I feel that, in a very wide variety of areas of human achievement, psychological factors are ignored. Rarely is the question asked:
"How does accomplished people reach the optimal psychological
state?" **

To improve in backgammon, an obvious plan is to play XG and flag
the significant errors. But where my approach would be non-standard
is that I would give the errors a psychological profile. For example,
"Somehow didn't consider the best move", "Played too quickly", "Felt
hopeless about the position", "Felt overconfident", "Wasn't acquainted with
the relevant theory", "Messed up the computations" etc. etc. This is at
least as important as tagging positions according to pure backgammon
criteria.

** This is a riff on the Bushism "Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?" I didn't want to reference this explicitly, but I somehow doubt that
anyone would have got my joke if I didn't.

Paul

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 5/2/2022 6:51 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:

To improve in backgammon, an obvious plan is to play XG and flag
the significant errors. But where my approach would be non-standard
is that I would give the errors a psychological profile. For example, "Somehow didn't consider the best move", "Played too quickly", "Felt
hopeless about the position", "Felt overconfident", "Wasn't acquainted with
the relevant theory", "Messed up the computations" etc. etc. This is at least as important as tagging positions according to pure backgammon criteria.

I agree with your approach, although I don't know that I would call it non-standard. At least in chess, this sort of thing is standard fare
for coaches. But perhaps in backgammon, coaches aren't common even for
pros.

---
Tim Chow

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Doesn't it depend on what your goal is?

If I'm playing XG or GnuDung, my goal is to win. If I achieve that goal, does it *really* matter if some of my moves are deemed sub-optimal?

I have to say I am difficulty coming to terms with the mindset that as long as you play close to perfect, it doesn't matter if you get thrashed 15-0.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Monday, May 2, 2022 at 4:03:22 PM UTC+1, Nasti Chestikov wrote:

Doesn't it depend on what your goal is?

If I'm playing XG or GnuDung, my goal is to win. If I achieve that goal, does it *really* matter if some of my moves are deemed sub-optimal?

I have to say I am difficulty coming to terms with the mindset that as long as you play close to perfect, it doesn't matter if you get thrashed 15-0.

I totally share the mindset that if you play close to perfectly, it doesn't matter if you get thrashed 15-0.
The goal of match backgammon isn't to win -- it's to maximise your probability of winning.
It's totally possible to lose 15-0 while maximising that probability.

Paul

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Monday, 2 May 2022 at 16:49:33 UTC+1, peps...@gmail.com wrote:

On Monday, May 2, 2022 at 4:03:22 PM UTC+1, Nasti Chestikov wrote:

Doesn't it depend on what your goal is?

If I'm playing XG or GnuDung, my goal is to win. If I achieve that goal, does it *really* matter if some of my moves are deemed sub-optimal?

I have to say I am difficulty coming to terms with the mindset that as long as you play close to perfect, it doesn't matter if you get thrashed 15-0.

I totally share the mindset that if you play close to perfectly, it doesn't matter if you get thrashed 15-0.
The goal of match backgammon isn't to win -- it's to maximise your probability of winning.
It's totally possible to lose 15-0 while maximising that probability.

Paul

But isn't that counter-productive?

Oh dear, I've lost £50k tonight but the upside is.......I played perfectly.

The goal of any challenge etc is to win is it not?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Monday, May 2, 2022 at 5:35:43 PM UTC+1, Nasti Chestikov wrote:

On Monday, 2 May 2022 at 16:49:33 UTC+1, peps...@gmail.com wrote:

On Monday, May 2, 2022 at 4:03:22 PM UTC+1, Nasti Chestikov wrote:

Doesn't it depend on what your goal is?

If I'm playing XG or GnuDung, my goal is to win. If I achieve that goal, does it *really* matter if some of my moves are deemed sub-optimal?

I have to say I am difficulty coming to terms with the mindset that as long as you play close to perfect, it doesn't matter if you get thrashed 15-0.

I totally share the mindset that if you play close to perfectly, it doesn't matter if you get thrashed 15-0.
The goal of match backgammon isn't to win -- it's to maximise your probability of winning.
It's totally possible to lose 15-0 while maximising that probability.

Paul

But isn't that counter-productive?

Oh dear, I've lost £50k tonight but the upside is.......I played perfectly.

The goal of any challenge etc is to win is it not?

No, the goal of any challenge is to maximise your probability of winning.

Paul

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)