Czuch Chuckers: i meant at the end of the game

she just rolled a double 2 and could bear all her men off except 1

you had only 4 men in your home, so either a double 4,5 or double 6 would win you the game ... that still was a chance of 1/12 to win .. but you resigned and threw away that chance .... we will never know if your next roll would have been a high double though :)

Czuch Chuckers: why did you resign in the last move ? you could have rolled a high double and still win

that game was a nice example of how a backgame can win :)

i would take the double hit, leaving only 1 single, and your opponents board empty so you would have no problem getting back on the board

redsales: *nod* thats why i thought it to be a very good move :) its often very nice to know your opponent in bg

btw in the messages i the game redsales worked even more towards this point by stating 'one is going down hard in this game' (or something like that :)) .. i had to agree (with a smile :)) and next turn i felt like i had to drop the double :)

grenv & playBunny: hmm might be true indeed .. the game wasnt that far advanced yet .. and i played for 4 (or 2*gammon) in the other match with him as well (and got 4-0 behind ;))

i guess i was scared .. i wonder if he doubled because of that ... redsales .. did you ? ;)

playBunny: really ????? no way!
hmm maybe i was too chicken :)

i would have continued if he had not doubled .. but i didnt dare to play it for 2 points (or gammoned 4) :)

playBunny: wow i would never expected .. you are right about the vulnerable piece on 11 though :)

i am on a roll for luck in that game .. i tell myself i should play more safe now .. but i cant help it with this start :)

grenv: even when leaving 2 singles in my home ? *shiver* :)

playBunny & grenv: lol! i tried it out against redsale .. i would have done 12-14,1-2 normally .. but i wanted to try it out because of this conversation and it even happened in a game at the same time :)

he sent me to the bar with 1 piece .. the other is still there .. lets see what this will bring me :)

grenv: ok .. like in this game

grenv: it seemed to work out ... i am still there :) (although a double 6 from his side would have been best for me ;))

how could i make my 4 point when rolling 2+3 ?

grenv: ah ok .. thats something to keep in mind .. i already to focus especially on the 5 point .. but 4 is important as well i guess :) .. makes sense :)

grenv: i edited my post to add an example which just occured in which i did send both pieces to the bar :)

skipinnz & playBunny: uhoh ... i guess i have to bribe the gods of dice then :)

barb .. lets do a special type of game .. lets see if you can roll more 1+2 than i can roll high doubles ;)

grenv: *nod* *blush* :)

suppose my opponent rolls 1+5 on the first roll and moves 13-8,24-23

i then roll 4+5, is it wise to send the pieces from 23 and 24 to the bar but leaving 2 singles in my home ?

or like in this example, where i did send both pieces to the bar (my other option was 16-19,1-3 ?)

i remember it going well for me, but also going pretty bad :)

playBunny: uhm .. i guess i used the word 'home' wrong there :)

suppose your opponent has 2 singles in your home, is it wise to hit both, but leaving 2 singles of my own in your home ? (again, early in the game)

'home' is where i am bearing off from or where my pieces from the bar enter the game ? .. i now guess i bear off from my home :)

i accepted the double in this game .. but i fear i should have dropped ... i am feeling lucky though and hope she will miss some bear offs because she only has 1 piece on 23+24

any opinions ?

is it always best to capture 2 pieces of your opponent ?

suppose my opponent leaves a single in his home, and another single somewhere else on the board. i can hit both singles but i will leave a single in his home (which will cost me quite some pips when hit) ... i am talking about early in the game when not much has changed yet

suppose your opponent has 2 singles in his home, is it wise to hit both, but leaving 2 singles of my own in his home ? (again, early in the game)

(and another question: whats a blitz?)

playBunny: lol! true! at least i was consequent in my mistakes :) .. or wasnt i ? :)

playBunny: uhm yes i meant 13-8, 24-23 :)

(i didnt check the board and am not experienced enough to know the numbers from the top of my head :))

Czuch Chuckers: i usually play 12-17 and 24-23 .... i am too chicken to place a single on 19 right away :)

Czuch Chuckers: ah! could be, i noticed before that i have to make 1 move first before i am given the option to double .. i am not sure if its a standard rule for backgammon, but it seems to be that way on here

Czuch Chuckers: cant see anything weird .. i think you should be able to double ?

playBunny: *nod* thats a better idea indeed :)

playBunny: these links are great! thanks!

(s-q/bbw: is it possible to put (a selection of) those links on top of this board?)

grenv: ah ok .. i guess i am in a defensive mood today ... right now i would be terrified by the idea of being closed in by a block over 19,20,21 :)

Pythagoras: not 24-20(2) ?

grenv: *nod* agree :)

playBunny & Pythagoras: thanks!
a lot depends on my mood for sure ... i know myself to play too aggressive sometimes .. but sometimes i just noticed and and tend to be quite careful :)

i always wondered if leaving the single on 8 is a bad thing (when rolling double 1 for example) .. but i guess its danger is outweighed by the move :))

thanks!

KotDB: lol! *slap forehead* you are right :) i forgot about that :)

i guess the games in which i wondered about it is when my opponent had the first move and my double roll was in fact the second roll in the game

I never see any doubles in the opening rollouts, why is this ?

