Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Backgammon Forum hosted by Bill Robertie. Discussion of anything related to backgammon: strategy, problems, books, clubs, and tournaments.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-11-2010, 12:25 PM   #26
sheetsworld
veteran
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,643
Re: Norwegian, Spoiler, but no RO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by higonefive View Post
I am a non math. This is a serious flaw in my performance, espacially in match. Often i decide by experience and “gut-feeling”. So a closer view, which is possible without bots (Stick or Bill will do this over the board, we fishes can do only an educated guess).

Five point match 3away, 3away

“Play is close to normal backgammon at this score, but you should tend to drop quicker than usual. A look at the numbers illustrates why. Let's assume gammons aren't an issue, and you are being doubled.
If you pass: You are behind 3-2, 40% equity.
If you take and win: You are ahead 4-2 (Crawford), 75% equity.
If you take and lose: You are behind 4-2, 25% equity.
As can be seen the taker is risking 15% to gain 35%. This is worse than the normal money 3 to 1 odds -- you need 30% winning chances to justify the take. If there were anything special about the recube value it wouldn't be so bad, but the recube is normal. If your opponent passes, he will be behind 4-2 (Crawford) for 25% equity. If he takes, it is for the match. Therefore your opponent will have the normal 3 to 1 odds on his take; his only disadvantage will be that the cube will now be dead so he will have to play the game to conclusion.
Since the drops come quicker at this score, the doubles come quicker also since the doubler doesn't want to lose his market. Otherwise, play is fairly normal.”
(http://www.bkgm.com/articles/GOL/Aug99/fivept.htm)

“Gammon price

The relative value of winning a gammon compared with the value of winning a single game. Gammon price is computed as GP = (WG - W) / (W - L), where WG = value of winning a gammon, W = value of winning a single game, and L = value of losing a single game. In money play, the gammon price is 50%. In match play, the gammon price depends on the score of the match and the level of the doubling cube. See posts by David Montgomery and Ron Karr." And don't forget different gammon rates. See below.

(http://www.bkgm.com/gloss/lookup.cgi?gammon+price)

So this are two major adjustments. The takepoint may be higher, and the gammon price may be higher then in cash game. If you know this, then your “gut” will tell you, that as this score, with higher gammon rates, the doubling window will significantly change. Also, the point of first and last give will be lower. It is fine, when we know it exactly, but it is better then nothing if we know this approximately.

I will show, to get a real feeling, the exact numbers(Kazaross/Rockwell MET). Non gammon adjusted, for both players:

Take point dead/alive 30,29% / 22,76%
Double Point dead/alive 50,00% / 50,00%
Cash Point dead/alive 69,71% / 77,24%
Too Good Point: dead/alive 100% /100%

Gammon adjusted, this changes dramatically (Gammon Price: 0,769).

I take the exact GR and BGR from the RO ( Skara 45,99% / 7,84%; Wachtel 31,67% / 4,88%).

Market Windows:

Take point: dead/alive; Skara/Wachtel 33,43% / 30,78%; 39,34% / 33,78%
Double Point: dead/alive; Skara/Wachtel 48,70% / 48,70%; 51,30% / 51,30%
Cash Point: dead/alive; Skara/Wachtel 60,66% / 66,22%; 66,57% / 69,22%
Too Good Point: dead/alive; Skara/Wachtel 78,36% /84,42%; 84,42% / 78,36%

So the point of first give is for Scara below even! And he can double in only up to 66,22%. Regarding 66 55 11 52 65 61 51 64 as market losers, we have a whopping 13 throws, or 36,1%, to lose our market in next turn. And if Wilcox Snellings comes the way, putting out his wallet to give one point for the cube, i would even for money decline his offer.

Because of the confidence interval, i have to crank up the rollout assuming cash game. If there is interest, i will post XG results, 3ply/3ply variance reduction, 1296 trials for match, ???? for cash game.
BG is a different game than when I left it 7 years ago....this is sick.
sheetsworld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2010, 12:58 PM   #27
Wamy Einehouse
rack 'em
 
Wamy Einehouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,652
Re: Another interesting position from the Norwegian backgammon community

How big a factor is black's anchor in the outfield here too?

In my limited experience often these games seem to break down into the side that controls the outfield best coming out on top - simply because even if red anchors it will be so hard to get its pieces back around without getting hit the minute black gets his men moving out and controls the out field. Multiple hits usually follow, and I can easily see red ending up with numerous men on the rail later even if they anchor very quickly.

