What is sacsobgd ?

[mu...@compuplus.net]

Too long to be an acronym?

MK

[mu...@compuplus.net]

On December 17, 2019 at 11:20:18 PM UTC-7, mu...@compuplus.net wrote:

> Too long to be an acronym?

According to Guinness Records the longest acronym is NIIOMTPLABOPARMBETZHELBETRABSBOMONIMONKONOTDTEKHSTROMONT
(Нииомтплабопармбетжелбетрабсбомонимонконотдтехстромонт)
for "the Laboratory for Shuttering, Reinforcement,
Concrete and Ferroconcrete Operations for Composite-
monolithic and Monolithic Constructions of the Department
of Technology of Building Assembly Operations of the
Scientific Research Institute of the Organization for
Building Mechanization and Technical Aid of the Academy
of Building and Architecture of the USSR."

Apparently there are quite longs ones in common useage
the medicine, military, etc. like this:

HRCCIOSPB Human Resources Command Chief Information
Office Strategic Planning Branch

But how would you go about deciphering HRCCIOSPB if you
didn't already know what is is?

Write a script to combine initials of single words like
"Human", "Resources", "Command", "Chief", "Information",
"Office", "Strategic", "Planning" or of two-word terms
like "Human Resources", "Command Chief", "Information
Office", "Strategic Planning" or even of multi-word
terms like "Human Resources Command", "Chief Information
Officer", "Strategic Planning Office", etc.

Breaking SACSOBGD into four letter acronyms yields very
few useless options like:

SACS Structural Analysis Computer System
OBGD Office of Biomedical Graduate Diversity

Breaking it into three letter acronyms results in quite
more like:

SAC Staphylococcus Aureus Cowan
SOB Son of a Bitch
BGD Brassica Genome Database

Those would then allow numerous meaningful combinations.

Breaking it into two letter acronyms find even more like:

SA Salvation Army
CS Coed Soccer
OB Over Board
GD Graphic Display

Knowing that this is related to backgammon, I'd say BG
must be "BackGammon".

Even if unlikely, "Coed Soccer" for CS sounds a lot like
"Cock Sucker" to me... :)

While I'll be working on the rest, feel free to offer
your suggestions.

MK

[Peter Percival]

mu...@compuplus.net wrote:
> On December 17, 2019 at 11:20:18 PM UTC-7, mu...@compuplus.net wrote:
>
>> Too long to be an acronym?
>
> According to Guinness Records the longest acronym is NIIOMTPLABOPARMBETZHELBETRABSBOMONIMONKONOTDTEKHSTROMONT
> (Нииомтплабопармбетжелбетрабсбомонимонконотдтехстромонт)

In a Properly Organized Society acronyms would be pronounceable
abbreviations such as 'radar'.

[mu...@compuplus.net]

On December 20, 2019 at 3:27:02 AM UTC-7, Peter Percival wrote:

> murat compuplus.net wrote:

>> According to Guinness Records the longest acronym is
>> NIIOMTPLABOPARMBETZHELBETRABSBOMONIMONKONOTDTEKHSTROMONT
>> (Нииомтплабопармбетжелбетрабсбомонимонконотдтехстромонт)

> In a Properly Organized Society acronyms would be pronounceable
> abbreviations such as 'radar'.

You mean you couldn't pronounce it? :)

Maybe Russian speakers can pronounce the original. ;)

What the heck is a "pronounceable abbreviation"?

"Abbr." (with a period at the end) is the abbreviation
for "abbreviation". How do you pronounce "Abbr."?

I thought the rule for acronyms was "anything goes" and I
didn't know that "abbreviation" was synonym for "acronym".

How do you pronounce USBFG? Or just BG? Surely you woudn't
say "beegee"??

If "spelling" isn't synonymous with "pronouncing", maybe
those can't be acronyms in a Properly Organized Society
either?

MK

[mu...@compuplus.net]

On December 19, 2019 at 6:47:58 PM UTC-7, greedygammon wrote:

> happy holidays computerman!

A year later, "same to you" again.

Are you still googling me? After your last post that you
earsed, I did the same google search but didn't find the
whirling dervishes. Apparently google produces different
results depending on ones' location, search history, etc.

