• Backgammon Super Genius Quiz

    From Timothy Chow@21:1/5 to All on Thu Oct 13 09:46:10 2022
    I just bought James Vogl's new book, "Backgammon Super Genius
    Quiz." It contains 100 tough quiz problems that were presented
    to 12 of the world's top backgammon players under competition
    conditions. First prize was $5,000. The 12 contestants were:

    Aref Alipour
    Bob Wachtel
    David Wells
    Dirk Schiemann
    Hideaki Ueda
    Joe Russell
    Mochy
    Ryan Rebelo
    Sander Lylloff
    Sebastian Wilkinson
    Wilcox Snellings
    Zdenek Zizka

    I won't spoil things by telling you who won, but I will say that
    even the winner scored only 56/100. That gives you some idea of
    how tough the problems are.

    I've only just started the book (I got 5 of the first 10 problems
    right), but I can already tell you what I think are the main pros
    and cons.

    Pro 1: Every problem solution is accompanied by commentary by some
    of the 12 contestants. As you might expect, there are some really
    top-notch insights to be found here.

    Pro 2: You can take the quiz yourself under conditions that are
    very similar to those under which the contestants took the real quiz.
    Just give yourself an average of 1 minute per problem, or 10 minutes
    per set of 10 problems. The answers don't appear until the end of
    each section, so you can take an honest look at each problem and make
    your decision before seeing the answer.

    Pro 3: Most of the problems themselves are very interesting. The
    position on the cover is one which none of the 12 contestants got right!

    Con 1: The print quality of the book is poor. The diagrams are legible,
    but fuzzy and unattractive, sometimes with weird proportions. The
    rollout information is barely legible, and we are not shown how much
    variance is left in the equity estimates. The introductory section,
    where the contestants are briefly interviewed, contains photos that are downright awful---tiny, grainy, and often with a highly distorted aspect
    ratio. The sans-serif font that was chosen for the main text of the
    book also makes it look amateurish to my eyes.

    Con 2: In some of the problems, there is very little equity at stake.
    I don't find these as interesting, one reason being that who knows if
    the next generation of bots will agree with the answer. Also, the
    contestants were ranked based on the number of problems they got right
    and not by the total equity lost, which seems somewhat unsatisfactory.

    Con 3: The problems were multiple choice. There seems to be no good
    reason for this, and it gives away information unnecessarily.

    Overall, I thought the Pros greatly outweighed the Cons, and I highly
    recommend the book to others. I just hope that if there is a sequel,
    the production quality of the book will be better.

    ---
    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 Oct 13 08:53:49 2022
    On Thursday, October 13, 2022 at 2:46:14 PM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:
    I just bought James Vogl's new book, "Backgammon Super Genius
    Quiz." It contains 100 tough quiz problems that were presented
    to 12 of the world's top backgammon players under competition
    conditions. First prize was $5,000. The 12 contestants were:

    Aref Alipour
    Bob Wachtel
    David Wells
    Dirk Schiemann
    Hideaki Ueda
    Joe Russell
    Mochy
    Ryan Rebelo
    Sander Lylloff
    Sebastian Wilkinson
    Wilcox Snellings
    Zdenek Zizka

    I won't spoil things by telling you who won, but I will say that
    even the winner scored only 56/100. That gives you some idea of
    how tough the problems are.

    I've only just started the book (I got 5 of the first 10 problems
    right), but I can already tell you what I think are the main pros
    and cons.

    Pro 1: Every problem solution is accompanied by commentary by some
    of the 12 contestants. As you might expect, there are some really
    top-notch insights to be found here.

    Pro 2: You can take the quiz yourself under conditions that are
    very similar to those under which the contestants took the real quiz.
    Just give yourself an average of 1 minute per problem, or 10 minutes
    per set of 10 problems. The answers don't appear until the end of
    each section, so you can take an honest look at each problem and make
    your decision before seeing the answer.

    Pro 3: Most of the problems themselves are very interesting. The
    position on the cover is one which none of the 12 contestants got right!

    Con 1: The print quality of the book is poor. The diagrams are legible,
    but fuzzy and unattractive, sometimes with weird proportions. The
    rollout information is barely legible, and we are not shown how much
    variance is left in the equity estimates. The introductory section,
    where the contestants are briefly interviewed, contains photos that are downright awful---tiny, grainy, and often with a highly distorted aspect ratio. The sans-serif font that was chosen for the main text of the
    book also makes it look amateurish to my eyes.

    Con 2: In some of the problems, there is very little equity at stake.
    I don't find these as interesting, one reason being that who knows if
    the next generation of bots will agree with the answer. Also, the
    contestants were ranked based on the number of problems they got right
    and not by the total equity lost, which seems somewhat unsatisfactory.

    Con 3: The problems were multiple choice. There seems to be no good
    reason for this, and it gives away information unnecessarily.

    Overall, I thought the Pros greatly outweighed the Cons, and I highly recommend the book to others. I just hope that if there is a sequel,
    the production quality of the book will be better.

