XGID=-BeBC-BBB-A---A--abdba----:1:-1:1:52:0:0:0:0:10
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-+
| X O O | | O O O | +---+ | O | | O O | | 2 |
| | | O | +---+
| | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | O |
| | | O |
| | | X O | | X X | | X X X O X | | X X X | | X X X O X | +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 86 O: 175 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 52
On 11/7/2021 11:21 PM, Timothy Chow wrote:
XGID=-BeBC-BBB-A---A--abdba----:1:-1:1:52:0:0:0:0:10
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-+
| X O O | | O O O | +---+
| O | | O O | | 2 |
| | | O | +---+
| | | O |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | O |
| | | O |
| | | X O |
| X X | | X X X O X |
| X X X | | X X X O X |
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 86 O: 175 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, O own cube
X to play 52
We could fill in the gap at the expense of leaving a direct shot.
We could slot the gap and leave just as many shots, but I'm fairly sure
it's better to just fill it now since the ensuing blot will be easy to
move to safety while covering is not as certain.
We could clear the eight point and only leave indirect shots. But I
think I want to hold her runners instead of letting her leap into the outfield and preserve her board.
Or we could simply play 14/9 10/8 leaving only 43 to hit. That seems to
be the least risky play. Her weak board and homeboard blot make me think
that it might be worth the risk to fill in the gap, but as with so many
pay now or pay later decisions it's often better to choose to pay later because sometimes you don't have to pay at all.
14/9 10/8
If you're deciding between making the 5pt and some other play, just make the 5pt. It will save you a vast amount of harm over your bg career.
Of course, players point this out to you and say "But I made the 5 point here, and XG said it was
a whopper!"
And your reply is? [Surprise! Surprise!] "No, that doesn't contradict me at all. I wasn't thinking
about that type of position. I only mean positions where it's not obvious that you shouldn't make the 5 point."
...
If you're deciding between making the 5pt and some other play, just make the 5pt. It will save you a vast amount of harm over your bg career.But how do you know this?
I make a lot of blunders by making the 5 point when other checker plays are preferred.
It would seem to me that you would need to do a careful study to have evidence for your hypothesis:
"More equity is lost by wrongly abstaining from making the 5 point, compared to wrongly making it."
Of course, players point this out to you and say "But I made the 5 point here, and XG said it was
a whopper!"
And your reply is? [Surprise! Surprise!] "No, that doesn't contradict me at all. I wasn't thinking
about that type of position. I only mean positions where it's not obvious that you shouldn't make the 5 point."
[Quote marks are used to indicate the types of things I've heard you and other people say -- they aren't verbatim
quotations.]
Paul
If you're deciding between making the 5pt and some other play, just make the 5pt. It will save you a vast amount of harm over your bg career.
On Thursday, November 11, 2021 at 6:56:13 AM UTC-5, peps...@gmail.com wrote:easily you'll find the scant times when not making the 5pt is correct. No surprise there. So you can take this maxim and try to apply it and improve on your knowledge of it aiming to play like the people who do (I can guarantee you when the top Giants
...
If you're deciding between making the 5pt and some other play, just make the 5pt. It will save you a vast amount of harm over your bg career.But how do you know this?
I make a lot of blunders by making the 5 point when other checker plays are preferred.
It would seem to me that you would need to do a careful study to have evidence for your hypothesis:
"More equity is lost by wrongly abstaining from making the 5 point, compared to wrongly making it."
Of course, players point this out to you and say "But I made the 5 point here, and XG said it was
a whopper!"
And your reply is? [Surprise! Surprise!] "No, that doesn't contradict me at all. I wasn't thinking
about that type of position. I only mean positions where it's not obvious that you shouldn't make the 5 point."
[Quote marks are used to indicate the types of things I've heard you and other people say -- they aren't verbatim
quotations.]
PaulYou will save far more equity by making the 5pt blindly when in doubt than trying to be a genius and figuring something out OtB. This study has been done.
Inherent to the saying is 'some other play'. A play that beats making the 5pt often stands out and announces itself with authority. Here you're just washy pushing around checkers with Play B or Play C. It's true the more you study at home the more
On 11/10/2021 11:38 AM, Stick Rice wrote:
If you're deciding between making the 5pt and some other play, just make the 5pt. It will save you a vast amount of harm over your bg career.
Well, first you have to be paying close enough attention to notice that
it is possible to make the five point. I didn't even see it here,
despite trying to consider all reasonable plays.
Tim's PR is significantly better than mine, so I'd like to play like Tim.