Also, to my surprise, I discovered that there is a son of
a cousin and a grandson of a cousin who now have the same
name as me. No doubt they were named after famous me. :)

It's mind boggling what can be found in the cyberspace in
these days. Kind of related to your "computerman", I found:

https://www.librascopememories.com/Librascope_Memories/1980_-_1989_files/840700%20Librazette.pdf

It's found just because my name is mentioned toward the end
of page 4, as copiable text inside a PDF, in announcing I
was promoted from Programmer to Sr. Programmer (when I was
merely twentyseventeen).

It brought back tons of memories for me and you may find a
few interesting things in it also, like the photo on the
first page, the article about the cutting edge technology
"Bubble Memory" including a space-agey photo of it. :))

Another photo on page 6, showing "submarine models in a
water-like setting". :) The rest is just small news but
a weight losing program that paid $1/pound-lost back in
those days. Were there any fat people back then?? I was
wearing Levi's corduroys with 28" waists... :(

MK

[mu...@compuplus.net]

On December 19, 2019 at 4:52:10 PM UTC-7, mu...@compuplus.net wrote:

> SACS Structural Analysis Computer System

> SOB Son of a Bitch

> SA Salvation Army
> CS Coed Soccer

Back to decyphering SACSOBGD. "Salvation Army" and
"Analysis Computer System" rang an old bell about
a bg quizz/analysis bot called "Swiss Army Software
for Backgammon" or similar(?).

Hmmm? SA=Swiss Army, CS=Computer Software. "O" may
be for "of" as used in "SOB=Son of a Bitch" above".

Add BG and we have ""Swiss Army Computer Software
of BackGammon".

Not too bad, eh? :) But I am still stumped by that
leftover "D" at the end. :( Any ideas??

MK

[mu...@compuplus.net]

On December 20, 2019 at 5:33:58 PM UTC-7, greedygammon wrote:

> ... most hits on GreedyGammon download page is from
> all parts of Turkey ...

Is your server still active with people playing there?

We talked about playing but never did because you wanted
to play for money. I'd still play if you don't insist on
playing for money.

In fact, I'm again checking out server sites where I may
play against people online, preferably strong players or
some bot-whores who seem to find meaning for their lives
in endlessly discussing positions here in this forum...

> You have never affirmed anything "Turkish" so it was
> just a wild guess

I don't know when you joined RGB and maybe missed them
but my Turkish background was openly mentioned in many
of the literally thousands of my posts (and of others')
going back to 1994-1995.

> you had mentioned here something about participating
> in city council meetings. It is an admirable trait.

There was a time in my life when I thought I owed back
to the society and that fighting the corrupt scumbags
in city goverment was a worthwhile ideal.

So, beyond making a difference in council meetings, I
ran for council four times, never won but got up to 30%
of votes in a three or four candidate race once, while
all I expected was 10-15 votes from close friend. It was
very unexpected for an openly atheist Turkish immigrant
in an area 90+% white, christian, republican. I must
have some qualities to overcome such odds(??)... ;)

> Google says you won (if it is indeed you) a case of a
> golf course discrimination case against single people.
> Well bravo! sir, as a single person I wholeheartedly
> agree with your stance. It is absurd how much cultural
> discrimination there is in USA against single people.

Yes, it was me and ironically I had gotten into golf
after divorcing. They were giving couples dicount to not
only unmarried people but wouldn't give it a single parent
wanting to play with his son/doughter for example. I asked
them to broader their definition of couple and they instead
added the words "solemnized married". I pursued 4 different
cases as pro se for over five years. While waiting trial
dates for two of them at state supreme court, I dropped them
for several reasons. It was estimated that city spent 250+K
in defending against me instead of doing the right things.

It made the local TV's, front page of the sunday paper with
a color photo of me :), numerous news articles over years,
in many publications, even foreign ones like a german golf
magazine, etc. Anyway, the whole thing is a very very long
story that some think would make an interesting documentary...

> GreedyGammon Home www.greedygammon.com
> GreedyGAmmon Forum www.greedygammon.com/support

I'll check your site again. Let me know if you wanna play.

