XGID=-aA-a-E-C---bD---c-bBbc-a-:0:0:1:52:0:0:3:0:10

X:Player 1 O:Player 2
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X O | | O X O O O |
| X O | | O X O O |
| X O | | O |
| X | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | X |
| | | X |
| X | | X |
| O X | | X |
| O X | | X O X O |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 148 O: 125 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X to play 52

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

On 1/27/2023 3:01 PM, ah...Clem wrote:

XGID=-aA-a-E-C---bD---c-bBbc-a-:0:0:1:52:0:0:3:0:10

X:Player 1 O:Player 2
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X O | | O X O O O |
| X O | | O X O O |
| X O | | O |
| X | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | X |
| | | X |
| X | | X |
| O X | | X |
| O X | | X O X O |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 148 O: 125 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X to play 52

"Double tiger" is presumably borrowed from Michy, but he uses it to mean
a double hit. It sounds like you're using "tiger" to refer to the
number of blots in X's home board, which isn't at all what Michy meant.

In any case, if X hits with 6/4*, then I think he should also hit with
6/1*, since it doesn't leave any more shots and it puts two checkers on
the bar instead of one. The other possible deuce is 13/11 along with
either 6/1* or 13/8, but while they leave somewhat fewer shots, I don't
think they have much upside. I would try hitting twice.

---
Tim Chow

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

On Friday, January 27, 2023 at 11:56:58 PM UTC-5, Tim Chow wrote:

On 1/27/2023 3:01 PM, ah...Clem wrote:

XGID=-aA-a-E-C---bD---c-bBbc-a-:0:0:1:52:0:0:3:0:10

X:Player 1 O:Player 2
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X O | | O X O O O |
| X O | | O X O O |
| X O | | O |
| X | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | X |
| | | X |
| X | | X |
| O X | | X |
| O X | | X O X O |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 148 O: 125 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X to play 52

"Double tiger" is presumably borrowed from Michy, but he uses it to mean
a double hit. It sounds like you're using "tiger" to refer to the
number of blots in X's home board, which isn't at all what Michy meant.

In any case, if X hits with 6/4*, then I think he should also hit with
6/1*, since it doesn't leave any more shots and it puts two checkers on
the bar instead of one. The other possible deuce is 13/11 along with
either 6/1* or 13/8, but while they leave somewhat fewer shots, I don't
think they have much upside. I would try hitting twice.

---
Tim Chow

I hate the term but it means more than simply a double hit.

Stick

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

I'm not always hip to the current lingo for slang terms that describe
certain backgammon moves.

In discussion, someone suggested playing the "triple tiger" and NeilKaz
opined that a triple tiger might be a triple whopper. So, at least some
people understood what was meant. Seemed clear to me.

Anyway, leaving three blots in the homeboard is not a triple whopper,
but it's far from best.

I thought the safe play of 13/6 was too passive, and that the single hit
was too aggressive so I advocated for the hybrid play of bringing two down.

XG favors the chicken play but the single hit to fight for the four
point is statistically tied (yes, there are two other single hit plays,
and hitting on the ace is not too bad, but who would do that instead of
a single hit on the four point?). Two down is a small error. The double
hit is a clear error, but not a blunder.

No variant because I can't think of one.

XGID=-aA-a-E-C---bD---c-bBbc-a-:0:0:1:52:0:0:3:0:10

X:Player 1 O:Player 2
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game, Jacoby Beaver
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X O | | O X O O O |
| X O | | O X O O |
| X O | | O |
| X | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | X |
| | | X |
| X | | X |
| O X | | X |
| O X | | X O X O |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 148 O: 125 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X to play 52

1. Rollout¹ 13/6 eq:-0.406
Player: 39.16% (G:8.42% B:0.26%)
Opponent: 60.84% (G:14.16% B:0.32%)
Confidence: ±0.013 (-0.419..-0.393) - [63.0%]
Duration: 6 minutes 15 seconds