Still way above my head this problem. I one minute grunched it as a double/take (missed it was a 3 point match which prob would have made a difference to this), although with some thought and reading the analysis itt I'm now pretty convinced it must be a double/drop - and maybe even a too good to double/pass.
Wamy Einehouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2010, 02:46 PM   #28
RolldUpTrips
adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 827
Re: Another interesting position from the Norwegian backgammon community

XG 1296 trial 3 ply with VR for money gives a .989 take.
RolldUpTrips is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2010, 04:01 PM   #29
higonefive
journeyman
 
higonefive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Germany, lower saxony
Posts: 317
Re: Another interesting position from the Norwegian backgammon community

Quote:
Originally Posted by RolldUpTrips View Post
XG 1296 trial 3 ply with VR for money gives a .989 take.
I crancked up to 100% confidence, stopped at 9077 trials. Look at the take decision confidence [Confidence Double: ± 0,019 (+1,017<E<+1,055)]. 1296 trials are not enough.

No Double
Player Winning Chances: 66,11% (G: 37,16% B: 5,73%)
Opponent Winning Chances: 33,89% (G: 12,35% B: 1,60%)
Double/Take
Player Winning Chances: 67,72% (G: 37,79% B: 5,11%)
Opponent Winning Chances: 32,28% (G: 12,05% B: 1,80%)

Cubeless Equities: No Double=+0,322, Double=+1,290

Cubeful Equities:
No Double: +0,798 (-0,202)
Double/Take: +1,036 (+0,036)
Double/Drop: +1,000

Best Cube action: Double / Drop

Rollout
9077 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves and cube decisions: 3 ply
Confidence No Double: ± 0,011 (+0,787<E<+0,809)
Confidence Double: ± 0,019 (+1,017<E<+1,055)

Double Decision confidence: 100,0%
Take Decision confidence: 100,0%


I have to check up my post with the market windows. I wrote Xavier an E-Mail. Something with the cube information window. I don't know if there is a fault be me or XG or mishandling it.

And here for match:

No Double
Player Winning Chances: 66,73% (G: 37,36% B: 7,14%)
Opponent Winning Chances: 33,27% (G: 12,67% B: 3,21%)
Double/Take
Player Winning Chances: 67,51% (G: 37,47% B: 14,34%)
Opponent Winning Chances: 32,49% (G: 13,66% B: 5,22%)

Cubeless Equities: No Double=+0,813, Double=+1,487

Cubeful Equities:
No Double: +0,935 (-0,065)
Double/Take: +1,253 (+0,253)
Double/Drop: +1,000

Best Cube action: Double / Drop

Rollout
1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves and cube decisions: 3 ply
Confidence No Double: ± 0,038 (+0,898<E<+0,973)
Confidence Double: ± 0,059 (+1,194<E<+1,312)

Double Decision confidence: 100,0%
Take Decision confidence: 100,0%

This one is another remarkable norwegian position.

Last edited by higonefive; 11-11-2010 at 04:09 PM.
higonefive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2010, 08:33 PM   #30
Bjornar
old hand
 
Bjornar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Norwegian donkey
Posts: 1,969
Re: Another interesting position from the Norwegian backgammon community

Quote:
This one is another remarkable norwegian position.
LOL. Yeah, lets all be happy that we actually have players that take pictures and notes about the really interesting positions that we all can probably learn something from(even though this is about as complex as it gets).
Bjornar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2010, 11:23 PM   #31
Robertie
old hand
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,702
Re: Norwegian, Spoiler, but no RO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheetsworld View Post
BG is a different game than when I left it 7 years ago....this is sick.
Actually, it's not as bad as all that.

There is backgammon knowledge which is very useful and which makes you a better player, such as knowing where to put your checkers, knowing what sort of structures play well and what sort are awkward, and knowing how to do a pip count. All of these things are important and wil make you much better when you master them.

Then there is backgammon knowledge which is very arcane and makes almost no difference in your play. A lot of the mathematical tournament strategy, such as the post you were referring to, fits this category. It matters a little, and if you want to be a very top player you'll need to look at this stuff at some point, if only to develop some simple rules you can apply over the board.