• double 6 is clear to me, 24-18 (2x) and 13-7 (2x)
  
• double 5: most probably 13-3(2x)
  
• double 4 is a doubt: 13-5(2x), or 13-9(2x) and 6-2(2x), or 8-4(2x) and 6-2(2x). I tend to go with 13-9(2x) and 24-20(2x)
  
• double 3: i have no real idea, i go either 13-8(2x) or 6-3(2x) and something else
  
• double 2: i have no idea either, i usually go 6-4(2x) and 1-5 or 13-11(2x) or 13-9
  
• double 1: 6-5(2) and 8-7(2x) ?
  

Pythagoras: nice site! thanks!

playBunny: thanks! that looks like what i felt as well.

thanks for the explanations! it now shows a lot more to me :)

playBunny: uhm ... care for a little explanation ? ;)

(i only played with gnubg for a couple of days and that was several months ago :))

grenv: what about 24-18 and 13-9 ?

nobody25: *nod* true .. handled personally is always better, especially with rooks who are often on the site and are known to answer

i didnt even know you were #1 for a while :) fun :) it only happened once to me .. not in a gammon type though but just when espionage came online, i was one of the first to complete 4 games :) .. yes never been #1 established .. but i am working on my gammon skills lately :)

ZEROZERO: some players show weird patterns, have a look at some of the top players of hyper gammon .. i dont think there are any weird ones up there now .. but now and then a new player (often pawns) shows up in there with very weird games (often a lot of resigns by his opponents, which are also pawns, in games which the opponent would have won) ... some people look at the top ratings to have a look who are moving up the ranks and who arent .. and to study their games to see if they can learn anything new from them and to challenge them for an interesting game themselves

i know both you and nobody from several games and know you arent cheating (at least i wouldnt expect you two to do :)) ... but curiousity is a characterstic of humans which cant be denied ... even though it wasnt cheating i was curious to what happened myself as well :)
not thats its a matter of life or death to me .. but something which can make one curious (and that doesnt have to be a bad suspicion)

(sorry for the wrong english words :))

furbster: ah! thats a bit better :)

wow! a double allows all doubles up to double 6 ? that increases the luck factor a lot! (i think?)

grenv: *nod* my thoughts as well .. (i left the stairs with single games :))

still a double six can easily make a game (or even a 5 point match)

alanback proposed to use different rules in hyper gammon (fencer proposed to create a new type with those rules ... well fencer didnt say he would .. but if such rules would come into place then it would be easier to create a new game type for it :))

the new rules are

1) double count as normal rolls (only use each die once)

2) no formation of blocks (a player can not place more than 1 piece at a position)

i didnt want to clutter the feature request board with this discussion so i started it here :)

would this game be better ?
i can see the point of treating doubles as normal rolls .. i think that would be a good change ...
but removing the blocks makes the game too much a lucky race i think ?

pentejr: lol .. more the opposite for me ... i wonder why i didnt double sometimes .. and often wonder why i accepted :)

pentejr: *nod* i do look at the pip count .. but only when the board setup makes me decide to accept the double with a little doubt

thanks for taking a second thought when playing me .. thats a good compliment .. although i would rather have you offer mindless doubles ;)

playBunny & Pythagoras: thanks! i am trying to create a feeling for when to accept and when not :)

the chance to gammon made me doubt indeed :)

at this point i was offered a double .. i declined .. any comments ?

playBunny: ah ok :) i dont know :) i just like it because it protects me from my blond moments :)

playBunny: it would be very bad to offer a double when you are just 1 away .. you gain nothing from it while your opponent might if he is more than 1 away.

would you want to double in that case ?

playBunny: i dont have anymore data either :)
all we have seems to be the site for the chess formula which is used (but i think a bit altered) and our games data

also a few months ago the rating formula was changed so the data from previous games in my memory might have been with the old formula
(but i think the old formula favoured more games played much more by a higher rating)

playBunny: when you have less games played your bkr will rise or drop more steeply

it takes quite some games to become a bit stable ... the 25 games which are needed to get an established rating isnt really enough ...

you can see that mjost clearly when playing opponents with roughly the same rating ... you will both win or gain the same amount of rating ... but this will be slightly more for a player who has played less games.

when i was around 100 game i think it was 13 points for me, now its around 6 points i think
(your +2 and -13 have an average change of 7 (absolute) .. your opponents -3 and +23 have an avera change of 13 .. this is probably due to the number of games played for each opponent

when only a few (relatively) games are played, the real top players havent been able to gain a real advantage in their rating yet as the opponents they did beat are just in the mid section of the ratings ... sub top players will have won about the same number of games, maybe a bit less, against opponents out of the mid section of the ratings .. as everyone is at that section when the game comes online first

when a game has been around longer then some people are around 2000 ... and the top players have been able to beat those 2000 players quite a few times raising their own rating ..

the difference between pahtum and loop chess probably comes from the fact that pahtum gives a bigger chance to win with white than with black .. while this isnt true (or at least much less) with loop chess .. therefore pahtum will have quite some draws (especially with the 2 games stairs) or an equal number of wins and losses between the same players .. in loop chess a real good player can win much more often than a real good player would be able to win with pahtum .. this will lead to a higher rating for the top player in loop chess