• Thoughts and suggestions on backgammon notation.

    From MK@21:1/5 to Simon Woodhead on Thu Jul 28 03:23:25 2022
    On July 25, 2022 at 2:45:49 AM UTC-6, Simon Woodhead wrote:

    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 :-)

    How did you see conspiracy in what I wrote?
    Did you perhaps feel like saying whatever to
    simply attack me?

    But this time I won't do the same to you and
    as an answer to your post, I will try to write a
    comprehensive article about how's and why's
    backgammon games should be notated, also
    in addressing all issues discussed in other posts
    in this thread (and then some), as best as i can.

    I will also try to be as nice and as compassionate
    as I can while doing that, with the hopes that you
    all may learn something towards analytical and
    systematical thinking, for better understanding
    backgammon and becoming better players.

    There are no notation rules in backgammon.

    Yes. Unfortunately true and to the detriment of
    backgammon. I think there were a few attempts
    in the past, like proposed BGX(?), etc. standards,
    but apparently nothing came out of them.

    Common sense and practicality prevail.

    No. Unfortunately again, this is not true at all.

    All notations past and present are so devoid of
    common sense and practicality that one would
    think it's all done so badly on purpose.

    I will here examine their details and make some
    propositions, both from the view and for the sake
    of both the game of backhammon and its players
    and of bot programming and data processing in
    general.

    I'll number my paragraphs to delienate sub-topics.
    So, let me start.

    1) Obviously BG notation is done to communicate
    game info among human and bot players, mostly
    to preserve it in order to use it later.

    The most important, desirable quality of preserved
    data is for it to be as "raw" as possible. Think of raw
    BMP images which can be repeatedly processed vs
    lossy, condensed JPG images which can't be without
    further losing bits of data.

    Thus, unlike all bots and humans currently do, dice
    rolls should not be notated with the higher number
    first. Statistically, a 52 is different than a 25. Unless
    this distinction is preserved, you can never go back
    to statistically analyse dice rolls/rollers.

    There is something much more important about it
    from the player's sake perspective, which is that it
    conditions the player's brain to alwasy process the
    higher number first and turns them into bad players
    by tempting and causing them to assess and play
    the higher number first, very often erroneously.

    The same harm is done also by the bots that offer
    to always display the higher number first. Humans
    should never use this feature and allow their brains
    to remain flexibly capable of processing dice rolls
    either way.

    2) Unlike all bots and humans currently do, moves
    should not be notated with higher die numbers first.

    In games like chess where only one piece is moved
    only once per move (counting castle as one move),
    there is nothing to say about the order of moves.

    In backgammon, depending on the position and dice,
    a player may move 0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 pieces, by moving a
    piece more than once and/or making the same move
    more than once.

    This makes the order of the individual moves is very
    important, not only while making the moves during
    a game but also while analysing past games that had
    been played between better human or bot players, in
    order to learn from them.

    For example, playing a 52 as 19/14 7/5 is obsolutely
    not the same thing as playing it as 7/5 19/14 even if
    the resulting position is the same.

    Think about you guys' own position/play discussions
    here. Often times you say things like "the 2 is obvious
    but how do you play the 5?"

    By notating it as 7/5 19/14 you preserve that bit of
    info that 7/5 was the obviously, decisively correct
    move. By notating it as 19/14 7/5 you lose it forever.

    3) Unlike all bots and humans currently do, moves
    should not be notated starting at higher points first
    for the same reason as above.

    Using the same 52 example but this time with the 5
    being the obvious move, notating it as 19/17 7/2
    (simply because the 19-point is higher numbered
    than the 7-point) is just as bad, instead of notating
    7/2 19/14 even if the resulting position is the same.

    4) Because the double numbers are played four times,
    the issues with the order of moves in the above sub-
    topics 2 and 3 are further magnified with doublets.

    For example, if you played a 33 as 6/3 (to make your
    3-point) 8/5 (to move a blot to safety) 23/20 (to get
    ready to escape) 6/3 (just to reduce the stack on your
    6-point), according to how you perceived and made
    each move in your own order of importance, nothing
    can be worse than notating it as 23/20 8/5 6/3 6/3 or
    23/20 8/5 6/3(2), etc. based on such useless, in fact
    counter productive, things like in descending order of
    point/die numbers.

    Now on to somewhat minor issues...

