BG with handicap
Kees van den Doel
strengths?
For the game of GO there is an elaborate tradition which prescribes
precisely the handicap to equialise various levels of play.
I've tried various opening positions for this but it's hard to quantify.
For example giving your opponent 2 free rolls at the beginning is not
satisfactory as ity forcethe game into a certain direction already.
I can't imagine no-one has thought about this before and would love to
hear these thoughts.
Kees (I must protest cyanide in parelachtig wit-grijs.)
Patti Beadles
or equivalent good roll.
-Patti
--
Patti Beadles |
pat...@gammon.com |
http://www.gammon.com/ | The crazy chick with
or just yell, "Hey, Patti!" | the purple hair.
Kees van den Doel
Patti Beadles <pat...@mauve.rahul.net> wrote:
>It's not uncommon to spot your opponent an opening 4-2 or 3-1 or 6-1,
>or equivalent good roll.
Since you deleted the context I sort of forgot what we're talking about
but I found if I have 3-4 wodka's I'm about even with a player 300
rating points lower and the other way around depending on tolerance
levels.
Kees (Zodat dat examen moest men querulanten wel aantonen is feminine or
worse, of abstract versturen onder verstaat weet je leden werven
herh Date: 17 09:44:11 PDT Tuesday will The frog turns the concept
vriend of homosexuele gedrag binnen 15 hver...@ingr.com
h...@hiwaay.net No Keywords: Praise the Neapolitan pizza nu Wodka
in En- glish?)
Kees van den Doel
LostVegan <your.pant...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>It's not uncommon to spot your opponent an opening 4-2 or 3-1 or 6-1,
>>or equivalent good roll.
>How about giving a weaker opponent a chance to "roll" any joker he wants once
>during the first ... say 10 rolls ... of a game.
Or let the weaker one kick you in the crotch with a baseball bat.
Kees (I would, I heard Persian culture, to cows by too stupid people.)
Kees van den Doel
LostVegan <your.pant...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>Or let the weaker one kick you in the crotch with a baseball bat.
>Since kicking normally involves a foot, would this weaker player require a
>prehensile appendage in order to grasp said bat?
I'm sorry but my command of the English language is limited to the
rudimentary level of "Murat bad! Zare bad! SHOOSH!".
Would you care to explain what is a "prehensile appendage in order to
grasp said bat"?
Anyways, since the Subject: has already degrade below zero, I was kinda
hoping for some interesting insights on equalization between players
through handicaps. Giving your opponent a 3-1 is one way to give 5%
advantage but you force the game into a particular direction.
How about giving your opponent 2 rolls and she can choose the better
one? How much advantage would that give?
Kees (IS DEDICATED TO RECLAIM FROM CYBERIA WITH THIS SIMPLE QUESTION?)
Malte Negendank
> Anyways, since the Subject: has already degrade below zero, I was kinda
> hoping for some interesting insights on equalization between players
> through handicaps.
I wouldn't really say that the topic has slided off into a direction not
intended. Receiving a good hit/kick/whatever into the balls would
certainly have a disadvantageous influence on the better player's
concentration. I guess we could then call that poor guy "temporarily
handicapped" regarding his mental abilities. (Since that would not be the
politically correct term we'd have to find a replacement before including
this rule into the official rules. Also, this rule could also be applied
for games between two male players, so eventually an alternative for gals
would have to be found.)
One way or the other, this would be BG with a handicap for the tough ones
amongst us.
The exact percentage of the advantage gained by the weaker player I
couldn't tell you, have to admit I'm not too deeply into maths.
Cheers, and don't forget to wear them football boots next time you play,
Malte
Tom Keith
1. If you are playing for money, the weaker player can pay less per
point than the stronger player; or
2. The stronger player can spot a certain number of pips to the weaker
player. The way this works is, the weaker player doesn't have to
bear off all his checkers to win, but merely has to reduce his
pipcount to a given number.
Tom
frisco
has by virtue of being the better player?
"Kees van den Doel" <kvan...@xs1.xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:3f459d23$0$76256$e4fe...@dreader9.news.xs4all.nl...
s.w.a....@hccnet.nl
Doel) wrote:
>Anyways, since the Subject: has already degrade below zero,
>>
>>
Grin....
**
>I was kinda
>hoping for some interesting insights on equalization between players
>through handicaps. Giving your opponent a 3-1 is one way to give 5%
>advantage but you force the game into a particular direction.