Imagine you went to a party and met a couple of mechanical engineers. One knew the value of pi to 5 decimal places. The other knew pi to 100 decimal places. Who's the better engineer? Answer -- no difference. It's possible to have lots of very specialized knowledge which doesn't affect your results much. The trick is knowing what's important and what's not, so you can concentrate on the important stuff and actually play better.
Robertie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 01:35 AM   #32
Bjornar
old hand
 
Bjornar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Norwegian donkey
Posts: 1,969
Re: Another interesting position from the Norwegian backgammon community

Since you have posted in this thread Robertie, but also seen the rollouts unfortunately. What would you play over the board? The play was double take in the actual game. We have seen through rollouts that this probably is wrong but the rollouts vary a lot too. I feel this is a very good practical double, what are your thoughts?
Bjornar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 03:48 AM   #33
slowkey
journeyman
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 270
Re: Another interesting position from the Norwegian backgammon community

Preposterous to pretend that this is a proposition that tests the position itself. If it goes double and take, an extended middle game is likely to result which will afford both players multiple opportunities to make big errors.

If you are offered such a "proposition", think about whether it's simply a test of who is the better player. With the cube in a disadvantageous spot.
slowkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 04:23 AM   #34
higonefive
journeyman
 
higonefive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Germany, lower saxony
Posts: 317
Re: Another interesting position from the Norwegian backgammon community

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bjornar View Post
Since you have posted in this thread Robertie, but also seen the rollouts unfortunately. What would you play over the board? The play was double take in the actual game. We have seen through rollouts that this probably is wrong but the rollouts vary a lot too. I feel this is a very good practical double, what are your thoughts?
atrifix=MCG=Matt Cohn-Geier would give you 1 point and the cube, and i think, for every amount, that you can afford. So i think this is a pass and a good prop for practical purposes to lure someone in.

And Xavier wrote me:

Hello,



The Number displayed in the Cube information are different than the ones in the analyze: in the cube information it is the (back)gammon ratio.

In this case for the bottom player: the analyze show 66.73% game won, 37.36% are gammon (or better) and 7.14% are backgammon

The values in the cube information a hence:

· Backgammon ratio= 7.14/66.73=10.70% of game won that are backgammons

· Gammon ratio =(37.36-7.14)/66.73=45.29&% of game won that are Gammons



So anything right, if you look in the cube information window for a centered cube, and this is the information for the decision to double to 2.

And last, but not least, a rollout for match or for money at this score must vary. 1296 trials was not enough in the light of the standard deviation (confidence).

Last edited by higonefive; 11-12-2010 at 04:36 AM.
higonefive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 05:24 AM   #35
higonefive
journeyman
 
higonefive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Germany, lower saxony
Posts: 317
Re: Norwegian, Spoiler, but no RO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robertie View Post
Actually, it's not as bad as all that.

There is backgammon knowledge which is very useful and which makes you a better player, such as knowing where to put your checkers, knowing what sort of structures play well and what sort are awkward, and knowing how to do a pip count. All of these things are important and wil make you much better when you master them.

Then there is backgammon knowledge which is very arcane and makes almost no difference in your play. A lot of the mathematical tournament strategy, such as the post you were referring to, fits this category. It matters a little, and if you want to be a very top player you'll need to look at this stuff at some point, if only to develop some simple rules you can apply over the board.

Imagine you went to a party and met a couple of mechanical engineers. One knew the value of pi to 5 decimal places. The other knew pi to 100 decimal places. Who's the better engineer? Answer -- no difference. It's possible to have lots of very specialized knowledge which doesn't affect your results much. The trick is knowing what's important and what's not, so you can concentrate on the important stuff and actually play better.
Dear Bill,

i looked at work at this position, made a guess, and then i began the workout, like problemchess. At this time, luncheon, i reread Kits "How to play tournament backgammon" and your game against him Reno 1993, given as example. If you play tournament backgammon, you have to work this over the board, and i think you can do the math approximately over the board. So it was not only 2003 but even 1993 an issue, which you have to manage for successful matchplay. And no one who will play a major tournament is successful, without this considarations. What "sick" is: 42.000k RO for 3ply opening theory, databases about the flaws and biases of your opponents to adjust checkerplay. Modern Backgammon is fighting very hard against the variance of the dice.
higonefive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2010, 02:45 AM   #36
RolldUpTrips
adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 827
Re: Another interesting position from the Norwegian backgammon community

