X to play 2-2
Bob Stringer
Match to 5. Score X-O: 0-4 (Crawford)
-------------------------- Move 5 X -------------------------
X to play (2 2)
+24-23-22-21-20-19-------18-17-16-15-14-13-+
| X O O O O | | O X |
| X O O O | | O X |
| O | | O X | S
| | | X | n
| | | | o
| |BAR| | w
| | | | i
| | | | e
| X | | O |
| X X X X | | O |
| O X X X X | | O |
+-1--2--3--4--5--6--------7--8--9-10-11-12-+
Pipcount X: 137 O: 119 X-O: 0-4/5 (2) Cr.
CubeValue: 1
Bob Stringer
In order to reply by e-mail, please replace
"NotHere" with "spamcop" in my address
Mary Hickey
Why do you keep posting backgammon problems here? Don't you feel any
need to make exaggerated claims of clairvoyance regarding pseudo-RNGs?
Or take potshots at poor Andre Nicoulin? Or maybe instead offer bets at
appalling odds under ridiculous conditions? Doesn't your bot cheat?
Here I would recognize right off that since all I get out of a gammon is
the privilege of sometimes-but-not-always denying my opponent a free
drop, and he presumably knows that too, I would just go for the simple
win without a major accident. 24/20*(2) for me, toward that end.
If he fans for awhile, I may get the gammon anyway, but in the meantime
i don't have to worry about getting schlomped by a small double, or
being forced to open up more than one blot and so give him the
opportunity to start hitting, then slide past me and win in the race.
Also, he can't win by containing my back checker if I don't have one.
What if he gets an ace point game going? I wouldn't worry too much if
he does. His timing won't be very good for it even if you hit another
of his checkers (and I would, if I got the chance). Also, he won't be
able to prepare for a later hit by making his 5 point as long as you are
sitting on it.
Mary Hickey
Irentem
options on almost any roll, and if I get hit on the 1 point, I get a
chance to enter back on the 24 or 20 point and improve my timing.
A couple of dances by O would help to bring down some help from the
13.
Setting up a block on the 20 would give O the chance to move into
his home without being hit, and setting up a better defense. I like
2 of O's men on the bar, with me available to hit from the 24 or 20.
Mark
In article <bbkk3t44mamolr3j9...@4ax.com>,
Bob Stringer
wrote:
>Hi again Bob,
>
>Why do you keep posting backgammon problems here? Don't you feel any
>need to make exaggerated claims of clairvoyance regarding pseudo-RNGs?
>Or take potshots at poor Andre Nicoulin? Or maybe instead offer bets at
>appalling odds under ridiculous conditions? Doesn't your bot cheat?
I'm so ashamed. But take heart, Mary. Now that the election of
*G*eorge *W* Bush has been confirmed, I'm looking further into the
machinations of that arch fiend, *G*ary *W*ong. I have not
forgotten about his attempts to take over all aspects of
backgammon the web. He thought he had me under control, but I
have eluded his agents by wearing a different colored speedo each
day.
>
>[analysis snipped.]
I personally thought that the "clear" play was the double hit --
24/20* 3/1(2)* Double hits are often so effective at sowing
confusion amongst mine enemies. So now we have votes for three
different plays.
I'll wait a short while further to post what Snowie says about
this. In the meanwhile, I've got a local tournament to attend
tomorrow, so I have to go rest my fingers.
Bob
Bob Stringer
wrote:
>I'd go with the double hit 24/20* 5/1*. That leave me with lots of
>options on almost any roll, and if I get hit on the 1 point, I get a
>chance to enter back on the 24 or 20 point and improve my timing.
>
>A couple of dances by O would help to bring down some help from the
>13.
>
>Setting up a block on the 20 would give O the chance to move into
>his home without being hit, and setting up a better defense. I like
>2 of O's men on the bar, with me available to hit from the 24 or 20.
>
>Mark
I thought your play was sorely tempting. In fact, so tempting
that it's what I played over the board. But at the back of my
mind I immediately regretted not playing 24/20* 3/1*.
Snowie results to follow this weekend.
Bob
Ric Gerace
> I'm so ashamed. But take heart, Mary. Now that the election of
> *G*eorge *W* Bush has been confirmed, I'm looking further into the
> machinations of that arch fiend, *G*ary *W*ong. I have not
> forgotten about his attempts to take over all aspects of
> backgammon the web. He thought he had me under control, but I
> have eluded his agents by wearing a different colored speedo each
> day.
So that's what's going on! I deduce from your secret code that what you're
saying is that *W* and the Republicans are seeking to corner the Speedo
market and appear in Congress wearing Speedos on their heads to protect them
from the death rays of godless liberalism, and that Wong is choosing the
colors. Then they'll pass a law requiring all of us to wear Speedos on our
heads with various colors identifying our political persuasion. And as a
final attempt to rein in the anti-Republican, anarchist elements of society
they'll arrest all the backgammon players. (Say, maybe they'll put us all in
the same dungeon. We could have one hell of a lifetime tournament! On the
other hand, they'll probably make us play with one die and 12 checkers, and
refuse to let us count pips.)
