Stale
Zuppone Marco
do you know if is possible to reach whit a finite number of moves a position
of stale in backgammon??
Regards,
Marco,.
m
Julian
You can't do it. Not even with an infinite number...
---------------------------------------------------
Julian Hayward jul...@ratbag.demon.co.uk
'Booles' on FIBS +44-1344-640656
---------------------------------------------------
"Questions are a burden to others,
Answers are a prison for oneself."
- Village proverb
---------------------------------------------------
James Eibisch
>Hello,
>do you know if is possible to reach whit a finite number of moves a position
>of stale in backgammon??
Stalemate can never be reached in backgammon.
There was a thread a while ago about two players playing with dice
decided by a third party. If I remember correctly, it was thought that
stalemate could never be reached even in this type of game.
--
_
James Eibisch ('v') N : E : T : A : D : E : L : I : C : A
Reading, U.K. (,_,) http://metro.turnpike.net/J/jeibisch/
=======
mike bloxham
> There was a thread a while ago about two players playing with dice
> decided by a third party. If I remember correctly, it was thought that
> stalemate could never be reached even in this type of game.
Assuming that the third party could see the game as it progressed,
wouldn't it be possible to get both sides to have a checker on the bar,
and then dance till the cows come home? [Note: Cows don't come home.]
Jan Andrew Bloxham alias JABlox on FIBS
Bob Johnson x6152
Legally, a player could not close his/her board, putting an opponent blot
onto the bar if that 1st player is already on the bar behind a closed board.
Illegally, it would not be too far out of the ordinary.
Suppose Player 1 steps away for coffee and tells his/her opponent,
"Play". Witnesses are present. Player 2 rolls 6-6, and must hit a
blot which will face a closed board. Unfortunately, Player 2 has his
own blot trapped on the opponent's ace pt, behind a 6-prime. Player 2
pauses, to reflect on his/her doom.
Player 1 comes back, "Did you move?"
Player 2 responds, "Yes."
Player 1 rolls 3-3 (not noticing his/her checker on the bar). He/she
closes the board, puts the opponent checker on the bar and picks
up the dice, happy as a clam!... until Player 1 notices a look of
astonishment on everyone else. He/she soon realizes what happened!
Player 2 decrees, "Let the play stand!" After all, if Player 2 rejects
the move, then Player 2 would be forced to play on, crunching
his/her own inner board because his/her own blot remains behind
that 6-prime. A sure loss.
The game is a draw after this point, as both players will not permit
any more moves to be played.
Am I right? Can anyone believe this scenario might occur?
If so, how cool/perverse would this be if it occurred in the finals
of a major tournament?
Bob Johnson x6152
>mike bloxham <blo...@ultrix.uor.edu> wrote:
>>James Eibisch wrote:
Oops. I messed up my email address on the previous postings.
Robert D. Johnson, "rjohnson" on FIBS, rjoh...@cvbnet.cv.com
Katz Stuart
: Suppose Player 1 steps away for coffee and tells his/her opponent,
: "Play". Witnesses are present. Player 2 rolls 6-6, and must hit a
: blot which will face a closed board. Unfortunately, Player 2 has his
: own blot trapped on the opponent's ace pt, behind a 6-prime. Player 2
: pauses, to reflect on his/her doom.
: Player 1 comes back, "Did you move?"
: Player 2 responds, "Yes."
: Player 1 rolls 3-3 (not noticing his/her checker on the bar). He/she
: closes the board, puts the opponent checker on the bar and picks
: up the dice, happy as a clam!... until Player 1 notices a look of
: astonishment on everyone else. He/she soon realizes what happened!
: Player 2 decrees, "Let the play stand!" After all, if Player 2 rejects
: the move, then Player 2 would be forced to play on, crunching
: his/her own inner board because his/her own blot remains behind
: that 6-prime. A sure loss.
: The game is a draw after this point, as both players will not permit
: any more moves to be played.
: Am I right? Can anyone believe this scenario might occur?
: If so, how cool/perverse would this be if it occurred in the finals
: of a major tournament?
Sorry, this could not happen. This is not an illeagle play, this is an
illegal POSITION. The play that caused the position would have to be
re-played. No tournament director would let this play stand. (In your
scenario, I'm sure player 1 would ask for a ruling).