2. Rollout¹ 13/8 6/4* eq:-0.409 (-0.003)
Player: 40.67% (G:9.77% B:0.36%)
Opponent: 59.33% (G:20.24% B:0.46%)
Confidence: ±0.014 (-0.423..-0.395) - [37.0%]
Duration: 6 minutes 56 seconds

3. Rollout¹ 13/11 13/8 eq:-0.445 (-0.039)
Player: 38.90% (G:8.38% B:0.29%)
Opponent: 61.10% (G:16.64% B:0.43%)
Confidence: ±0.012 (-0.457..-0.432) - [0.0%]
Duration: 6 minutes 00 second

4. Rollout¹ 13/11 6/1* eq:-0.452 (-0.047)
Player: 39.03% (G:9.44% B:0.30%)
Opponent: 60.97% (G:20.88% B:0.54%)
Confidence: ±0.015 (-0.467..-0.437) - [0.0%]
Duration: 6 minutes 15 seconds

5. Rollout¹ 6/4* 6/1* eq:-0.476 (-0.070)
Player: 39.45% (G:10.27% B:0.34%)
Opponent: 60.55% (G:23.47% B:0.64%)
Confidence: ±0.014 (-0.490..-0.461) - [0.0%]
Duration: 6 minutes 12 seconds


¹ 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller


eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10


--
Ah....Clem
The future is fun, the future is fair.

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

On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 9:47:48 PM UTC-5, ah....Clem wrote:

I'm not always hip to the current lingo for slang terms that describe
certain backgammon moves.

Okay, I looked at Michy's book, "Opening Concepts." "Tiger" refers to a
double hit. "Double tiger" refers to a double loose hit; i.e., a double hit that creates two blots in the home board. "Triple tiger" isn't discussed,
but one could infer that it might be a double hit that leaves three blots
in the home board, or a triple hit that leaves three blots in the home board.

I don't think that a single hit that leaves two blots in the home board
counts as a tiger, but I guess the term means whatever people want it
to mean.

I don't mind the terminology as much as Stick does, but it would help if
there were a consensus about the meaning.

---
Tim Chow

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

Tim Chow <tchow12000@yahoo.com> wrote:

...
I don't mind the terminology as much as Stick does, but it would help if >there were a consensus about the meaning.
...

They pay million-dollar lawyers to define "catch" in the NFL, and
are free to enforce the definition ad hoc, and yet it remains an
elusive concept.

--bks

Paul, catch:NFL :: handball:FIFA

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

On 1/30/2023 10:43 AM, Tim Chow wrote:

On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 9:47:48 PM UTC-5, ah....Clem wrote:

I'm not always hip to the current lingo for slang terms that describe
certain backgammon moves.

Okay, I looked at Michy's book, "Opening Concepts." "Tiger" refers to a double hit. "Double tiger" refers to a double loose hit; i.e., a double hit that creates two blots in the home board. "Triple tiger" isn't discussed,
but one could infer that it might be a double hit that leaves three blots
in the home board, or a triple hit that leaves three blots in the home board.

I don't think that a single hit that leaves two blots in the home board counts as a tiger, but I guess the term means whatever people want it
to mean.

I don't mind the terminology as much as Stick does, but it would help if there were a consensus about the meaning.

Almost everybody defines a vector space as a module over a field.

Yet Hungerford defines it at a module over a division ring.

Go figure.

--
Ah....Clem
The future is fun, the future is fair.

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

On Tuesday, January 31, 2023 at 2:08:53 AM UTC, ah....Clem wrote:

On 1/30/2023 10:43 AM, Tim Chow wrote:

On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 9:47:48 PM UTC-5, ah....Clem wrote:

I'm not always hip to the current lingo for slang terms that describe
certain backgammon moves.