Who would ever have thought that a little Speedo was such a dangerous thing?
Ric
Mary Hickey
have designed an exclusive line of rainbow-colored tie-dyed Speedos for people
like yourself. Order the catalog from my Website, and I'm sure you'll agree the
prices are reasonable and the photography is...uh, unique?
BG with one die and 12 checkers? Hey, they got Hypergammon to catch on, and all
they give you is 3 checkers! Maybe you can call this perversion of yours
Hypogammon?
mamabear
Ric Gerace
kind offer. I have decided to go Speedoless into this new age, letting my
handsomely graying hair stand as a beacon in the political wilderness we are
entering. Stringer may have need of your catalog, though, and I expect he
will contact you about it. He likes to look dashing as he dashes about town
with his head Speedo. He's setting a new fashion trend.
As for the 12-checker, one-die version, you should note that one of the
strategies our new keepers will engage in is to erase, at random, an odd
number of points from the boards. It would be difficult to make the five
point or play an ace point game if your board has no five point or ace
point. But we could call it Floating Point Gammon, or Pointless Gammon. Of
the traditional game Lewis DeYong said, "Backgammon is like life." Of this
new version, it can be said "Backgammon is like political truth." Not that I
would say such a thing, of course.
Ric
--
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
Work like you don't need the money, dance like nobody's watching, and love
like you've never been hurt...
Visit me at http://www.oncapecod.net/rickgerace
"Mary Hickey" <mamab...@att.net> wrote in message
news:3A3BB75A...@att.net...
Bob Stringer
<bob...@NotHere.net> wrote:
>Your play and your reasons, please.
>
> Match to 5. Score X-O: 0-4 (Crawford)
>
> -------------------------- Move 5 X -------------------------
> X to play (2 2)
> +24-23-22-21-20-19-------18-17-16-15-14-13-+
> | X O O O O | | O X |
> | X O O O | | O X |
> | O | | O X | S
> | | | X | n
> | | | | o
> | |BAR| | w
> | | | | i
> | | | | e
> | X | | O |
> | X X X X | | O |
> | O X X X X | | O |
> +-1--2--3--4--5--6--------7--8--9-10-11-12-+
> Pipcount X: 137 O: 119 X-O: 0-4/5 (2) Cr.
> CubeValue: 1
>
Snowie agrees with Mary, once again proving the bot's prowess:
1. 3 24/20*(2) Eq.: 0.325
1.1% 25.3% 65.1% 34.9% 6.7% 0.2%
Full 3-ply, 100%.
2. 3 24/20* 3/1*(2) Eq.: 0.288 (-0.037)
1.4% 34.4% 62.8% 37.2% 10.7% 0.5%
Full 3-ply, 100%.
3. 3 24/22(2) 22/20* 13/11 Eq.: 0.276 (-0.050)
1.1% 25.9% 62.5% 37.5% 11.4% 0.5%
Full 3-ply, 100%.
4. 3 24/20* 13/11(2) Eq.: 0.257 (-0.069)
1.3% 25.9% 61.5% 38.5% 11.5% 0.6%
Full 3-ply, 100%.
* 6. 3 24/20* 5/1* Eq.: 0.190 (-0.135)
1.3% 28.5% 58.1% 41.9% 13.6% 0.7%
Full 3-ply, 100%.
!Alert! Blunder (0.135)
Note that my actual play is considered truly despicable, whereas
the one I regretted not playing came in second by virtue of not
enough gammons offsetting the fewer number of wins.
I'm always hearing about double 2-2's being especially difficult
to play. I personally never know when 24/22(2) is correct -- more
often than not, in the positions I've run through Snowie, it's not
the right play.
Here I'm persuaded by Mary's reasoning that it is correct.
Looking at it from the negative end -- the reason for not playing
other moves -- it's significant that X doesn't have anything in
the outfield to use for the purpose of immediately following up on
a hit in his inner board. After 5/1* X has no follow-up at all,
and 3/1(2)*, while putting two men on the bar, weakens the inner
board when (again) X needs too much time to get his men in place
to attack O as he comes in.
Peter Backgren
@NotHere.net says...
>>In article <3A3A5622...@att.net>, mamab...@att.net says...
>> Hi again Bob,
>> ...
>> Here I would recognize right off that since all I get out of a gammon
>> is the privilege of sometimes-but-not-always denying my opponent a
>> free drop, and he presumably knows that too, I would just go for the
>> simple win without a major accident. 24/20*(2) for me, toward that
>> end.
>
> I personally thought that the "clear" play was the double hit --
> 24/20* 3/1(2)* Double hits are often so effective at sowing
> confusion amongst mine enemies. So now we have votes for three
> different plays.
24/20* sure jumps right at you. Most be wrong as I don't find
a reason to post it here then. Probably what I would play FTF.
24/20* 3/1(2)* was the second one that came to mind but it looks weak
even with the double hit. I'd actually prefer 24/20 in that case.
24/20* 5/1* looks interesting. If I'm hit I'll probably make the 5
anyway. If O dances I might even have time to cover my 1 or get ammo
closer by before he enters with both guys. Can't find any advantage
possibly hitting additional forced blots if O enters soon with both guys
and the second guy has a bad roll. I'd bet this is the bot suggestion
since I can find so little merit in the last one I could find; 24/20*
13/11 (2).
