I play backgammon just for fun and not against anyone who is really all that good but they still know how to play. I was wondering what is best to do in the beggining of the game with the 2 pieces in the villians home. do you want to run or keep them there? or do you want to move them up a few spaces but still in their bass?

Thanks bulldog

unless you roll like 2-1 or 4-1 just keep them back there when your opponent starts closing in on you try to advance them foward either getting an advanced anchor or running them out of there

Opening rolls.

Edit: If you like backgammon you need to download gnubg.

what is the best site for learning how to play this game?

If you roll big numbers (6-3, 6-4, 6-5) you can run a back checker all the way out and try to bring it to safety next turn. Mostly, however, your goal is to split your back checkers quickly by advancing to your opponent's 5-point or 4-point or bar-point, then try to bring the back checkers together again next turn, making what's called an "Anchor". With an anchor in place, your back checkers are safe again and you can then work on making a blocking position on your own side.

Remember that if you roll a number that actually makes a good blocking point (like 3-1 or 4-2 or 6-1) you forget about the back checkers for awhile and just try to block in your opponent.

You're really trying to play two games at once: a game of escaping your back checkers, and a game of blocking your opponent's back checkers. You try to evaluate every roll and see if it's better for one purpose or the other.

I'd recommend www.gammoned.com. It contains a lot of free articles about rules, how to play the opening rolls, and other topics. You can easily pick up the basics by spending a hour there.

tyty

This! ^^^

GNU Backgammon is awesome. JellyFish Backgamoon is another one but I actually prefer gnubg. Backgammon Snowie is another one but it's kind of pricey.

Im in the same boat as you man, hopefully this forum will help me become a better player and beat up on my friends(short term goal)

how far away from becoming a solved game is backgammon? I mean the permutations can't be as many as chess. (or can they?)

I don't know anything about backgammon but I just assumed (from reading other comments) that it was more similar to poker in that it can never be "solved" (there is no algorithm for it) because of random events from dice rolls and whatnot

I just wanted to make a post to make myself an accepted member of this newly forming community. Not having ever played backgammon in my life may be a disadvantage however.

Neither chess nor backgammon is "solved". What we can say is that there are software programs for each game that play better than the best human players. (Rybka in chess and Snowie in backgammon are currently the best.) However, these programs aren't perfect by any means. We can be pretty sure that the programs of ten years hence will be better still, although whether they'll be slightly better or a whole lot better is difficult to say.

The permutations in backgammon actually grow faster than in chess. A typical middlegame position in chess might have 35-40 moves for the side on move. A typical backgammon position has 21 different dice rolls, some of which might have several hundred possible moves. (For example, imagine the number of ways to play 1-1 in the starting position. It's a big number!) That's why the exhaustive look-ahead methods that work in chess programs don't work in backgammon programs. Backgammon programs are all neural nets, which is a fundamentally different technology.

is backgammon like poker in that you can't see your opponents dice?

You can.

well that makes it too easy. I think that if i were to be able to see my opponents cards in poker i would have too much of an advantage.

What he means is that there is no discrepancy of information at any point in the game. When your opponent rolls his dice, you can see them just as well as he can. So your comparison to not seeing villains cards in poker isn't valid.

However, backgammon is like poker in that you can't predict future rolls, just like you can't predict which out of the possible cards will fall on future streets. In other words, there are elements of chance in both games.

But BG is a game of perfect information, while poker is a game of imperfect information.

oh i see. I understand now

I think it would be better if you can see two of your opponents dice rolls, and then the other two dice are face down. that would add in that element of having to "read" your opponent if he's not wearing sunglasses

I guess that could be interesting to try. However, it makes it harder to arrange a game that doesn't leave room for cheating, as it's really easy to manipulate dice while your opponent can't see them..

you bring up a good point. unlike poker cards, dice can be turned or "rotated" to display different results.

That and I really don't see where not being able to see the dice would really change things that much. Since as soon as a player rolls they have to act based on the dice. So they would roll, then move, then you would roll and move. There wouldn't really be any reading required.

Backgammon is a fascinating game and a blast to play.

(Count Chocula, I love your avatar! .. lol)

I think he meant that you'd have an open roll that you act on, and a hidden roll that will be the one you'll act on on your next round. Thus, the way you play your open dice will be affected by the hidden roll.

For example, you may be more prone to leave a blot if you know that your next roll will allow you to cover it in your next round. The fact that you leave a blot in a situation that you'd normaly not do so in may tip your opponent off that your hidden roll will in fact help you cover that blot. So there is an element of "dice reading".

Ahhh! Okay that makes a lot more sense!!

Is backgammon making a comeback??

It's the 1980's all over again!!