    5) Not all bots and humans indicate a blot hit using an
    asterisk. I deem this as necessary beyond being merely
    a useful clarification because when a piece is hit, it is
    touched and moved from a point on the board to the
    bar and thus technically counting as a separate move.

    6) Even hand-notating backgammon games in real time
    doesn't require the speed of court reporting. Shortening
    notations doesn't serve any practical purpose to save time
    or storage space, (which is miniscule for text format data),
    but to the contrary, makes them more lossy, cryptic and
    confusing.

    Personally, I would prefer "Cannot Move" instead of just
    blank spaces, "Bar/.." instead of "25/..", "../Off" instead of
    "../0", etc. which are more human than machine language.

    7) Currently many bots display the possible legal moves
    and the actual moves made differently during the games
    and then even more differently when saving/exporting
    then in different file foemats. This is a clear proof of how
    your venerated gamblegammon bots are total garbage
    products of incest among mentally ill gambler in all roles.
    Consistency ensures quality and is of utmost importance.

    8) If playing both/all dice numbers when possible is the
    rule, then it should be used throughout the entire game
    including during bearing off without confusing exceptions.
    Consistency in applying rules is of utmost importance.

    9) Checker and cube errors during bearing off are more
    critical than during early and even middle stages of the
    games and thus all moves need to be notated separately
    and in the same order as they were made.

    10) Finally, not only that all of those unnecessary gildings
    of the lily are counterproductive for the humans but they
    also "uglify" the computer code by causing a bloating in
    programming more logical decisions and data processing.
    For purists in computer programming, simple is beautiful.

    When you consider that while exporting/importing games
    among different bots all those inconsistencies cause more
    problems, it becomes clearer that haphazardly trying to
    make something more out of backgammon and more so
    of gamblegammon (a la chess) than what it really is will only
    make it less...

    MK

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Timothy Chow@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jul 28 08:36:41 2022
    On 7/28/2022 6:23 AM, MK wrote:
    The most important, desirable quality of preserved
    data is for it to be as "raw" as possible.

    Ah, I get it. You want more statistics for gamblers to be
    able to bet on, like in baseball, where every detail of the
    game is preserved for the benefit of sports bettors. Makes
    sense.

    Thus, unlike all bots and humans currently do, dice
    rolls should not be notated with the higher number
    first. Statistically, a 52 is different than a 25. Unless
    this distinction is preserved, you can never go back
    to statistically analyse dice rolls/rollers.

    This cannot be done with live games unless the dice are
    distinguishable (e.g., by color).

    10) Finally, not only that all of those unnecessary gildings
    of the lily

    Don't you mean "paintings of the lily"?

    ---
    Tim Chow

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From pepstein5@gmail.com@21:1/5 to Tim Chow on Thu Jul 28 07:46:43 2022
    On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 1:36:47 PM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:
    On 7/28/2022 6:23 AM, MK wrote:
    The most important, desirable quality of preserved
    data is for it to be as "raw" as possible.
    Ah, I get it. You want more statistics for gamblers to be
    able to bet on, like in baseball, where every detail of the
    game is preserved for the benefit of sports bettors. Makes
    sense.
    Thus, unlike all bots and humans currently do, dice
    rolls should not be notated with the higher number
    first. Statistically, a 52 is different than a 25. Unless
    this distinction is preserved, you can never go back
    to statistically analyse dice rolls/rollers.
    This cannot be done with live games unless the dice are
    distinguishable (e.g., by color).
    10) Finally, not only that all of those unnecessary gildings
    of the lily
    Don't you mean "paintings of the lily"?

    ---
    Tim Chow

    I don't get your point, Tim.
    Isn't "gild the lily" the standard idiom?
    "Paint the lily" sounds like your own idiosyncratic variantization.

    Paul

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ah...Clem@21:1/5 to peps...@gmail.com on Thu Jul 28 17:14:40 2022
    On 7/28/2022 10:46 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 1:36:47 PM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:

    Don't you mean "paintings of the lily"?

    ---
    Tim Chow

    I don't get your point, Tim.
    Isn't "gild the lily" the standard idiom?
    "Paint the lily" sounds like your own idiosyncratic variantization.




    https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/gild-the-lily-origin-shakespeare

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From MK@21:1/5 to peps...@gmail.com on Thu Jul 28 15:54:36 2022
    On July 28, 2022 at 8:46:45 AM UTC-6, peps...@gmail.com wrote:

    On July 28, 2022 at 1:36:47 PM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:

    On 7/28/2022 6:23 AM, MK wrote:

    10) Finally, not only that all of those unnecessary
    gildings of the lily

    Don't you mean "paintings of the lily"?