BTW, there is no such thing as a draw, tie or stalemate in backgammon.
stu (scats on FIBS)
--
o
|
| .-----. ,,-------....___.,, _
| / (@ `-' ___ ''''---.....___ { |
| | == Q >> / '. ''''----....__/ |
| \ (@ ,-. | """""---------\ Stuart Katz |
| `-----' \ \__________________\\ Voice 708 679-1772 ) |
| `------------------------------------------------' |
|###################################################################|
) If life is a game, then death is the prize. (
) Don't go alone, play to tie. (
Katz Stuart
: as...@tiac.net (Albert Steg) wrote:
: >In article <3vkh15$o...@nntp.interaccess.com>, sk...@interaccess.com wrote:
: >
: >> Sorry, this could not happen. This is not an illeagle play, this is an
: >> illegal POSITION. [etc]
: >
: >I'm not familiar with any written distinction between an illegal play and
: >an illegal position, but intuitively I don't see why a tournament director
: >shouldn't declare the game a draw. [etc]
: Illegal _position_, Stu? Fifteen years ago the rules said that after an
: illegal play is made and the dice are picked up, the opponent may choose
: either: (A) to have the original player replay it legally, or (B) let the
: illegal play stand. Have the rules changed or been enhanced on this?
: I would not know. My logic is like Albert's. Can anyone else help here?
: --
: Robert D. Johnson MAIL: rjoh...@cvbnet.cv.com FIBS: rjohnson
Here is another example of an illegal position...you move a checker to
hit your opponents blot, but in the heat of battle, you do not put his
blot on the bar. Now there is a point with two different checkers on it.
Can your opponent allow this play to stand? Is this a made point? Who's
point is it? No, it is an illegal position and must be re-played legally.
Any directors out there? How would you rule? I'm here to learn like
everyone else.
Stu
Albert Steg
> Sorry, this could not happen. This is not an illeagle play, this is an
> illegal POSITION. The play that caused the position would have to be
> re-played. No tournament director would let this play stand. (In your
> scenario, I'm sure player 1 would ask for a ruling).
> BTW, there is no such thing as a draw, tie or stalemate in backgammon.
>
stu (scats on FIBS)
I'm not familiar with any written distinction between an illegal play and
an illegal position, but intuitively I don't see why a tournament director
shouldn't declare the game a draw. The player who left the table for a
break played his move without thoroughly acquainting himself with the
current position, and made an error that cost himself equity in the
match. Since tournament directors routinely confirm that illegal plays
stand once the dice have been picked up, why should this be any different?
Albert
Robert D. Johnson (Bob)
>In article <3vkh15$o...@nntp.interaccess.com>, sk...@interaccess.com wrote:
>
>> Sorry, this could not happen. This is not an illeagle play, this is an
>
>I'm not familiar with any written distinction between an illegal play and
>an illegal position, but intuitively I don't see why a tournament director
Martin Ronek
of rules.
In one match, I hit an opponents blot and with one sweep of the hand,
picked my the dice and placed his checker on the bar. Note the order of the
two actions. He commented in passing that he could have chosen to force me
to leave his checker on the board, since I had placed his checker on the
bar _after_ I picked up the dice. (a disadvantage of playing only online
BG).
In the next match against another opponent (and being very tired and hungry
(a disadvantage of not playing at home and being able to run to the fridge
at will)), I hit my opponent's blot and placed _my_own_ checker on the bar.
As soon as I picked up my dice, he informed me of what I had done and
insisted that the play stands as is (and added that he had once lost $3000
in making such a error. Inferring, I suppose, that I was getting off
cheap).
So there you have it, stay alert!
Marty (NYCGuy - fibs)
mike bloxham
up the posting sometimes. Btw, it's _Jan Andrew Bloxham_ alias JABlox.
mike bloxham
>Legally, a player could not close his/her board, putting an opponent >blot onto the bar if that 1st player is already on the bar be=
hind a >closed board.
What I meant is that a _legal_ position where both players have a checker on the bar can easily be accomplished. The third party, si=
nce it's deciding the rolls, can then make both players dance forever.
mike bloxham
>Legally, a player could not close his/her board, putting an opponent >blot onto the bar if that 1st player is already on the bar be=
hind a >closed board.
What I meant is that a _legal_ position where both players have a checker on the bar can easily be accomplished (without necessarily=
having any closed boards). The third party, since it's deciding the rolls, can then make both players dance forever. This, from the=
players' point of view, would then be a stalemate.
JABlox alias JABlox on FIBS
PS This is obviously no serious comment on the game of backgammon :-)
Albert Steg
<blo...@ultrix.uor.edu> wrote:
> What I meant is that a _legal_ position where both players have a
checker on the bar can easily be accomplished (without necessarily having
any closed boards). The third party, since it's deciding the rolls, can
then make both players dance forever. This, from the players' point of
view, would then be a stalemate.
>
> JABlox alias JABlox on FIBS
It seems to me that from the *players* point of view this is no stalemate,
because there is an immediate prospect for the position to change and for
the game to procede to completion --namely, that this bizarre series of
dancing numbers will end. I don't have any official lexicons by my side,
but isn't a stalemate a position in which there is no legal prospect of
either player forcing a victory in the game?
Albert