>How about giving your opponent 2 rolls and she can choose the better
>one? How much advantage would that give?
>>
>>
You could try to fiddle with the number of chequers each player has,
that would be a handicap that is stable throughout a game....it should
be easy to figure out the (dis)advantage via trial runs with GNU.
bye,
Peter
Hank Youngerman
The weaker players rolls a third die, say a 12-sided die.
If it comes up with a particular number, he may, if he likes, re-roll.
He does not get the better of the two rolls.
Some weak players might not even know what roll was good or bad and
whether to re-roll!
On 22 Aug 2003 04:33:39 GMT, kvan...@xs1.xs4all.nl (Kees van den
Kees van den Doel
Hank Youngerman <red...@redtopbg.com> wrote:
>On 22 Aug 2003 04:33:39 GMT, kvan...@xs1.xs4all.nl (Kees van den
>Doel) wrote:
>>Is there any tradition for playing handicapped BG to even out playing
>>strengths?
>>For the game of GO there is an elaborate tradition which prescribes
>>precisely the handicap to equialise various levels of play.
>>I've tried various opening positions for this but it's hard to quantify.
>>For example giving your opponent 2 free rolls at the beginning is not
>>satisfactory as ity forcethe game into a certain direction already.
>>I can't imagine no-one has thought about this before and would love to
>>hear these thoughts.
>How about this.
>The weaker players rolls a third die, say a 12-sided die.
>If it comes up with a particular number, he may, if he likes, re-roll.
>He does not get the better of the two rolls.
>Some weak players might not even know what roll was good or bad and
>whether to re-roll!
Yes, an excellent idea.
I've thought of giving the underdog the advantage of a random cube: the
better player HAS TO DOUBLE if possible if his first dice is odd, and
HAS TO ACCEPT an offer if his first dice is odd, and thus effectively
has a random cube strategy which costs about 250 ELO points.
Kees (Mijn collega, Professor Richard Nixon.)
Kees van den Doel
frisco <unknown_...@cantfindhost.com> wrote:
>What's the point of trying to do away with the advantage the better player
>has by virtue of being the better player?
No the question whas "HOW" not "WHY", you ignoramus.
Kees (If those there with STUPID LOSERS en loop blijkbaar kunnen
verlagen om de opvolgers van ma?)
Jerry Donovan
news:3f459d23$0$76256$e4fe...@dreader9.news.xs4all.nl...
When I played games with my daughter, I would give her some "Roll Again"s.
Up to some agreed upon number of times in a game, she could choose to roll
again when she got a bad roll, or have me roll again when she thought I had
a really good roll. This did seem to help even things out some. It takes
a fair number of "RollAgain"s to even out a good player and a beginner
though.
Jerry
Michael Sullivan
this is not a serious suggestion, but how about this for a hideous
shark's gambit. To give the weaker player an advantage, you
traditionally make the race a little shorter, so just move two checkers
off the 6 point and 2 checkers off the midpoint and put them on the two
point. There, that should be a good handicap... I start the game 30
pips behind!
:)
It reminds me of my favorite shark's gambit, which is at cricket
(darts). Give the weaker opponent one tick (or even two ticks) of every
number. If there's a significant difference in skill, this advantage is
essentially meaningless, as the stronger player is likely to close
something and quite possibly point heavily on the first round.
Michael
Albert
kvan...@xs1.xs4all.nl (Kees van den Doel) wrote:
> Is there any tradition for playing handicapped BG to even out playing
> strengths?
Fun question --
I'd suggest the answer really depends on why you are wanting to even out
the strengths.
if you are gambling, you could offer your opponent ownership of the
cube. -- He or she "owns" it on "1". Only he can double initislly,
after which the game proceeds normally. Checker plsy is not affected,
but you offer substantiasl equity (somebody else can say how much.)
If, on the other hand, I was teaching a newcomer or child the game, I
might be inclined to make him or her *think* -- a very large edge: on
each roll the opponent gets to choose the number for one die, and roll
the other. Hence, while a hitting number might be obvious, the player
would have to think of the ideal secondary number.
Thst eoulod be a huge adge. A similar approach would be to allow the
player *one* (or two or five) opportunities pergame to call his or her
roll. You could give them three poker chips to redeem for choice rolls.
As a teaching device, these approaches wouod be better than "spotting"
them extra pips -- it's not good for a learner to play games from an
artificiual starting point!
have fun
albert