MK

[mu...@compuplus.net]

On December 20, 2019 at 4:13:29 PM UTC-7, mu...@compuplus.net wrote:

> Add BG and we have ""Swiss Army Computer Software
> of BackGammon".

> Not too bad, eh? :) But I am still stumped by that
> leftover "D" at the end. :( Any ideas??

Upon further research and consideration, I find "CS"
for "Cock Suckers" much better fitting than "Computer
Software". :)

https://www.bkgm.com/rgb/rgb.cgi?view+584 says in 1998:

"BG-Blitz is a Software intended as the
"Swiss-Army Knife for Backgammon.

Wow! I had no idea it went back that far. I wonder if
it was the one that played a sicko laughter every time
it rolled a joker?? At the time I had tested it, I had
seen no value in using it when there were better/free
alternatives.

https://nebackgammon.org/index.php/resources/nebc-bg-sites/

Quotes Terje Pedersen calling his Backgammon Studio site

"The Swiss Army Knife of Backgammon."

http://www.chicagopoint.com/links.html mentions both.

I had tested Backgammon Studio about a year ago and had
concluded that the dice was rigged to not only smooth
out sharp edges of perceivable luck but also to level
the calculated luck to conform to the prophecy.

I had a discussion here about it with the owner of the
site who could only give evasive answer to my questions.

I recently played 33 matches of 25 points there and I am
fully convinced that it's rigged. I won 10 (31%) and lost
22, with an average 15.13 PR. Pretty much the same exact
numbers as in my several experiments against XG. Fucking
amuzing...! :))

So, my revised guess is:

SACSOBGD = "Swiss Army Cock suckers of BackGammon". :)

I still can't figure out that "D" at the end. :(
I'm not getting any help from you folks either. :((

MK

PS: Read "Swiss Army Cock suckers" as a compound noun
like "Swiss Army General", "Swiss Army Tank", "Swiss
Army Knife", etc... ;)

[mu...@compuplus.net]

On December 22, 2019 at 7:11:37 PM UTC-7, mu...@compuplus.net wrote:

> I recently played 33 matches of 25 points there

Just to clarify. All of them were played against the
6 bots (apparently some high level of XG) with ratings
above 1800's (while the highest rated human seems to
be 1790[??]).

Does anyone know if/how Backgammon Studio and BG-Blitz
related?

MK

[Grunty]

On Wednesday, December 18, 2019 at 3:20:18 AM UTC-3, mu...@compuplus.net wrote:
> Too long to be an acronym?
>
> MK

You perhaps found this in the meantime?
https://worldremittances.info/h/sacsobgd

Not an acronym but a group of codes. You didn't mention the context you found it in.

[Paul]

But there's nothing special about your reference.
Take any random group of letters like axvadvnsh
Then https://worldremittances.info/h/axvadvnsh
is a valid link.

Paul

[Grunty]

MK's got that string from someone/somewhere — he didn't specify. So he may know the context. Perhaps that link is related to that context.

Making an exercise of imagination — Murat may be researching some obscure money transfers sent from/to the city where he ran for a public position some time ago. One of those transfers could be found some levels deeper under that link (each further level code appends two letters to the preceding).

[Grunty]

It could also represent a chat-style string of insults, the kind MK used to adorn his posts with. Split it up this way: SAC SOB GD

[mu...@compuplus.net]

On December 25, 2019 at 12:16:56 PM UTC-7, Grunty wrote:

> It could also represent a chat-style string of
> insults, the kind MK used to adorn his posts with.
> Split it up this way: SAC SOB GD

You may be on to something here. ;) Keep going...

Having become unable to enjoy bg online and against
bots, I am trying to make use of my time by amusing
myself in creative ways to piss on the army of Thorge
Faggetsen et ilks, who completely destroyed bg beyond
recovery by bastardizing it beyond recognition... :(

MK

[mu...@compuplus.net]

On December 22, 2019 at 9:38:18 PM UTC-7, greedygammon wrote:

> if i can get 2-3 users willing to setup as server
> for testing, I can get to work testing

As I had offered before, I would be willing to help
you some with that if you can find others.

