The threepoint backgame is a very powerful strategy. It consists of the two backgame points in the opponent's innerboard, plus a third one which may be outside the opponent's innerboard, but close to it. To me it feels like giving you a lot control of your destiny, as you are 99% sure to hit a checker. Often the opponent's forward position gets ruined, and he will leave more blots which, if hit, make up for even a great number of borne-off checkers, or present you even with a gammon. It needs a lot of skill for both players to make the right decisions, so it is likely even more effective against a weaker player.

They arise rarely of themselves, so, in case I have not awfully much better to do, I help the dice a little bit by provoking one. If the equity difference is less than -0.2, which at least means that the opponent didn't make an innerboard point, I generally go for it, with the apology that the bots are somewhat puzzled themselves about the evaluation of the future course. As the doubling cube is still untouched, the risk seems to me permittable, and if villain doubles, and you take, it's leverage is very welcome when you have established your threepoint backgame.

I would like to draw a daring and maybe slightly faulty analogy with soccer. In the world of soccer, some teams with less technical quality will go for straightforward and often physical play, which can be very effective, as the germans, and since recent years, the dutch have proven to the dismay of the viewers. However, it is spain with its beautiful high quality football, that is regarded as the best and greatest national team ever.

Below I present some examples of challenging play. Left is before the move, right is after the move.


[img]http://s6.************/cro3qpenl/Screenshot_from_2013_08_06_17_07_00.png[/img]
screen capture freeware

Hi yogiman,

i denote the positions as number 1,2,3 in the left-column, and 4,5,6 in the right column.

position 1: there are no good alternatives, so b/21 9x7 seems the right way to play.

position 2: The problem with your play b/24 13x8 is that you give up the midpoint.
This way you make it easier for white to build a prime in front of the 5-anchor
I would prefer b/20 3x2 and try to go forward.

position 3: after playing b/24 13x7 you give up your midpoint, but you don't have a backgame yet.
after the proto-backgame-play b/18 you have more options for future play.

position 4: i agree with your play.

position 5: it is not useful to hit so deep in a backgame, 6x2 is too deep.
b/21 23x18 is healthier, also because you stop white from making a 5-prime.

position 6: a backgame is still very far away, and hitting deep is not useful.
i would play b/14 or b/20 24/18.

Dear kruidenbuiltje (little bag of spices),

Yes, most of them are bad (bot) equity plays, but it does spice things up, and could be really rewarding. It is worth the experiment in a natural setting.


This could happen. In that case you try to hit your opponent wherever, and create blots in your homeboard. But even when a series of checkers ends up dead, you have still 2 or 3 defensive points, which may get you off the gammon. Maybe this one is less suited against a skilled player.

I am aware that giving up your midpoint is a deadly sin. But what I am doing is to create an anarchistic state in which few fixed laws are upheld. The game can flow in multiple directions, and the odds are in my favour to be able to establish the 3pointgame. Even a slugfest could happen, resulting in a backgame for the opponent.

I like to recirculate. By holding white back, I can hopefully hit and leave more blots next turn.

I go for the adventure, and am willing to sacrifice a little bit of priming potential. And a weak player is going to hit on the 1point, also if he should not do so.

Here I tried to forge a 3pointgame, while being behind a 5-prime with gloomy prospects. My plan to get my checkers recycled worked, and with the cube after some time on 4 the gammon was well within reach. This in spite of the fact that I played two megabot-blunders in the positions which are surrounded by red.

In the first one I played 6/1 4/2 with an equity of -1,12, and a difference of -0,48 with the best choice. In the second one I played 15/14* 15/13* with an equity difference of -0,24. Was this just a coincidence?

[img]http://s6.************/okafekjn5/Screenshot_from_2013_08_11_15_35_40.png[/img]
free screen capture

[img]http://s6.************/vos8nlqwh/Screenshot_from_2013_08_11_16_19_09.png[/img]
screen capture freeware

[img]http://s6.************/91czhgbch/Screenshot_from_2013_08_11_16_33_07.png[/img]
image hosting flickr

Hi yogiman,

I think in both cases the fact that you won the game is a coincidence:

I suggest you play the positions after your move out by a manual-rollout.

