A Greek student maintains the following page with a nice Java applet which you can use to play against his implementation of an average playing strength AI opponnent:

http://cgi.di.uoa.gr/~ea99509/tavli.html

No! This is the 5%

The main reason is that while at Backgammon there is the "home board", the "opponent's home board" and the rest board and 2 general different strategies, the one we are behind in race and the other ahead, in Fevga there are 4 different boards that we have to combine the strategies considering all these 4 boards each time, we also have many different strategies that also change on every stage on the game........

I would go as far as saying both plakoto and fevga are more strategic games than "regular" backgammon.I live in hope that both come to this site.

Pythagoras: Probably due to the diametrical start and the no-hitting feature.

The first time anyone will plat it would feel a little lost in the desert. But after he get the feeling he would put it on his favourite games.....

Pythagoras: The truth is in the playing, as everyone who plays it for the first time knows all too well :)

Here........

I can guarantee that you will not have a good impression when you read the rules and you will say that it's a bit complicated, but the truth is on the other side........

Walter Montego:

Here.

WhiteTower: Where can I see the rules of the Fevga version?

Pythagoras:

Fevga: Exactly.

Plakoto: Also quite strategic, although not at the level of Fevga.

Portes = the same Backgammon it is here on Brainking with the addition of having gammons and backgammons.

Plaloto = A nice game that i yet find a bit boring.....

Fevga = One of the most interesting games, that requires a very deep strategical play, which is much harder to play it correctly.......Very fun to play also. I suggested the addition of Fevga, and i believe that if this game spreads in the world (USA?) it would start replacing Backgammon, not to take its place but to stand along with it in the top.....

Fevga = a must for Brainking!

So, Fencer, are there any news on the possible introduction of the "Greek three-game series" that some people know as Tavli? For the record, Greeks refer to the whole genre as Tavli, and have three separate names for the variants, which they play in the following order up to 3-, 5- or, most frequently, 7-point matches:

- Portes (=Doors, no-doubling Backgammon)
- Plakoto (=Slab-covered)
- Fevga (=Go Away, similar to Russian Backgammon)

that too.. :-)

rod03801: WhiteTower can't see the graph because he's a Pawn.

WhiteTower: It's a graph showing George's plummet in the backgammon ratings. From 2556 to 1869 and dropping in just a few days. 'E's been an' gorn an' legged it.

Only paying members can see the graphs.

This one should work for you

It is best to make your imbedded links the shortened version. BBW can explain it better, but there is a reason that using the full address causes some people to go to the main page instead.

/game/BKRGraph?u=9175&tp=23

playBunny: Ummm your link redirects to my Main page :(

Dramatic!

I'm concerned. I hope he's doing better than his games. :-(

WhiteTower: It doesn't sound like a whine to me. Slow players in fast tournaments are being inconsiderate. I'm compiling a list of such players. If I ever get to be director of speed tournaments, I will be excluding them.

So there is this tournament, declared specifically for fast players. What happens is that one player now holds up the whole tournament for days using the automatic vacation feature without telling (me at least) anything about the absence. Now, I know that according to the rules this user is fully entitled to this, but isn't there some kind of etiquette regarding these cases?...

Sorry if it sounds a bit like a whine...

Walter Montego: Lol. I think the Dice Guy might do well to take out a franchise on these dice. If he's wily he might even repackage them and flog them at other sites. ;-) Although I think there are players at every site who believe that these dice must already be available - to their opponents.

re: Rating formula ... Here, here!

Walter Montego: Well put.

[points microphone to Fencer]

Any comments, Mr Rachunek?

:)

WhiteTower: The rating system that we use here might work OK for games without any luck in them like Chess or Checkers, but it doesn't seem like a good system for single game matches of Backgammon. I remember a few weeks back a discussion about the ratings for the various games. I would like a ratings system to match each game's characteristics instead using the blanket approach and giving us one that's main effect is to discourage people from playing games that have luck in them with someone that is rated far below them. This isn't a problem in Chess since someone ranked far below has almost no chance of winning the game. In Backgammon even I might beat the world's champion of Backgammon just because I get lucky. I'd never stand a chance against any Chess master, let alone the world's champion. I think the rating should reflect this reality.

grenv: Not very nice... I will be more careful.

WhiteTower: it's because your opponent's rating is so far behind yours. unrated players actually have a hidden rating. If it's their first game I believe it's 1300.