> I'm sure there are many other sites that probably
> work better than GreedyGAmmon.

I've been checking them out lately but unfortunately
haven't found one that I like yet.

It seems like a few have gone obsolete/inactive and
dozens of new one cropped up each with only a handful
of players of unknown skill levels. Popular bg sites
mention these few:

- gridgammon.com = said by many to be very hard to join
which I only tried once eons ago and never again since.
It gives me the impression of a gambling hall operated
by the mafia, with an iron door and a peek hole. I have
no idea what the interface even looks like.

- GammonSite (aka GameSite) = operated by the creators
of XG. I downloaded the interface and tried to join but
have never received an approuval email even after many
attempts. I was willing to try it for $10 for 6 months,
mainly to play the XG bot online to compare results to
my experiments against XG offline. I have no idea what
the interface even looks like since I couldn't get past
the login screen. Does anybody play there or even know
if it's still active?

- Backgammon Galaxy = beta/incomplete site with browser
interface that looked acceptable to me. It's one of the
"new wave?" of bg servers "powered by eXtreme Gammon".
There are no XG bot players and after playing a number
of matches against people, I decided it wasn't for me
since the dice was "too smooth and too random" :) for
my taste on top of all.

- Backgammon Studio = very pleasant browser interface.
Tons of features and options. I was only interested in
playing against the XG bots there as this one is also a
server "powered by eXtreme Gammon". Played strictly 25
point matches against bots (about 50 under 2 usernames)
screwing around with experimental moves, etc. and came
to the conclusion that the dice was "too smooth and too
random (NOT!)" on this server as well. Is XG discontinued
and evolved into bg server engine?? I wonder if the good
intention is to teach players to become better (i.e. like
bots) but it doesn't appeal to me at all.

- SimplyBG.com = just heard about it and played only two
matches there to try. Browser interface is primitive but
it claims to fetch the dice from random.org but I didn't
think so even when I won a 5 pointer by one roll, at 4-4
post crawford, against an apparent novice with low ELO. I
think most sites perhaps try to keep up the interest of
players by creating feelings of close competion among them?
However, I will play on this server some more before coming
to any conclusions yet. Maybe their dice claim is true even
if not verifyable.

- there are a number of other lesser mentioned server that I
may check out as I find time and I would like to hear from
you all about your experienced and recommendations regarding
where to play online. I would like to play some of you guys
on whetever servers you may be members of.

> The offline bot works good.

How strong is it? Is it basically gnubg? With perhaps some
additional user features and settings??

> I sell all my worldly belonging shave my head and move
> into a monastery in Kathmandu or join a whirling Dervish
> motorcycle gang :)

I like the last idea. Very creative... :) Can I join too?

MK

[mu...@compuplus.net]

On December 26, 2019 at 1:11:01 AM UTC-7, greedygammon wrote:

> Here is a forum post that describes the configuration process.
> http://www.greedygammon.com/support/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=290

I connect via cell phone's hotspot. I can't act as a server
but I would be willing to setup an isolated pc as a client.

MK

[mu...@compuplus.net]

On December 25, 2019 at 7:20:23 PM UTC-7, mu...@compuplus.net wrote:

> - SimplyBG.com = just heard about it and played only two
> matches there to try. Browser interface is primitive but
> it claims to fetch the dice from random.org but I didn't
> think so even when I won a 5 pointer by one roll, at 4-4
> post crawford, against an apparent novice with low ELO. I
> think most sites perhaps try to keep up the interest of
> players by creating feelings of close competion among them?
> However, I will play on this server some more before coming
> to any conclusions yet. Maybe their dice claim is true even
> if not verifyable.

Scrap this one. Don't even waste your time!

After letting me play a whopping 3 times for free, it's
already asking me to pay $5.50/year if want to continue
playing there.

The about page, it says: "SimplyBG.com uses Web-services
provided by www.2IBS.com for complete game match and
tournament play management." And if you make the mistake
of going to that site, you will see hundreds of blinking
and flashing banners in some asian language that seem to
promote betting money, etc.

