plea for luck to the moderator
The rules for backgammon were laid down in 1743 by Edmond Hoyle, who also invented the rules for a cardgame named -whisp-. Those rules for whisp were overturned a century later, and gave rise to the game of bridge. Apart from the doubling cube, in backgammon there has been little innovation since three centuries, whereas the strategy has evolved tremendously.
This is a no-topic for mr. Robertie. He has good reason, because maybe he doesn't want to be remembered as the big giant, but in a previous era; maybe he is not eager to revise his books; maybe he has like no one else the opportunity to show that also without luck he would have been two times world champ.
But having invested a lot of time in study, and being desirably more talented than our inferior opponent, it's natural for the human ego to hanker after better results than a meagre 3 to 1 against a beginner, and a tense and relieved victory over a presumptuous intermediate.
Maybe one time more we could override the Sticky. Actually, what i would like to say is that i have two proposals for a better luck manipulation.
First, i would like to see something being done about that multiple dancing on the bar. It is often fatal, and induces wrinkles and premature aging. I find that in case of not entering three times in a row, one should have the option to set the doubling cube back to its former position.
Second, about the board setup. The Hoyle-setup leads to relatively quick results (likely to have been his reason of choice), and leads too often to a holding game and forced moves, which benefits the inferior player. Rather give the player who throws the highest dice the option to choose out of three setups: backgammon, nackgammon and a third one. My favourite choice for the third one would be 6 checkers on the 18 point, 6 on the 17 point, and 3 on the 6 point, but this could be open for deliberation.
Those rules leave the present game of backgammon intact, but make a world of difference. But who am I?