    I don't get your point, Tim.
    Isn't "gild the lily" the standard idiom?
    "Paint the lily" sounds like your own idiosyncratic
    variantization.

    As usual, you "two lilies are gilding each other" with
    such petty pédéantics...

    But you two are incapable of "getting it", i.e. seeing
    intended usage details and understanding nuances
    in language, such as my having written "gildings" in
    plural, adapting an idiom to what I meant to convey.

    If someday I write "guilding the lilies", make sure you
    "get it" that I will mean to convey something else by
    using the word "lily" in plural instead...

    MK

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From MK@21:1/5 to Tim Chow on Thu Jul 28 15:33:19 2022
    On July 28, 2022 at 6:36:47 AM UTC-6, Tim Chow wrote:

    On 7/28/2022 6:23 AM, MK wrote:

    The most important, desirable quality of preserved
    data is for it to be as "raw" as possible.

    Ah, I get it.

    No, you don't get it.

    You want more statistics for gamblers to be
    able to bet on, like in baseball, where every
    detail of the game is preserved for the benefit
    of sports bettors. Makes sense.

    This is all your own irrelevant nonsense...

    Statistically, a 52 is different than a 25. Unless
    this distinction is preserved, you can never go
    back to statistically analyse dice rolls/rollers.

    This cannot be done with live games unless
    the dice are distinguishable (e.g., by color).

    I thought you would be smart (ass) enough to
    "get it" that I was obviously referring to testing
    the randomness of bot dice but that is based
    based on my assumption that the randomness
    of manual dice is never questioned. Therefore,
    if you can give an example of this being done,
    I will give you credit for making a valuable point.

    10) Finally, not only that all of those
    unnecessary gildings of the lily

    Don't you mean "paintings of the lily"?

    No, I mean "gildings of the lily".

    MK

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From MK@21:1/5 to ah...Clem on Thu Jul 28 16:27:48 2022
    On July 28, 2022 at 3:14:45 PM UTC-6, ah...Clem wrote:

    On 7/28/2022 10:46 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:

    On July 28, 2022 at 1:36:47 PM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:

    Don't you mean "paintings of the lily"?

    Isn't "gild the lily" the standard idiom?

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/gild-the-lily-origin-shakespeare

    Do we have a late entry into the "Lilies of the RGB"
    contest here...?

    Why are you pathetics focusing and dwelling on a
    detail that is at best remotely related to the subject
    of the thread? But since you are, let me try to help
    with improving your language analitics.

    1) There are no such thing as "standard idioms", i.e.
    "standard idiocies", in languages. Any idiot can coin
    a new idiom and if the other idiot doesn't "get it", he
    can always explain it using alternative idioms.

    2) Unlike gilding gold with gold doesn't make it any
    more valuable, gilding the lily not only changes the
    color of the lily but also makes it more valuable. So,
    don't just assume that an idiom that arose from a
    misquoting can't be used precisely meaningfully in
    a certain context.

    You can, of course, fake the gilding and "paint the
    lily a near gold/goldish color" using other pigments
    but if I had simply said "pintings of the lily", Chow
    wouldn't necessarily "get it" right either. He could
    visualize lilies covered with white, pink, red, yellow,
    etc. color paints before gold color paint, and most
    likely never covered with real gold...

    MK

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Timothy Chow@21:1/5 to peps...@gmail.com on Fri Jul 29 08:01:52 2022
    On 7/28/2022 10:46 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
    I don't get your point, Tim.

    The point is to generate entertainment by provoking Murat into
    a hilarious defense of his ignorance. As usual, Murat delivers
    with flying colors.

    ---
    Tim Chow

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Timothy Chow@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jul 29 09:17:00 2022
    On 7/28/2022 6:33 PM, MK wrote:
    On July 28, 2022 at 6:36:47 AM UTC-6, Tim Chow wrote:
    Ah, I get it.

    No, you don't get it.

    You want more statistics for gamblers to be
    able to bet on, like in baseball, where every
    detail of the game is preserved for the benefit
    of sports bettors. Makes sense.

    This is all your own irrelevant nonsense...

    But I thought you were a big fan of gambling. Isn't that
    why you talk about gambling all the time?

    ---
    Tim Chow

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