So many petty little scambugs to piss on, so little time. :(

I did the dirty work for you all here. You are welcome. ;)

MK

[mu...@compuplus.net]

On December 25, 2019 at 7:20:23 PM UTC-7, mu...@compuplus.net wrote:

> - there are a number of other lesser mentioned server that I
> may check out as I find time and I would like to hear from
> you all about your experienced and recommendations regarding
> where to play online. I would like to play some of you guys
> on whetever servers you may be members of.

My username/password for playok.com from eaons ago still
works but don't recognize the interface. Maybe because
of my using a a different browser and settings...?? I'll
try to figure it later but it will probably a waste of
my time, since as far as remember I had created an account
there to play "cocsucking Michael" who is apparently being
busy sucking on his thumb stil... :(

I have no interest in playing for money online (duh!) nor
offline, the only remaining server of any interest seems
to be safeharborgames.net where I have just created an
account and will explore it as I find time.

Come play with me cock sucking bot-whore scumbags. Let
me turn your world upside down... :)

MK

[Grunty]

On Thursday, December 26, 2019 at 7:13:00 AM UTC-3, mu...@compuplus.net wrote:
> On December 25, 2019 at 7:20:23 PM UTC-7, mu...@compuplus.net wrote:
>
> My username/password for playok.com from eaons ago still works

There is somenone that goes by your name there, and he's from Turkey. Played him a couple times recently, he's got a decent level. Isn't that you?

> I have no interest in playing for money online

I invite you to play for something of more value than money — bits of your lifetime. I promise to put more care playing against you than I do against all those 2000+ clowns there.

> Come play with me cock sucking bot-whore scumbags.

Just let me know a preferred range of time/zone.

[mu...@compuplus.net]

On December 26, 2019 at 4:56:35 AM UTC-7, greedygammon wrote:

> On December 25, 2019 at 6:22:16 PM UTC-7, mu...@compuplus.net wrote:

>> Having become unable to enjoy bg online and against
>> bots, I am trying to make use of my time by amusing
>> myself in creative ways to piss on the army of Thorge
>> Faggetsen et ilks, who completely destroyed bg beyond
>> recovery by bastardizing it beyond recognition... :(

> Ok so you and Lee Sedol can cry on each other shoulders
> cuz he also recently declared giving up Go since the AI
> machines are impossible to beat. Sissy ass capitulating
> bitches hahaha (just kiddin Murat.. we friends now!)

I won't mind if you are serious either. I don't know much
about Go. Is it a solved game? Do they play it to gamble?
Using a doubling cube? Do they use ELO :) rating? Etc.

Without knowing these, I can't tell if your comparison works.

Doubling cube goes against the nature of backgammon (which
requires staying power) by turning it into a gambling tool
for sick gamblers who prefer premature-ejeculation instead.
Did they bastardize Go in a similar way also?

Except the initial version of TD-Gammon, there never was/is
any real neural network bg bots. We are impatiently waiting
for an AlphaZero bg bot. If and when there comes such a bot
that I can't beat, I may give up bg. For now, not only that
I can beat the existing bg bots but I find them predictable
and boring to play with, like a toy train going around and
around the xmas three vs playing with people like remotely
controlled toy cars that can be freely steered in the room.

With ELO and ER/PR ratings being complete bullshit based on
arbitrary constants and having become the only measure/goal
in bg, neither playing nor winning is what used to be for me.

So, I don't understand the point in your Go comparison but I
can understand that you may not understand how I feel about
bg bots and servers...

MK

[mu...@compuplus.net]

On December 26, 2019 at 6:58:23 AM UTC-7, Grunty wrote:

> On December 26, 2019 at 7:13:00 AM UTC-3, mu...@compuplus.net wrote:

>> My username/password for playok.com from eaons ago still works

> There is somenone that goes by your name there, and he's from
> Turkey. Played him a couple times recently, he's got a decent
> level. Isn't that you?

Not me. The nick I had created just to play Michael there was
oynak. Since I had not deleted myself I assumed it would still
work but it didn't. That was in late in 2016 and I found that
I had created the same nick on Netgammon (it says closed down
in 2017) also probably for the same reason but I'm not sure if
I ever even used them at all since Michael and I never played.