On 11/11/2021 6:56 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
Of course, players point this out to you and say "But I made the 5 point here, and XG said it wasCongratulations, Paul. You're ready to join Stick's Online
a whopper!"
And your reply is? [Surprise! Surprise!] "No, that doesn't contradict me at all. I wasn't thinking
about that type of position. I only mean positions where it's not obvious that you shouldn't make the 5 point."
Backgammon School as a junior instructor.
It's pretty easy, actually. Just follow this simple step-by-step
process.
1. Collect a bunch of backgammon platitudes: "make the 5pt"; "when
in doubt, hit"; "always run the last checker"; and so forth.
2. Given a position, quote the most simpleminded platitude that is
consistent with the bot play. For example, given a position where
you can either make the 5pt or hit, quote "make the 5pt" if the
bot makes the 5pt and quote "when in doubt, hit" if the bot hits.
It is irrelevant how complicated and confusing the position is.
The only important thing is to quote a platitude that is consistent
with the bot play. If there is more than one suitable platitude,
pick the most simpleminded one.
3. If the student tries to protest or quote some other platitude,
chide the student for not studying hard enough to recognize that
the other platitude is obviously inapplicable in the current position.
On 11/11/2021 3:26 PM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:...
That I'm a weak player has never been in dispute......
The primary reason is clear: improving at backgammon has dropped
several notches down in my list of priorities over the past few
years.
In fairness, I think it should be added that this parody is only applicable to Stick's postings, not the services he charges for.
His lessons are excellent, I think. I went to at least one of them several years ago.
Not only was it very informative, and well-prepared and well-organised, but his series of lessons was evidently hugely popular with everyone else there -- a crowd of maybe six or seven,
I think.
I tried a (somewhat cursory) google search to investigate whether FLT generalises
to positive surreal integers, and I came up empty-handed.
On 11/12/2021 5:52 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:...
I tried a (somewhat cursory) google search to investigate whether FLT generalisesWhat do you mean by surreal integers?
to positive surreal integers, and I came up empty-handed.
On Friday, November 12, 2021 at 2:57:05 PM UTC, Tim Chow wrote:
On 11/12/2021 5:52 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:...
I tried a (somewhat cursory) google search to investigate whether FLT generalisesWhat do you mean by surreal integers?
to positive surreal integers, and I came up empty-handed.
The correct question is "What is the definition of a surreal integer?"
It is a standard (although not particularly well-known) part of maths terminology, rather than an idiosyncratic
expression that only I use.
A surreal number is a function from an initial segment of the ordinals to a two-element set.
There is a well-known ordered field structure on the class of surreal numbers.
Multiplication and addition and their inverses and > are defined but the surreal numbers don't form a field because
they don't form a set within ZFC.
Let 1 be the multiplicative identity with respect to the class of surreal numbers.
Let s be a surreal number.
s is positive iff s > the empty function.
s is an integer iff ( s - 1 < s < s + 1 and [ (all surreal numbers y such that s - 1 < y < s + 1) are functions that are defined
wherever s is defined and have y(k) = s(k) whenever k is in the domain of s] ).
I don't think this is the same as a nonstandard integer but I haven't checked yet.
Please let me know if this does not make sense.
Paul
s is an integer iff ( s - 1 < s < s + 1 and [ (all surreal numbers y such that s - 1 < y < s + 1) are functions that are defined
wherever s is defined and have y(k) = s(k) whenever k is in the domain of s] ).
On 11/12/2021 12:18 PM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
s is an integer iff ( s - 1 < s < s + 1 and [ (all surreal numbers y such that s - 1 < y < s + 1) are functions that are definedThis looks like what Conway, in "On Numbers and Games," calls an
wherever s is defined and have y(k) = s(k) whenever k is in the domain of s] ).
"omnific integer." Right? s is an omnific integer if s = {s-1|s+1}.
Fermat's Last Theorem fails for the omnific integers. As Conway shows
in "On Numbers and Games," every real number is the quotient of two
omnific integers. So in particular, the cube root of 7 is A/B for some relatively prime omnific integers A and B. Then A^3 + B^3 = (2B)^3.
I suppose a more general point is that reading ONAG and the further theory, and contributing to it,
seems to me a better usage of time than becoming better at backgammon.
But, of course, that's a highly subjective determination.
Conway himself seems to have agreed.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 293 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 234:59:06 |
| Calls: | 6,624 |
| Files: | 12,172 |
| Messages: | 5,319,707 |