Duplicated the situation at the end for convinience.
Eskimo
------------
Match to 5. Score X-O: 0-4 (Crawford)
-------------------------- Move 5 X -------------------------
X to play (2 2)
+24-23-22-21-20-19-------18-17-16-15-14-13-+
| X O O O O | | O X |
| X O O O | | O X |
| O | | O X | S
| | | X | n
| | | | o
| |BAR| | w
| | | | i
| | | | e
| X | | O |
| X X X X | | O |
| O X X X X | | O |
+-1--2--3--4--5--6--------7--8--9-10-11-12-+
Pipcount X: 137 O: 119 X-O: 0-4/5 (2) Cr.
CubeValue: 1
--
//------------------------------
//Remove nospam to mail directly.
//Ascended:WVPTKHSBC
//In progress:P (Illiterate Atheist)
Edward Bonaventure
colon 3A3BB75A dot D29B72B1 at att dot net":
->> BG with one die and 12 checkers?
Here's my version of backgammon with one die. The good news is that
you get all 15 checkers. Using a tie-died board is optional.
DUODECAGAMMON
=============
Duodecagammon is backgammon played with one duodecahedronic die
instead of two cubic dice. This duodecahedron-shaped die has twelve
faces, all regular pentagons, numbered 1 to 12. For whatever number
is rolled, the player may choose any combination of two numbers from
one to six that add up to that number. This allows the player more
choice than in regular backgammon.
Some numbers allow two combinations: 12, 10, 5, 4, 3. Numbers in
the middle range allow three combos: 9, 8, 7, 6. The numbers 11, 2,
and 1 are, as the English would say, hard cheese.
"Doubles," as in regular backgammon, aren't allowed. That is,
playing one number four times (in actuality, a quadruple) isn't
allowed. Instead, "triples" are allowed; in a triple all components
are the same. Thus 3 can be 1+1+1, 6 can be 2+2+2, 9 can be 3+3+3,
and 12 can be 4+4+4.
The complete list of allowable "dice rolls" is as follows:
NUMBER OF
ROLL COMBOS POSSIBLE COMBINATIONS
==== ========= =====================
12 2 6+6, 4+4+4
11 1 6+5
10 2 6+4, 5+5
9 3 6+3, 5+4, 3+3+3
8 3 6+2, 5+3, 4+4
7 3 6+1, 5+2, 4+3
6 3 5+1, 4+2, 2+2+2
5 2 4+1, 3+2
4 2 3+1, 2+2
3 2 2+1, 1+1+1
2 1 1+1
1 1 1 alone
Neither zero nor numbers larger than six can be used. (Why?
Because they're not on regular cubic dice. The only number
combinations allowed are those that could be rolled with regular
dice.)
Since all triples are in the 1 to 4 range, this system eliminates
the "big doubles" phenomenon (such as double sixes or fives) and cuts
down on the "medium doubles."
Duodecagammon was invented by David Moeser of Cincinnati, Ohio, on
April 18, 1999. Note: 12-sided dice can be found in gaming stores in
all major cities. (And this note for flamers: "dodecahedron" is the
more commonly-found form of the word. I know that but chose not to
use it.)
(Revision 2.0 = July 2000. This text Copyright (c) 2000 by David
Moeser.)
>>>----------------------------------------------<<<
>>> david moeser -- erasmus39 at yahoo dot com <<<
>>> Censornati, Ohio - USA <<<
>>>----------------------------------------------<<<
* I'm sure it's clearly explained in the Zmodem DOCs *
Banjo Bluesman
Edward Bonaventure <era...@sonnets.and.company> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.3.96.1001219212759.12866C-100000@shell1...
> The complete list of allowable "dice rolls" is as follows:
>
> NUMBER OF
> ROLL COMBOS POSSIBLE COMBINATIONS
> ==== ========= =====================
> 1 1 1 alone
>
> Neither zero nor numbers larger than six can be used. (Why?
> Because they're not on regular cubic dice. The only number
> combinations allowed are those that could be rolled with regular
> dice.)
If that's the case, wouldn't it be improper to allow a single 1? Although 1
appears on a single die, it's not a combination that could be rolled with
regular dice. Personally, though I didn't invent the game so don't sit on
the rules committee, I think I'd allow use of numbers over six to make up
for the loss of doubles. Imagine the use of a 12... ;-)
Jive Dadson
"problem". I would make the same play in a money game or in a match
game at any score.
You have a play that will make your opponent's five point in a position
where you might get primed in otherwise, and in which activity in the
outer boards may decide the game. The opponent has builders aimed at
his five point, and his seven point is already made, which is all the
more significant because you have men languishing on his one point. On
top of all that, the "Ginsu knife bonus" is that making his five point
also sends a man up against your four point board in a position where
the opponent has already escaped one back man, and your control of your
outer board is poor.
You desparately want that five point. You are in a big mess if your
opponent makes his five point. You rolled a magic number.
Jive (Who?)
P.s.
What actually happened?