I think that in both positions you will end up (most of the time) with a so-called nothing-game.
This is a sort of backgame position where you might get a shot,
but at the moment you hit your own innerboard has several high points open.
The result is that your hits will not win you the game.

For instance position 1: what is a reasonable scenario:

1. White will hit 2 or 3 of your blots.
2. you will enter and make your 2 or 3 backgame-points
3. white will slot the 10-point
4. you will try to escape with a 6
5. white will eventually make the 10-point
6. because of the 6-prime your inner board will crunch
7. white will at the moment that he has to break his 6-prime for the bearoff a race-advantage
he will have 8 cross-overs before bear-off and you will have at least 12 crossovers (because of your at least 2 backgame-points)
8. white will come in rather easily behind your points
9. In the case you have some loose backblots he might make the point or do a late-blitz,
this is possible because your board is crunched.
10. If white has to leave a blot and you hit it, you might have to break a backgame-point.
11. White will hit on the left backblot.
12. Black ends up with a 3- or 4- holding game, still with a crunched board.
13. So black will not win the holding game nor will he win the race.

The scenario for your second position is not very different.

You will get a lot of play out of the positions, but in the end the result will be disappointing,

greetings k.

Hi kruidenbuiltje,

I suppose you did the rollouts yourself. I will give it a fair tryout for 12 times, and will show the results tomorrow. By the way, it also matters against whom you are playing.

Kruidenbuiltje,

The big problem is the flexibility of white, and blacks inability to build a prime, which is almost indispensible for the feasibility of a 3point backgame. Nevertheless, having endured some frustrating hour, I have the following suspicions:

• the bot does not like me anymore, and I cannot blame him. It feels like the bot wants to retaliate for my rebellious attitude. This could imply that the robot takeover is now in a stage of infancy.
• Maybe I spent all of my good luck budget in the above case, and left nothing for the other trials.
• The developers don't tolerate an irreverent attitude towards their brainchild.

So how are we to decide which of above hypotheses is true?

I am about as sure that you are little beast JJ from chess cafe Tweeklaveren, as that one of the above suspicions is true. So I would like to spent an evening on a real board with you. And please don't try to escape.

Hi yogiman,

if you ever come to Groningen, let me know in advance and we can play on a real board.
I would like that.

About your hypotheses:

1. The bots will will be very happy with you, I think they like to win.
2. Just let the bot play the other side, and you'll be a good luck millionaire.
3. Developers also like to win.

Hi JJ ,

You can get me with your car.

I have my hesitations about bot play in situations like these. My strategy is different from the bot, and as a reward the dice didn't behave organically at crucial moments.

1: just a pass
2, 3 and 4:just a disaster, and that's all in the game. Though I didn't consider white's double 5 in 4 necessary.
5 and 6: no bad prospects, but I lost

[img]http://s10.************/i55nrmc21/Screenshot_from_2013_08_16_12_51_20.png[/img]
print screen

7: I didn't hit, also not in the rest of the game
8: not like 7, but still unlucky
9: he throws 15/5
10: i didn't hit at all
11: a double 11 for white. Can happen, but quite a sour happening in this bad luck sequence.
12: I keep blots behind in order to establish a 3pointgame, and then white throws double 6.

[img]http://s17.************/th9cfe92n/Screenshot_from_2013_08_16_13_00_05.png[/img]
[url=http://postimage.org/app.php]grab screenshot[/ur

The style you're recommending, which I like to call "slot everything and let's play a backgame!" is an entertaining style which everyone should try at some time, if only to understand its limitations. It won't make you a winner against good opposition, but it will teach you lots of nuances of backgame play which will later come in handy in the real world. You'll also learn about playing against a back game, which few players know how to do.

Note: XG and Snowie play these positions very well from both sides.

Hi yogiman,

I am not JJ and I haven't got a car, but the offer still stands when you might one day come to the north.

How does your strategy score against real people?

greetings k.

Quite well, I played against the best dutch players, among them JJ (a former chess player like you), but that has been some years ago. There has been some discontent here in Amsterdam, but that is private. There should be at least someone from Amsterdam be present on this forum. He is invited to contact me.