An interesting point about this position for money: I gave white a 2 cube and did a long rollout. It was almost as big of a double as the center cube, and a much bigger take (1.138)? It seemed to me that a lot of the value of the initial cube (Jacoby on, of course) was in activating gammons, but this is apparently not the case, nor was it a major factor to keep an owned cube in a very volatile position. Also, in such a swingy position it would seem that owning a 4 cube would be fairly strong. Although I suspected that the best play would not change, I'm surprised at the numbers. Why is it so much worse for black to own a 4 cube, and why does the fact that it is not a center cube not matter as much as I thought it would (no double equity .832)?
RolldUpTrips is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2010, 03:36 AM   #37
higonefive
journeyman
 
higonefive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Germany, lower saxony
Posts: 317
Re: Another interesting position from the Norwegian backgammon community

Quote:
Originally Posted by RolldUpTrips View Post
An interesting point about this position for money: I gave white a 2 cube and did a long rollout. It was almost as big of a double as the center cube, and a much bigger take (1.138)? It seemed to me that a lot of the value of the initial cube (Jacoby on, of course) was in activating gammons, but this is apparently not the case, nor was it a major factor to keep an owned cube in a very volatile position. Also, in such a swingy position it would seem that owning a 4 cube would be fairly strong. Although I suspected that the best play would not change, I'm surprised at the numbers. Why is it so much worse for black to own a 4 cube, and why does the fact that it is not a center cube not matter as much as I thought it would (no double equity .832)?
I don't understand. Do you mean, that black owns the cube? It white owns the cube, there is no double/beaver.
higonefive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2010, 01:30 PM   #38
RolldUpTrips
adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 827
Re: Another interesting position from the Norwegian backgammon community

Quote:
Originally Posted by higonefive View Post
I don't understand. Do you mean, that black owns the cube? It white owns the cube, there is no double/beaver.
Sorry it's white on my XG lol...yes the stronger side owns the cube.
RolldUpTrips is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2010, 02:53 AM   #39
atrifix
grinder
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 500
Re: Another interesting position from the Norwegian backgammon community

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doubledouble1984 View Post
Im the fish?
No, I'm the fish. That's why I said "this fish is hooked." Prop is open.
atrifix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2010, 04:13 AM   #40
higonefive
journeyman
 
higonefive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Germany, lower saxony
Posts: 317
Re: Another interesting position from the Norwegian backgammon community

Quote:
Originally Posted by atrifix View Post
No, I'm the fish. That's why I said "this fish is hooked." Prop is open.
No Double
Player Winning Chances: 66,11% (G: 37,16% B: 5,73%)
Opponent Winning Chances: 33,89% (G: 12,35% B: 1,60%)
Double/Take
Player Winning Chances: 67,72% (G: 37,79% B: 5,11%)
Opponent Winning Chances: 32,28% (G: 12,05% B: 1,80%)

Cubeless Equities: No Double=+0,322, Double=+1,290

Cubeful Equities:
No Double: +0,798 (-0,202)
Double/Take: +1,036 (+0,036)
Double/Drop: +1,000

Best Cube action: Double / Drop

Rollout
9077 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Moves and cube decisions: 3 ply
Confidence No Double: ± 0,011 (+0,787<E<+0,809)
Confidence Double: ± 0,019 (+1,017<E<+1,055)

Double Decision confidence: 100,0%
Take Decision confidence: 100,0%

So you think 0,036 isn't enough? Or so borderline that you think you can win from both sides against most of the fishes as fish under fishes?!
higonefive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2010, 02:08 PM   #41
atrifix
grinder
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 500
Re: Another interesting position from the Norwegian backgammon community

Quote:
Originally Posted by higonefive View Post
So you think 0,036 isn't enough? Or so borderline that you think you can win from both sides against most of the fishes as fish under fishes?!
I think many people will make some mistakes playing Red and apparently I would have .036 the best of it to start with anyway. I didn't see the rollout until now, though.
atrifix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2010, 03:14 PM   #42
Doubledouble1984
centurion
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 140
Re: Another interesting position from the Norwegian backgammon community

I guess I was a little off about the beaver, but I still like this as a take for a prop. As atrifix said, there is a lot of room for red to make mistakes, but I think thats true for black also. bearing in against this position could create its share of errors.
Doubledouble1984 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2017, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online