    ---
    Tim Chow

    Con 4: Gender Imbalance. All of the 12 contestants were male.
    (Is this right? I don't know this for a fact.)

    Paul Epstein

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Stick Rice@21:1/5 to peps...@gmail.com on Thu Oct 13 15:57:53 2022
    On Thursday, October 13, 2022 at 11:53:50 AM UTC-4, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Thursday, October 13, 2022 at 2:46:14 PM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:
    I just bought James Vogl's new book, "Backgammon Super Genius
    Quiz." It contains 100 tough quiz problems that were presented
    to 12 of the world's top backgammon players under competition
    conditions. First prize was $5,000. The 12 contestants were:

    Aref Alipour
    Bob Wachtel
    David Wells
    Dirk Schiemann
    Hideaki Ueda
    Joe Russell
    Mochy
    Ryan Rebelo
    Sander Lylloff
    Sebastian Wilkinson
    Wilcox Snellings
    Zdenek Zizka

    I won't spoil things by telling you who won, but I will say that
    even the winner scored only 56/100. That gives you some idea of
    how tough the problems are.

    I've only just started the book (I got 5 of the first 10 problems
    right), but I can already tell you what I think are the main pros
    and cons.

    Pro 1: Every problem solution is accompanied by commentary by some
    of the 12 contestants. As you might expect, there are some really top-notch insights to be found here.

    Pro 2: You can take the quiz yourself under conditions that are
    very similar to those under which the contestants took the real quiz.
    Just give yourself an average of 1 minute per problem, or 10 minutes
    per set of 10 problems. The answers don't appear until the end of
    each section, so you can take an honest look at each problem and make
    your decision before seeing the answer.

    Pro 3: Most of the problems themselves are very interesting. The
    position on the cover is one which none of the 12 contestants got right!

    Con 1: The print quality of the book is poor. The diagrams are legible, but fuzzy and unattractive, sometimes with weird proportions. The
    rollout information is barely legible, and we are not shown how much variance is left in the equity estimates. The introductory section,
    where the contestants are briefly interviewed, contains photos that are downright awful---tiny, grainy, and often with a highly distorted aspect ratio. The sans-serif font that was chosen for the main text of the
    book also makes it look amateurish to my eyes.

    Con 2: In some of the problems, there is very little equity at stake.
    I don't find these as interesting, one reason being that who knows if
    the next generation of bots will agree with the answer. Also, the contestants were ranked based on the number of problems they got right
    and not by the total equity lost, which seems somewhat unsatisfactory.

    Con 3: The problems were multiple choice. There seems to be no good
    reason for this, and it gives away information unnecessarily.

    Overall, I thought the Pros greatly outweighed the Cons, and I highly recommend the book to others. I just hope that if there is a sequel,
    the production quality of the book will be better.

    ---
    Tim Chow
    Con 4: Gender Imbalance. All of the 12 contestants were male.
    (Is this right? I don't know this for a fact.)

    Paul Epstein

    All contestants were male but to fit the stipulation of "12 of the world's top backgammon players" they almost have to be. I don't know if that's Tim's stipulation/presentation, James', or both but depending on how you define it a few people should not
    be included.

    Stick

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Timothy Chow@21:1/5 to Stick Rice on Thu Oct 13 23:48:21 2022
    On 10/13/2022 6:57 PM, Stick Rice wrote:
    All contestants were male but to fit the stipulation of "12 of the world's top backgammon players" they almost have to be. I don't know if that's Tim's stipulation/presentation, James', or both but depending on how you define it a few people should
    not be included.

    It was James's wording. The first sentence of the Introduction
    uses the phrase, "a dozen of the world's best players."

    I just checked the BMAB, which I know Stick doesn't care for, but
    which at least provides some objective information. Nine of the
    players are listed there, but I'm going to omit Wachtel because
    he has too few BMAB games for his ranking to be meaningful.

    Rank Title Name
    1 SG2 Mochy
    2 G0 Ueda
    10 G1 Zizka
    12 G1 Schiemann
    22 G2 Wilkinson
    24 G2 Alipour
    39 G3 Lylloff
    56 G3 Rebelo

    For the remaining four, I looked at the 2019 Giants list.

    Rank Name
    24 Wachtel
    29 Snellings
    32 Russell
    44 Wells

    James does not define "top player," but one possible definition
    would be, either a BMAB grandmaster or a top 32 Giant in the last
    Giants list. According to this criterion, only Wells would not
    qualify. (The only woman I know who would qualify is Akiko, but
    there could be other women that I'm not aware of.) One limitation
    of this definition is that someone like Nack Ballard, who has been
    inactive for a while, would not qualify, even though I would expect
    him to do well on the quiz.

    I think that contestants had to show up in person, so that would
    limit who could participate. By the way, there's a comment in the
    book that Gus Hansen was going to be a contestant, but pulled out
    at the last minute because of a conflict.

    ---
    Tim Chow

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Timothy Chow@21:1/5 to All on Fri Oct 14 00:54:07 2022
    On 10/13/2022 9:46 AM, I wrote:
    Con 3: The problems were multiple choice.  There seems to be no good
    reason for this, and it gives away information unnecessarily.