Your expected BKR change: win: 2168 (0), draw: 2160 (-8), loss: 2152 (-16)

Ummm, so I have to win in order to avoid losing points... anyone else thinks this doesn't make sense?... Or doesn't it have to do with the unrated status?

playBunny: Does the dice guy know about these special dice? You might put him out of business. :)

WhiteTower: Ahah. It was that invisble word that has become clear. "Has the exact calculation of dice in backgammon games here been ever discussed?" So now I know that you don't want to know about GnuBg's dice generation choices, for instance. ;-)

Here? All I know is that I've reached #2 in the ratings because I bought the special $150 BrainKing "Roll-'em-as-you-want-'em" Dice! Lolol.

[For those, ie. not you WT ;-), who don't understand my sense of humour - This is a joke. It's funny and false, it's not serious or true. There are no "special $150 dice" as far as I know and nor would I use them and blah , blah ... Jeez, the lengths you have to take to avoid some people misunderstanding... As if they're only $150!!]

playBunny: OK, lemme make it more specific: at DailyGammon, they have a long FAQ entry devoted to how the dice is calculated, INCLUDING the Perl script that does the hard work. Here, nuffink! I mean, it's not like a trade secret or summin', is it?

WhiteTower: Care to be more specific?

Vikings: Care to be more specific?

Lol

WhiteTower: yep

Has the exact calculation of dice in backgammon games been ever discussed? Methods and randomization used etc.?

playBunny: ty

FNA: One on the bar is the same as one in your opponent's home table - its a loss by backgammon.

(By "behind the board" I assume you mean in your opponent's home table)

question for the players out there. If you do not get a chip off the board its gammon, if you have a chip behind the board and none off its backgammon? what if you have one on the bar and none off?

Fencer:
OK Fencer just posted here because backgammon is the only game I play here, except for one experiment with dark battleboats. I do like your site!

ajtgirl: Such things happen but the backup system should be faulty anyway :-) However, since this board is for backgammon discussion only, it might be better to continue on General Chat.

Hi, I am new here, a refugee from the crashed site, It'sYourTurn.com. I have been playing there for over 2 years and they constantly have down time. This last one has caused the site to be unavailable for 8 consecutive days. They only have a staff of 3 people and obviously had a faulty backup system. They claim to have 2,000,000 plus members, paying an average of $15.00 annually, which comes to about $30,000,000...can anyone explain to me how a popular web site such as IYT can be run so shoddily? Also, has this site (BK) ever experience similar problems? My loyalty, perhaps misplaced, is still with IYT because they have a great game called Jamble, which I am addicted to, but your backgammon game here is damn good and you have numerous convenience features here that IYT does not have. Any thoughts?
Ajtgirl NY, USA

Ebru: Yeah, random dice can be quite cruel. ;)

whats the problem with these dices ???? They are making me MAD with the style they roll... lol

ArtfulDodger: Just for the record, the opponent did the sporting thing. I watched the match and Marfitalu .. 5-1 .. definitely got the last word. ;-)

Marfitalu: Just dont play any more moves until the times start again, and he will time out and lose, as he should. It will just take some more time.

Marfitalu: you're right but he's got to play the sport about it.

Marfitalu: You should know that it takes the system about five minutes to "recognize" a time-out. After the time runs out, the system will, with a 5-min delay though, terminate the game.

Marfitalu: it may be unsportsman like if you have an agreement on the time per move...I'd just be sure you win at least one more in the series. Then you'll have the last word. ;)

Marfitalu: he's winning the game and time is suspended...I don't get why he should resign.

Marfitalu: I don't see any reason why should he resign. I wouldn't resign either.

AbigailII: Oh, I guess I picked up the string in the middle, never mind then.

grenv: sorry .. my fault .. my message directly below your message which was a reply to me (phew! ;)) .. anyway .. that message of me was a reply to peeky

about the other rating issues .. i agree with you ;)

when i want to judge my opponents strenght i look at his bkr, the number of games he played, how many he won, and his graph to see how he did lately (he could have lost a lot by timeouts, and dropped momentarily :)) .. so i combine all those data (and rarely i look who were his last opponents :))

i would love more types of ratings, but i dont know much about the overhead it would create .. that depends on the database structure

grenv: *nod* i have seen that happen a lot as well .. but peeky's question was why high rating would change more than his opponents rating .. as peeky played more games and his rating should change less, and because of their rating, the higher rating should lose more rating points when he lost, than the one with the lower rating (in case he lost) ... this was the case though .. the one with the lower rating would lose more rating points upon losing .. the question was why

about the net gain in rating when you win and lose one game with the same opponent .. its weird indeed and talked about a lot before already .. i think thats a weird result as well .. it will eventually lead everyone (who isnt that bad :)) to a higher rating when they play enough games