes have
turned - having your cube on "2" or more (automatic doubles excluded)
entitles you to consult with your Captain. Until somebody's cube is
turned, the captain has to "go it alone" against the box. Also, once a
person's cube is out of the game, he or she cannot consult.
This latter arrangement does place an added burden on the weaker players
-- in fact I've heard someone call it "soak the pigeon" rules, but I don't
think that's a fair charge. When consultation is unrestricted, the
strongest player or players wind up making all the decisions, and it winds
up being something like a head-up game between a few people with others
just hanging around and moving the checkers where they're told.
The non-consultation rule adds all sorts of fun dynamics to the game, such
as those Michael Zehr (Hiya Michael) mentioned in his post -- and as
someone else put it, in chouettes, you "play the players" much more
dramatically than in one-on-one action. The situations and criteria
leading to decisions are delightfully varied in a chouette. Having said
that, I believe that it's very easy to overestimate the value of deviating
from "proper play" on the basis of opponent strength. The most successful
chouette players I know just keep their head on straight and "do the right
thing" all the time. On the other hand, I tend to get into a carnival
mood when I play chouettes, and I'm sure I pay for it. (But I have fun).
I would also argue that weaker players learn the game *faster* by having
to sit in the Captain's chair and make tough decisions on their own.
Usually, after the game is over, the team-mates will point out things the
person should have done differently (at least if they aren't stingy with
their knowledge). Also, there turns out to be plenty of consultation to
learn from after cubes get turned anyway.
Albert
bshe...@hasbro.com
"Ed M" <edNOSPA...@rust.net> wrote:
> I've never played Chouette, but I have heard it is a good way to play with
> stronger players. It is an equalizer. For example, lets say there are 3
> stronger players, and you. When you are in the box, you will not have the
> help of the stronger players. All other times, you will. Keeping things
> simple, you will have assistance from the stronger players 3/4 of the time.
> This is why it is an equalizer.
Better watch your money there, Ed. Chouettes are a frightfully tough game.
You do benefit from the help of other players, at least in the most relaxed
chouettes, where consultations are unrestricted. But you pay for the privilege
because the stakes are higher than an equivalent head-to-head game. When you
are in the box (1/4 of the time) you play for triple the nominal stake. Advice
can be useful, but how much can you afford to pay for it?
Second, you lose some control over the opposition. If you play a head-to-head
game you can say "Yes, I will play this opponent, but No, I won't play that
one." In many chouettes the field is open to anyone who is a friend of any
participant, which can place you into a very tough field pretty fast.
One final thought is very disturbing: are you absolutely sure the players are
honest? If two players are colluding to defraud you, then you can get taken to
the cleaners without having any idea how it happened.
My advice is to play head-to-head against familiar opponents until you know
the ropes. It is a lot easier to walk away from a head-to-head game.
Best Wishes,
Brian Sheppard
Leo Bueno
>
>One final thought is very disturbing: are you absolutely sure the players are
>honest? If two players are colluding to defraud you, then you can get taken to
>the cleaners without having any idea how it happened.
>
When you are in the box or when you are the captain, I don't see how
the collusion can hurt you. I can see how you can be taken when you
are the crew, i.e., the captain purposefully makes bad plays. Will
appreciate additional examples.
bshe...@hasbro.com
The captain is vulnerable to the extent that he relies on advice from
teammates. If he regards them to be better players, as the original poster
did, then he can be cajoled into playing badly.
I agree that colluders cannot take advantage of the box, but that is also when
you happen to be playing for triple stakes against superior opposition. If you
have ever been in the box when better players offer you a cube in a tense
position then you know the kind of pressure that this brings on.
Once again I caution novices against thinking that playing chouettes is a
great way to learn the game at low risk. Playing a chouette *is* the most
pleasant way to lose a lot of money playing backgammon.
Brian
BTW: Watching a chouette does have the educational advantages claimed by the
original poster, and it doesn't cost a dime.
Martin Lee
>honest? If two players are colluding to defraud you, then you can get taken to
>the cleaners without having any idea how it happened.
>
used. If you speak only English, for example, and the predominant
language is unfamiliar, walk away - you never know. If all the payers
are unknown to you AND are speaking another language, then RUN AWAY
very fast! - especially if they are being very nice to you! :0)
....
,''. : __
\|_.' `: _.----._//_
.' .'.`'-._ .' _/ -._ \)-.----O
'._.'.' '--''-'._ '--..--'-`
. .'.'___ /`'---'. / ,-'`
'_\/ _<__.-._))../ /'----'/.'_____:'.
. /\ : Martin Lee \ ] 01535-670368 : '.
\_: aka \\ : '. "Look on my dice, ye Mighty,
: YLee on GG \\0831-493440 : .' and DESPAIR!"
:_______________|__]__________: .'
:.' JGS
Static IP 194.164.19.58