>> I have no interest in playing for money online

> I invite you to play for something of more value than money
> — bits of your lifetime. I promise to put more care playing
> against you than I do against all those 2000+ clowns there.

I like your philosophy about the value of our time. We'll play.

> Just let me know a preferred range of time/zone.

Widely between 30pm-3am but more likely between 6pm-midnight
Mountain time (UTC-7 in winter), mostly any day of the week.

I played a few matches on PlayOK as a guest. Dice must be
random because I won so easily :) but the interface is less
than minimalistic, plainly lacking even most common features.
Without any help pages, I finally figured out enough how to
play but may I ask why do you prefer playing there?? Can we
play on a different server instead (even with rigged dice
but more friendly/enjoyable interface)?

MK

[Grunty]

On Thursday, December 26, 2019 at 9:37:24 PM UTC-3, mu...@compuplus.net wrote:
> On December 26, 2019 at 6:58:23 AM UTC-7, Grunty wrote:
>
> > On December 26, 2019 at 7:13:00 AM UTC-3, mu...@compuplus.net wrote:
>
> >> I have no interest in playing for money online
>
> > I invite you to play for something of more value than money
> > — bits of your lifetime. I promise to put more care playing
> > against you than I do against all those 2000+ clowns there.
>
> I like your philosophy about the value of our time. We'll play.
>
> > Just let me know a preferred range of time/zone.
>
> Widely between 30pm-3am but more likely between 6pm-midnight
> Mountain time (UTC-7 in winter), mostly any day of the week.
>
> I played a few matches on PlayOK as a guest. Dice must be
> random because I won so easily :)

No, PlayOK dice aren't random. (You may want to skip reading the next paragraph, I put it here just to let my PlayOK review recorded.)

--- Start of review ---
This is my personal experience with PlayOK backgammon site. Maybe most other players' games are free of such constraints, or are they unaware or uncapable of noticing.
1) PlayOK server rolls doublets at a much higher rate than expected. We all experienced players know why many bg servers did/do that.
2) PlayOK server tries and maintain the equity of early/middle positions evenly by rigging the rolls delivered, in order to give users a sense of competitive and thrilling (yet artificial) experience.
3) Once I played a good deal of games, PlayOK server software had me fairly rated and set an upper bar for me. I'd show at least +1000 rating points if not for the server constraints mentioned.
...
It's very noticeable how often and at what extents PlayOK server twists the rolls in long parlays in order to enforce a win for the losing player.
Sometimes I have my opponent crushed, and -purposedly- give a tiny chance, just to see a nearly secure win turns into a laughable farce loss. For sure, the problem is not such swings occurring (they're within the nature of bg) but the frequence. Ridiculous.
--- End of review ---

> may I ask why do you prefer playing there??
> Can we play on a different server instead (even with rigged dice
> but more friendly/enjoyable interface)?

Sure, I'm bored of just giving entertainment to the bunch of inferior players there. Propose the site of your preference, I will open account (if free).

[Michael]

On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 6:08:18 PM UTC+2, Grunty wrote:

> --- Start of review ---
> This is my personal experience with PlayOK backgammon site. Maybe most other players' games are free of such constraints, or are they unaware or uncapable of noticing.
> 1) PlayOK server rolls doublets at a much higher rate than expected. We all experienced players know why many bg servers did/do that.
> 2) PlayOK server tries and maintain the equity of early/middle positions evenly by rigging the rolls delivered, in order to give users a sense of competitive and thrilling (yet artificial) experience.
> 3) Once I played a good deal of games, PlayOK server software had me fairly rated and set an upper bar for me. I'd show at least +1000 rating points if not for the server constraints mentioned.
> ...
> It's very noticeable how often and at what extents PlayOK server twists the rolls in long parlays in order to enforce a win for the losing player.
> Sometimes I have my opponent crushed, and -purposedly- give a tiny chance, just to see a nearly secure win turns into a laughable farce loss. For sure, the problem is not such swings occurring (they're within the nature of bg) but the frequence. Ridiculous.
> --- End of review ---

Over time I had more than 10 nicks at playOK. The reason is because I abandon a nick as soon as I bring my rating up to 2200 - 2300. I would then start all over again with another nick. There are simply no players at + - 100 rating points willing to play you after you reach 2200 - 2300.