    I just went through the second batch of 10, and the multiple choice
    format definitely worked to my advantage in one case. There were many
    options provided, and I was initially tempted by one of them, until I
    noticed that a slight variant of the play was not on the list. I then correctly inferred that if the tempting play were right, then the
    variant would at least be one of the listed options. Therefore the
    tempting play could not be right.

    I can confirm that doing these quizzes is fun. For example, I got one
    of the problems right that all the actual contestants got wrong. So
    there are many opportunities to experience the pleasant illusion of
    being just as good as the best players in the world.

    ---
    Tim Chow

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From pepstein5@gmail.com@21:1/5 to Tim Chow on Fri Oct 14 00:21:56 2022
    On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 4:48:24 AM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:
    On 10/13/2022 6:57 PM, Stick Rice wrote:
    All contestants were male but to fit the stipulation of "12 of the world's top backgammon players" they almost have to be. I don't know if that's Tim's stipulation/presentation, James', or both but depending on how you define it a few people should
    not be included.
    It was James's wording. The first sentence of the Introduction
    uses the phrase, "a dozen of the world's best players."

    I just checked the BMAB, which I know Stick doesn't care for, but
    which at least provides some objective information. Nine of the
    players are listed there, but I'm going to omit Wachtel because
    he has too few BMAB games for his ranking to be meaningful.

    Rank Title Name
    1 SG2 Mochy
    2 G0 Ueda
    10 G1 Zizka
    12 G1 Schiemann
    22 G2 Wilkinson
    24 G2 Alipour
    39 G3 Lylloff
    56 G3 Rebelo

    For the remaining four, I looked at the 2019 Giants list.

    Rank Name
    24 Wachtel
    29 Snellings
    32 Russell
    44 Wells

    James does not define "top player," but one possible definition
    would be, either a BMAB grandmaster or a top 32 Giant in the last
    Giants list. According to this criterion, only Wells would not
    qualify. (The only woman I know who would qualify is Akiko, but
    there could be other women that I'm not aware of.) One limitation
    of this definition is that someone like Nack Ballard, who has been
    inactive for a while, would not qualify, even though I would expect
    him to do well on the quiz.

    I think that contestants had to show up in person, so that would
    limit who could participate. By the way, there's a comment in the
    book that Gus Hansen was going to be a contestant, but pulled out
    at the last minute because of a conflict.

    ---
    Tim Chow

    I was thinking of Akiko -- I think her inclusion could have made a huge difference
    with regard to how gender in backgammon is perceived.
    Agreed that including someone far weaker than the rest of the field, just because
    she's a woman, would be tokenistic and I wouldn't be in favour of that.
    Of course, it's possible that Akiko was invited and couldn't participate. In that case,
    at least explain that to the reader.

    Paul

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Timothy Chow@21:1/5 to peps...@gmail.com on Fri Oct 14 07:39:17 2022
    On 10/14/2022 3:21 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
    I was thinking of Akiko -- I think her inclusion could have made a huge difference
    with regard to how gender in backgammon is perceived.

    It would have made some difference, but I doubt that this event
    was big enough to make a "huge difference" of any sort, good or bad.

    ---
    Tim Chow

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Timothy Chow@21:1/5 to All on Fri Nov 11 23:02:49 2022
    On 10/14/2022 12:54 AM, I wrote:
    On 10/13/2022 9:46 AM, I wrote:
    Con 3: The problems were multiple choice.  There seems to be no good
    reason for this, and it gives away information unnecessarily.

    I just went through the second batch of 10, and the multiple choice
    format definitely worked to my advantage in one case.  There were many options provided, and I was initially tempted by one of them, until I
    noticed that a slight variant of the play was not on the list.  I then correctly inferred that if the tempting play were right, then the
    variant would at least be one of the listed options.  Therefore the
    tempting play could not be right.

    I can confirm that doing these quizzes is fun.  For example, I got one
    of the problems right that all the actual contestants got wrong.  So
    there are many opportunities to experience the pleasant illusion of
    being just as good as the best players in the world.

    I just finished the quiz. I was doing pretty well at the half-way mark,
    with 24/50, which would have put me in the middle of the pack. But the
    second half of the book was tougher for me, and my final score was
    41/100, which was the score of the 10th-place finisher.

    Though I still think this is a very fun book, by the end, I was less enthusiastic about the quality of the positions than I was initially.
    There are too many positions where the equity differences are small,
    and in some cases I'm not sure I believe the rollout result.

    There are also some other anomalies, e.g., positions where the Jacoby
    rule is in force and the cube is centered, but one of the multiple-
    choice options is "no double/pass," or a racing position where the
    EPCs are displayed right there on the problem page! I like the concept
    of the book, but if there's a sequel, it could benefit from more careful vetting of the positions and proofreading of the book.

    Also, I found much of the commentary to be somewhat disappointing and superficial. There are some gems to be sure, but there are also glib "analyses" that I'm pretty sure miss the point of the position.

    ---
    Tim Chow

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