Here, XG not only lists just one move.
But .....
XGID=-aA-----a---b--a---ecb----:1:-1:1:61:3:1:3:0:10
X to play 61
1. 3-ply 2/1* 1/Off eq:+3.000
On July 23, 2022 at 7:00:33 PM UTC-6, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
Here, XG not only lists just one move.My XG doesn't do this.
But .....
XGID=-aA-----a---b--a---ecb----:1:-1:1:61:3:1:3:0:10
X to play 61
1. 3-ply 2/1* 1/Off eq:+3.000
You must have done a truncated rollout.
MK
Here, XG not only lists just one move.
But XG played what it seemed to think
was my "only move" for me.
However, 2/off is (of course) perfectly legal too.
Why was XG acting as if the hit is mandatory?
This sort of thing could really confuse a beginner.
Paul
XGID=-aA-----a---b--a---ecb----:1:-1:1:61:3:1:3:0:10
X:Daniel O:eXtremeGammon
Score is X:3 O:1. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| O | | O O O | +---+
| | | O O O | | 2 |
| | | O O | +---+
| | | O |
| | | O |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| O | | |
| O O | | X O |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 2 O: 130 X-O: 3-1
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 61
1. 3-ply 2/1* 1/Off eq:+3.000
Player: 100.00% (G:100.00% B:100.00%)
Opponent: 0.00% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10
I think you're the one who's confused about the rules. You have
to use both dice if you can. Therefore you must play the 1 first
and then the 6.
On July 24, 2022 at 8:32:03 AM UTC+1, MK wrote:
My XG doesn't do this.
You must have done a truncated rollout.
I didn't do any rollout. This happened during a game.
Here's a more consequential position where
you presumably would not make the same
mistake of thinking that 6/off is legal. XGID=-bbA-aA-------------------:1:-1:1:61:0:0:0:0:10
However, both Gnubg and XG play 62, 52 or 42
not as 6/5* 5/off but as 6/off at all ply levels.
On 7/24/2022 6:46 PM, MK wrote:
However, both Gnubg and XG play 62, 52 or 42
not as 6/5* 5/off but as 6/off at all ply levels.
With a roll of 62, 52, or 42, it is illegal to play 6/5* 5/off.
On 7/24/2022 6:46 PM, MK wrote:
However, both Gnubg and XG play 62, 52 or 42
not as 6/5* 5/off but as 6/off at all ply levels.
With a roll of 62, 52, or 42, it is illegal to play 6/5* 5/off.
I believe that what you meant to say is that
you don't like it when the bots say "6/off"
when they mean "6/4 4/off."
I personally don't think there's anything wrong
with omitting the intermediate number when
nothing is hit.
Though I can see that it can be confusing to
some people in situations like the one below. XGID=aBBBBBA-------------------:1:1:1:61:0:0:0:0:10
X to play 61
1. 3-ply 6/Off eq:-0.615
2. 3-ply 6/Off 1/Off eq:-0.697 (-0.083)
It's not about what I like or not. If the rules is
that "You have to use both dice if you can.",
then the correct play *and* correct notation
of the correct play is "6/4 4/off".
On Sunday, July 24, 2022 at 1:37:39 PM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:
I think you're the one who's confused about the rules. You have
to use both dice if you can. Therefore you must play the 1 first
and then the 6.
You're exactly correct. My OTB play was 2/off which would, of course,
be accepted by a human opponent (although illegal) (if they hadn't already resigned).
On 25/07/2022 3:34 pm, MK wrote:
It's not about what I like or not. If the rules is
that "You have to use both dice if you can.",
then the correct play *and* correct notation
of the correct play is "6/4 4/off".
You're a one man conspiracy cult, Murat :-)
There are no notation rules in backgammon.
Common sense and practicality prevail.
Here's a more consequential position where you presumably would
not make the same mistake of thinking that 6/off is legal.
XGID=-bbA-aA-------------------:1:-1:1:61:0:0:0:0:10
X:Player 1 O:Player 2
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| | | | +---+
| | | | | 2 |
| | | | +---+
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | O O |
| | | X O X O O |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 9 O: 114 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 61
1. 3-ply 6/5* 5/Off eq:+0.967
Player: 98.61% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Opponent: 1.39% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
On Sunday, July 24, 2022 at 1:42:36 PM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:
Here's a more consequential position where you presumably would
not make the same mistake of thinking that 6/off is legal.
XGID=-bbA-aA-------------------:1:-1:1:61:0:0:0:0:10
X:Player 1 O:Player 2Actually, now that I think about it, I think that I had
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| | | | +---+
| | | | | 2 |
| | | | +---+
| | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | O O |
| | | X O X O O |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 9 O: 114 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 61
1. 3-ply 6/5* 5/Off eq:+0.967
Player: 98.61% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
Opponent: 1.39% (G:0.00% B:0.00%)
a genuine confusion about the rules until I started this thread.
While I have no doubt that your and XG's interpretation of the rules
is correct, I would still maintain that, if you look at many rulesets literally,
it's a perfectly valid interpretation of the rules to say that 6/off without hitting
is perfectly legal.
In fact, I did think a non-hitting 6/off was legal here.
If you wonder how a strongish player like me could be so confused, please bear in mind
that this situation really is extremely rare, so my confusion was able to last for so many years.
All rulesets say (correctly) that you win when you remove all your checkers. However, the rulesets don't usually say that the objective can't be maintained (and the game
therefore won) mid-move.
I used to think that I could play 6/off and then say "I know there's normally a 1 remaining but
I've obtained my objective mid-move and I've won the game so the task of playing the 1 doesn't remain."
In case you think that this interpretation is ridiculous, a contrast with chess is useful.
In competitive chess, a move consists of moving a piece (or pieces) and then pressing the clock.
The move is not completed until you press your clock.
However, checkmate ends the game mid-move.
Once you have checkmated, you have already won the game, even if you have ignored the clock and not
done that part of the move.
I'm sure XG has got this right, so I'm not doubting you.
But I'd be interested to see where it says in the rules that you can't achieve your objective (and therefore win the game)
in the middle of your move, as you can in chess.
Thank you.
Paul
In the original position, I still don't see why 2/off (without hitting) is clearly illegal because a player could
argue that they had achieved their objective mid-move and therefore, because the objective is
attained, the 1 need not be played.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 292 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 195:07:09 |
| Calls: | 6,616 |
| Files: | 12,166 |
| Messages: | 5,315,464 |