I 've had the same suspicions like you. In general I thought playOK favored the weaker player. It looked to me I was rolling 66s way too often when I was hit at an early game. Losing an out of proportion race games with opponent rolling too many doublets.
So I went back to my most recent abandoned nick "WorldofaDice" and downloaded my last 200 matches. Analyzed them with GNUbg and checked how many matches should I have won based on the relative Fibs strength for each match.
I found I should have won 109. 5. I actually won 111!!
Obviously I failed to prove my suspicion.
However the feeling that there's some involvement of a bot running in the background, manipulating the natural flow of the game made me stop playing there anymore. Problem is I have no other alternative. All other online sites are almost dead….

The only exception was gridgammon. I played there for about 1. 5 months, I liked it, very live and competitive site with hundreds of players, I had no issues with the dice, but. . . . had to give back my borrowed nick and password to the one who kindly let it to me. Shhhh it's a secret don't tell ; - ) In the meantime I learned a lot about gridgammon and it's hidden "policy secrets".

Now if you want to boost your rating at playok to unbelievable level ( say more than 3000 like many over there actually do) there's a very simple way. Play 1 pointers. PlayOK uses the fIBS rating formula with one silly modification: It rounds the up/down rating after the match. Specifically for 1 pointers you get +2 points when you win - 2 points when you lose. Play amateurs, you'd win 8 out of 10, and raise your rating by 12 points for every 10 games.

[Grunty]

On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 8:17:21 AM UTC-3, Michael wrote:
> On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 6:08:18 PM UTC+2, Grunty wrote:
>
> > --- Start of review ---
> > This is my personal experience with PlayOK backgammon site. Maybe most other players' games are free of such constraints, or are they unaware or uncapable of noticing.
> > 1) PlayOK server rolls doublets at a much higher rate than expected. We all experienced players know why many bg servers did/do that.
> > 2) PlayOK server tries and maintain the equity of early/middle positions evenly by rigging the rolls delivered, in order to give users a sense of competitive and thrilling (yet artificial) experience.
> > 3) Once I played a good deal of games, PlayOK server software had me fairly rated and set an upper bar for me. I'd show at least +1000 rating points if not for the server constraints mentioned.
> > ...
> > It's very noticeable how often and at what extents PlayOK server twists the rolls in long parlays in order to enforce a win for the losing player.
> > Sometimes I have my opponent crushed, and -purposedly- give a tiny chance, just to see a nearly secure win turns into a laughable farce loss. For sure, the problem is not such swings occurring (they're within the nature of bg) but the frequence. Ridiculous.
> > --- End of review ---

Thanks Michael for your comments.

> Over time I had more than 10 nicks at playOK. The reason is because I abandon a nick as soon as I bring my rating up to 2200 - 2300. I would then start all over again with another nick. There are simply no players at + - 100 rating points willing to play you after you reach 2200 - 2300.

Well, my experience is just the opposite: I'm currently at 2380 (I reached a peak a bit above 2500) and select most of my games against 2100+ people, and most of them accept. I give them a really good challenge, so they willingly engage me.

> I 've had the same suspicions like you. In general I thought playOK favored the weaker player. It looked to me I was rolling 66s way too often when I was hit at an early game. Losing an out of proportion race games with opponent rolling too many doublets.
> So I went back to my most recent abandoned nick "WorldofaDice" and downloaded my last 200 matches. Analyzed them with GNUbg and checked how many matches should I have won based on the relative Fibs strength for each match.
> I found I should have won 109. 5. I actually won 111!!
> Obviously I failed to prove my suspicion.

A rigged (non-moneygame) server like playOK could even not save the games they actually rigged. Did you check about that? Your 200 sample could not include a number of losses.

> However the feeling that there's some involvement of a bot running in the background, manipulating the natural flow of the game made me stop playing there anymore. Problem is I have no other alternative. All other online sites are almost dead….
>
> The only exception was gridgammon. I played there for about 1. 5 months, I liked it, very live and competitive site with hundreds of players, I had no issues with the dice, but. . . . had to give back my borrowed nick and password to the one who kindly let it to me. Shhhh it's a secret don't tell ; - ) In the meantime I learned a lot about gridgammon and it's hidden "policy secrets".