Okay, I looked at Michy's book, "Opening Concepts." "Tiger" refers to a double hit. "Double tiger" refers to a double loose hit; i.e., a double hit that creates two blots in the home board. "Triple tiger" isn't discussed, but one could infer that it might be a double hit that leaves three blots in the home board, or a triple hit that leaves three blots in the home board.

I don't think that a single hit that leaves two blots in the home board counts as a tiger, but I guess the term means whatever people want it
to mean.

I don't mind the terminology as much as Stick does, but it would help if there were a consensus about the meaning.

Almost everybody defines a vector space as a module over a field.

Yet Hungerford defines it at a module over a division ring.

I'm not sure about this. There are plenty of algebra texts which assume
a commutative context, and therefore don't mention division rings.
Such a text would use the field definition to avoid unnecessarily introducing an extra concept (division rings) which was out of scope of the main text.

The relevant question would seem to be: Given that a text covers division rings,
how are vector spaces defined?

I don't think Hungerford's definition is unusual. It's a good text, that one, and I
think it's also quite standard.

If you're right, then there must be some term other than "vector space" for what Hungerford defines as a "vector space over a division ring"?

What is the name of that term? Should we call it future_funfair in honour
of your show?

Paul

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

On 1/31/2023 9:02 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:

On Tuesday, January 31, 2023 at 2:08:53 AM UTC, ah....Clem wrote:

Almost everybody defines a vector space as a module over a field.

Yet Hungerford defines it at a module over a division ring.

I'm not sure about this. There are plenty of algebra texts which assume
a commutative context, and therefore don't mention division rings.
Such a text would use the field definition to avoid unnecessarily introducing an extra concept (division rings) which was out of scope of the main text.

The relevant question would seem to be: Given that a text covers division rings,
how are vector spaces defined?

I decided to check my copy of Lang's "Algebra" (3rd edition).

If you look up "vector space" in the index, you'll find that he defines
a vector space as a module over a field.

But if you look up "division ring" in the index, you'll find (in
Chapter 17) this definition: "a module over a division ring is called
a vector space"! However, in the rest of the chapter, he hardly (if
ever) uses the term "vector space."

This example of conflicting terminology is a bit atypical, though.
The underlying fact is that there is hardly any difference between
the theory of modules over a field and the theory of modules over a
division ring. Modules over a division ring are so similar to vector
spaces over a field that most people find that it's more trouble than
it's worth to come up with a separate term for them.

---
Tim Chow

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

On 31/01/2023 1:43 am, Tim Chow wrote:

I don't mind the terminology as much as Stick does, but it would help if there were a consensus about the meaning.

Here are positions Michy considers Double Tiger...

https://bgmichy.com/double-tiger/

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

On 2/1/2023 5:15 PM, Simon Woodhead wrote:

On 31/01/2023 1:43 am, Tim Chow wrote:

I don't mind the terminology as much as Stick does, but it would help if
there were a consensus about the meaning.

Here are positions Michy considers Double Tiger...

https://bgmichy.com/double-tiger/

Thanks for the pointer.

Most of the examples hit two checkers in the homeboard while leaving two
blots in the homeboard.

But look at examples 15 and 19, where only one checker is hit, but it
still leaves two blots in the homeboard and two checkers on the roof.

So, I'll extrapolate that to imply that "double tiger" means a play that results in two on the roof and two homeboard blots, but is not
necessarily a double hit.

In this quiz, what I called "double tiger" leaves two blots but only
results in one on the roof. And what I referred to as "triple tiger"
hits two, leaving two on the roof but three homeboard blots. So not a
precise use of the terminology. But everybody knew what I was talking about.



--
Ah....Clem
The future is fun, the future is fair.

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

On 4/02/2023 11:17 am, ah....Clem wrote:

So, I'll extrapolate that to imply that "double tiger" means a play that results in two on the roof and two homeboard blots, but is not
necessarily a double hit.

That is my understanding. Only Michy knows for sure.

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