What kind of cube action would you call this?
What kind of cube action would you call this?
XGID=-ABaBBD--b-C-----Abdd-b---:0:0:1:00:0:0:0:0:10
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X O | | O O O |
| O | | O O O |
| | | O O |
| | | O O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | X |
| X | | X |
| X O | | X X X X |
| X O | | X X X O X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 97 O: 118 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X on roll, cube action
---
Tim Chow
On Friday, March 31, 2023 at 9:27:24 AM UTC-4, Timothy Chow wrote:
What kind of cube action would you call this?Easy. Didn't want to let you down.
Stick
On Friday, March 31, 2023 at 2:27:24 PM UTC+1, Timothy Chow wrote:I've chosen to only take part in the naming contest. Here goes:
What kind of cube action would you call this?
XGID=-ABaBBD--b-C-----Abdd-b---:0:0:1:00:0:0:0:0:10
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game +13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X O | | O O O |
| O | | O O O |
| | | O O |
| | | O O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | |
| | | X |
| X | | X |
| X O | | X X X X |
| X O | | X X X O X X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 97 O: 118 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 1
X on roll, cube action
---I'll consider this a three part problem: the naming contest, X's action, O's action if X doubles.
Tim Chow
The naming contest is the most straightforward. There used to be a (good) chess magazine
called Chess Chow. Therefore this position should be titled Backgammon Chow, as a homage
to both the defunct chess magazine and to the quiz setter.
Clearly we want to hit the checker on our 3 point. I think that the opponent's board is weak enough
that we hit leaving two blots if that's the only way to hit it, with a tremendous position after the 44.4%
dances.
These hit/dance sequences are powerful enough and numerous enough for a cube.
(I think the game is probably approx even, if we hit and are hit back.)
O's board appears weak but has no dead checkers and can be sorted out soon. There's clearly a lot
of work to bring the game home so I see it as a take.
Both the double and the take seem clear to me, but I'm not a strong enough player to be completely
sure about this.
Paul
On Friday, March 31, 2023 at 11:29:14 PM UTC+1, Stick Rice wrote:
On Friday, March 31, 2023 at 9:27:24 AM UTC-4, Timothy Chow wrote:
What kind of cube action would you call this?Easy. Didn't want to let you down.
StickI hope I got it right, in that case.
I think the position is too unusual for it to be an easy problem for
the typical reader of this forum.
[Note that the forum readers are far weaker, on average, than the
active posters.]
Paul
What kind of cube action would you call this? XGID=-ABaBBD--b-C-----Abdd-b---:0:0:1:00:0:0:0:0:10
On Friday, March 31, 2023 at 7:12:07 PM UTC-4, peps...@gmail.com wrote:What I said is clearly true, but it might be debatable whether it's appropriate to point this out. People who play backgammon generally play it as something to do and the idea of analysing it and studying it doesn't occur to them.
On Friday, March 31, 2023 at 11:29:14 PM UTC+1, Stick Rice wrote:
On Friday, March 31, 2023 at 9:27:24 AM UTC-4, Timothy Chow wrote:
What kind of cube action would you call this?Easy. Didn't want to let you down.
StickI hope I got it right, in that case.
I think the position is too unusual for it to be an easy problem for
the typical reader of this forum.
[Note that the forum readers are far weaker, on average, than the
active posters.]
Paul
[Note that the forum readers are far weaker, on average, than the
active posters.]
Objection.
Bob
On Sunday, April 2, 2023 at 2:20:45 AM UTC+1, Robert Zimmerman wrote:My objection was meant to be a little self-deprecation (like, I've lowered the average for the regular posters so much). Certain kinds of humor really don't transmit well with words alone. You had to be there. Trust me, I razed the roof. :-)
On Friday, March 31, 2023 at 7:12:07 PM UTC-4, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, March 31, 2023 at 11:29:14 PM UTC+1, Stick Rice wrote:
On Friday, March 31, 2023 at 9:27:24 AM UTC-4, Timothy Chow wrote:
What kind of cube action would you call this?Easy. Didn't want to let you down.
StickI hope I got it right, in that case.
I think the position is too unusual for it to be an easy problem for
the typical reader of this forum.
[Note that the forum readers are far weaker, on average, than the
active posters.]
Paul
[Note that the forum readers are far weaker, on average, than the
active posters.]
Objection.
BobWhat I said is clearly true, but it might be debatable whether it's appropriate
to point this out. People who play backgammon generally play it as something to do and the idea of analysing it and studying it doesn't occur to them. The idea that racing algorithms exist would surprise them, and they wouldn't remotely consider the idea of learning and applying these.
Most of the forum readers would be people who found it in a googling search, and they would be asking questions about the rules -- such as: "Is it legal to place
more than five checkers on the same point?"
Paul
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (3 / 13) |
| Uptime: | 12:44:40 |
| Calls: | 6,667 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,214 |
| Messages: | 5,336,453 |