I'd like to try gridgammon, but read they have admittance requisites like the aspiring player being presented by a current member etc.

> Now if you want to boost your rating at playok to unbelievable level ( say more than 3000 like many over there actually do) there's a very simple way.

No I don't want to do that, I just want to reach my real, fair rating level. No such thing at playOK, IMO.

> Play 1 pointers. PlayOK uses the fIBS rating formula with one silly modification: It rounds the up/down rating after the match. Specifically for 1 pointers you get +2 points when you win - 2 points when you lose. Play amateurs, you'd win 8 out of 10, and raise your rating by 12 points for every 10 games.

I mostly play 1 pointers and yes I know the +2/-2 delta. However playing amateurs would be a unbearable time killer to me, for no challenge. Another thing would be playing them for money...

[Peter Percival]

mu...@compuplus.net wrote:
> On December 20, 2019 at 3:27:02 AM UTC-7, Peter Percival wrote:
>
>> murat compuplus.net wrote:
>
>>> According to Guinness Records the longest acronym is
>>> NIIOMTPLABOPARMBETZHELBETRABSBOMONIMONKONOTDTEKHSTROMONT
>>> (Нииомтплабопармбетжелбетрабсбомонимонконотдтехстромонт)
>
>> In a Properly Organized Society acronyms would be pronounceable
>> abbreviations such as 'radar'.
>
> You mean you couldn't pronounce it? :)
>
> Maybe Russian speakers can pronounce the original. ;)
>
> What the heck is a "pronounceable abbreviation"?
>
> "Abbr." (with a period at the end) is the abbreviation
> for "abbreviation". How do you pronounce "Abbr."?
>
> I thought the rule for acronyms was "anything goes" and I
> didn't know that "abbreviation" was synonym for "acronym".

The error is mine. See meaning 2 here:
https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/1844. I thought that was _the_ meaning.
But it seem that meaning 1 is older.

Two further errors of mine: (a) I should have written "initialism"
instead of "abbreviation"; (b) I see that it originates in the US, so
it's inappropriate for me to complain at all.

>
> How do you pronounce USBFG? Or just BG? Surely you woudn't
> say "beegee"??
>
> If "spelling" isn't synonymous with "pronouncing", maybe
> those can't be acronyms in a Properly Organized Society
> either?
>
> MK
>

[mu...@compuplus.net]

On December 29, 2019 at 2:46:54 PM UTC-7, Peter Percival wrote:

> The error is mine. See meaning 2 here:
> https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/1844.
> I thought that was _the_ meaning.
> But it seem that meaning 1 is older.

I found the bottom two examples most interesting:

"The author hit on the idea of the name ‘oracle’ and
"it was not long before it was made into an acronym
"for ‘Optional Reception of Announcements by Coded
"Line Electronics’.

"Turning tea into an acronym for Taxed Enough Already,
"demonstrators were expected to attend more than 750
"rallies to protest government spending.

Thanks for refreshing, replenishing my mind and broadening
my horizons... :)

Now I can start by taking a word like SCUMBAG as an acronym
and then find some context fitting words to contribute one
or more characters towards reconcocting it... :)

Who says only a spelled BG can be acronym for [B]ack[G]ammon?
Why not a pronounced BAG made from [BA]ck[G]ammon?

After that I can go back to recode SCUM or remodel by adding
on GOT instead and figure out what can BAGGOT expand to? :)

From there the next BAG book may be titled "GOT BAG?" :))

And the sequel "DOUBLE BAG IT!"

MK

[mu...@compuplus.net]

On December 28, 2019 at 4:17:21 AM UTC-7, Michael wrote:

> The only exception was gridgammon. I played there for

> about 1. 5 months,..., I had no issues with the dice,

I responded to your other comments before I read these.

Being able to trust the dice would definetely be a big
plus and make it worth wanting to play there.(?)

> In the meantime I learned a lot about gridgammon and
> it's hidden "policy secrets".

Okay, now, we are listening... ;)

MK