Hi, I'm a complete newb to the game of backgammon so please bear with me.

I'm reading two beginner's books, Lamford's "Starting Out in Backgammon" and Chris Bray's "Backgammon to Win".

There seems to be a slight disagreement (if I'm understanding it correctly) when it comes to the doubling window between the authors.

On p.49 of Lamford's book he says that you should double when you lead by 10% in the pip-count, and accept when the lead is no more than 12.5%.

Lamford stats that "other authors have quoted slightly different figures to the above, but the author is fortunate to be writing this book in the age of very strong backgammon computers, which can play races almost perfectly. They have shown that there has been a tendency among most players to double prematurely in races." He then gives an example where the leader was ahead by 9% and said the position would not quite be a double.

What's confusing me is that in Chris Bray's book which came out in 2007 (six years later than Lamford's book), he gives 8% to double, 12% to pass/take and 9% to redouble. This seems to contradict Lamford's advice, even though Bray's book is more up-to-date.

To add confusion, Bray then says you can estimate the doubling window more easily by using "10% minus two pips" to double, "10% minus one pip" to redouble and "10% plus two pips" to pass/take.

Can someone please tell me who I should believe? I'm guessing that Bray's advice is more up-to-date, but I'm half hoping that I can use 10% because it's easier to calculate

Thanks

The "10% rule" breaks down as the end of the game approaches. As an extreme example, would you double when ahead in the race with nine checkers on the ace point and your opponent with two on his five point? I don't have either book so I can't comment out of context, but it isn't just the difference in pip counts that determine a correct double.

Hi cashedout, thank you for your reply.

Yes I understand that the 8/9/12 rule (or 10% rule, whichever is to be preferred) is a very basic method of estimating a racing advantage, and doesn't take into account factors such as wastage and big stacks.

I skimmed an article on one of the sites about the different racing formulae, but to be honest as a beginner I felt that trying to incorporate any of these into my game at this point would probably be counter-productive. Bear in mind I'm still struggling to be able to count pips in a reasonable amount of time without making mistakes.

I might be wrong about this though. I mean, do you think that I should choose a method (say, the Ward count which seems popular) and try to use this from the get-go? If you were starting out all over again what would you recommend?

Here's the thing, I'm presenting an "old school" perspective because my playing experience comes from 25 to 35 years ago. I had a winning game in my day, but stopped playing and now there are huge advances due to good authors and quality software. I have not kept up, and am here to see what has changed. Focusing on the best counting method seems to me to be similar to memorizing starting hand groups for hold'em. It will help your game, but isn't necessarily the place to begin improving. I can live with making a dubious decision a small percentage of the time because I don't have the latest and greatest pip count method down cold. I sure don't want to overlook something more fundamental like whether to break an anchor, or when not to hit loose though.

That's really interesting, because it makes me wonder if I'm approaching the learning of this game from completely the wrong direction.

The reason I have so many questions about doubling, is that the books and articles I've been reading always seem to imply that checker play pales into insignificance compared to the importance of understanding the cube. Your reply seems somewhat at odds with this.

This leads me to think that maybe, at least from a beginner's perspective, I shouldn't worry too much about the finer points of the cube and just concentrate on my checker play and plans in the various different game-types? The 8/9/12 rule for example works reasonably well for pip-counts above 50 according to Bray, so it's a decent start. And when the count is small then I can develop my 'feel' for playing those positions with experience. Is that what you'd suggest?

Understanding the cube in relation to everything else is something that we're always working on. It's the cube decisions that are often the difference between a very good player and a great player. Cube decisions in a pure race are the easiest to use as examples for explaining why a good double is also a good take. There isn't any better way to convey the value of owning the cube. However, most games don't get to the race. They are decided well before when one player declines to take the cube, or the proper opportunity to redouble never emerges. So I would say it is enough to be aware of the ranges where it is correct to offer and take in the end game, because you might only need to really have an exact count about 20% of the time you're racing anyway. When the count is small, it depends on how many rolls without doubles remain, odd vs. even number of checkers remaining to bear off, and gaps which carry a probability of not being able to bear off.

What I was suggesting to get a feel for playing, were the types of positions which can wind up with a fight for gammon instead of game. There's a lot of subtlety in playing to give yourself the best chance of saving the gammon, which is just as important as understanding the finer aspects of pip count ranges in the end game. When you start to realize you don't want to be fighting to save gammon, you begin to appreciate that playing a backgame for example is never plan A. First of all it is difficult to be properly timed, and it has to be played well after the hit. Secondly it is hard to decide when to give up waiting for the shot and game, and just play to save losing double. All the loose hitting preferred now, assumes that the player has the skills to handle the backgame positions well. If you don't have that come from behind experience, you really aren't going to fare well in the modern game which favors hitting much more than in my day.

I really don't know what to suggest working on, without having seen some of your play. However, I believe from what you've written in this thread, that you may be too bogged down with minute details. They will be important later, after you get enough actual play behind you. In short, yes you are right to think concentrating on checker play and how to handle the common game positions are the foundation build from.

Yes I notice that some references suggest beginners deliberately play running/splitting moves in the opening to aim for relatively simple positions, whereas others have the opinion that "Snowie knows what the best move is, so why not play it?". I've no problem with keeping the game as simple as possible and building up to more complex position-types as my understanding improves.

This is hugely useful to know, and exactly the kind of thing the books don't tell you. When I said I was a complete beginner I wasn't joking. My playing experience is limited to downloading GNUBG and getting trounced by it for the past week There's a local club I'm hoping to join (hence all the questions about point-counts), but as yet I haven't played a single live game. I'd like to get reasonably comfortable playing before I face someone over the board.

I guess I'm really trying to get a "bird's-eye view" of the game, so that I know what's important to concentrate on and what isn't. I'm trying to avoid the situation I found myself in years ago when I was learning how to play chess. I spent a ridiculous amount of time studying the openings when in fact my time would have been much better spent working on the endgame and middlegame.

I think you're right though, I'm probably trying to run before I can walk. Thanks for taking the time to give such detailed responses, I appreciate it.