Bill Robertie books
Steve Lachace
Does anyone have the exacte pages or problem numbers where there are
mistakes in the 2 books Bill Robertie wrote - Advance BG 1 and 2 . I
those 2 books and would realy like to go through them again; this time
without the mistakes. :)
thanks u
Ron & Ann Barry
Analyzer 1.0 rollouts for the 2nd edition of "Advanced Backgammon", Vols. 1 and 2, a
few years ago. I don't recall the site where I found this document, but that may be
enough information to get you started on your search.
Øystein Johansen
I don't have a list of all the problems that are wrong, but a friend
of mine and I, agrees that problem 14 and problem 16 are both wrong.
Problem 52 is also wrong. The best move is not even considered as a
candidate.
Good luck,
-Øystein
--
It's remarkable that a science which began with the consideration of
games of chance should have become the most important object of human
knowledge.... The most important questions of life are, for the most
part, really only problems of probability. -- Laplace, 1812
Daniel Murphy
Johansen <oeys...@online.no> wrote:
>Steve Lachace wrote:
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> Does anyone have the exacte pages or problem numbers where there are
>> mistakes in the 2 books Bill Robertie wrote - Advance BG 1 and 2 . I
>> those 2 books and would realy like to go through them again; this time
>> without the mistakes. :)
>
>I don't have a list of all the problems that are wrong, but a friend
>of mine and I, agrees that problem 14 and problem 16 are both wrong.
>
>Problem 52 is also wrong. The best move is not even considered as a
>candidate.
Look also, and judge for yourself, at the solutions for problems 48,
63, 84, 99, 149, 165, 177a, 199b, 252 and 332. Additionally, 311 needs
a checker on the bar, and 316 is a play problem, not a cube problem.
Daniel Murphy
Raccoon on FIBS, GamesGrid
Humlebaek Backgammon Klub hosts the 10th Danish Mixed Doubles Championship, 30 June-1 July 2001
Vi ses, og tak for alle fiskene!
Øystein Johansen
[snip]
> 63, 84, 99, 149, 165, 177a, 199b, 252 and 332. Additionally, 311 needs
> a checker on the bar, and 316 is a play problem, not a cube problem.
According to Jellyfish 1.0 rollouts of the checkerplay problems,
these positions are wrong:
(In order of deviation from JF rollout)
84, 169, 142, 185, 66, 107, 188, 247, 76, 80, 16, 14, 29, 161, 10a,
335b, 214, 336, 225, 221, 11, 33, 220, 7, 192, 83, 71, 1, 9, 12,
399, 39, 17, 245, 243, 229, 131.
(other position comes out with a equity difference less than 0.02)
In problem 52 the best play is 22/18, and is not even in the list
of candidate moves.
Remember that these are according to JF 1.0 rollouts, and may be
very wrong for some position types, like backgames and priming
games positions. I have not verified these rollouts with any other
stronger(?) neural net player. Daniel mentions the backgame
position 165, in his posting, which I'm not sure if white can
take or not.
In problem 142 I can't see how Bill can say that the black's 4 is
forced? Maybe he is so focused of the possibility to make a pick
and pass, if white enters with a 6, that he totally overlooks the
best four, obviously 8/4.
In positions 240a and 240b there is 17 black checkers in the diagram.
I interpret this as there should be no checkers off.
There is also some checkers missing in some positions:
Position 139 has only 14 white checkers.
Position 174 has only 14 white checkers.
Position 180 has only 14 white checkers.
Position 190 has only 13 white checkers.
I'm not sure how to interpret this at all.
In position 114, I think it should be White to play 2-2 obviously.
In position 19, there is only 14 white checkers, and I think there is a
white checker on the bar missing in the diagram.
According to Jellyfish 1.0 rollouts of the cube action problems,
these positions are wrong:
(In order of deviation from JF rollout)
199b, 252, 177a, 48, 332, 51, 63, 149, 207, 99, 159, 62, 56a, 145, 255,
198, 143, 171, 88, 95, 18, 40, 358b, 101, 153, 120, 254, 202b, 314, 213,
44, 112, 31, 34, 41, 45, 177c, 92, 94, 32, 179, 260b, 331, 201f, 90,
201b, 138.
(Other cube actions is also wrong according to JF rollout, but has a
equity difference less than 0.05.)
This maybe look like lots of error. It proves that the positions picked
out by Bill is very interesting positions, and Bill gives his arguments
for what he believes is the best play. These are usually good arguments,
and the books are worth every penny just to read these arguments. I
improved a lot by his books, even if some solutions are wrong according
to rollouts.