Just to point out. Gnu is strong more or less as XG as playing engine. What gives to XG the nod and excellence is his flexibility, his intuitivity interface his thousands options and finally his graphical design close to perfection.

So 60$ for that program is a price that any non random player has to pay ainec

As you said

Fllecha, my compliments for your non-italian english. As I have no financial interest I keep it short.

Pipcount we need for timing and double,take decisions in a race. Easy methods for a rough pipcount are available. Doubling in a race might be done away with, as by getting the pips for free a decision is just a matter of one subtraction and one division, like we did on primary school.

As far as analysis goes, professional players play against the bot for several hours per day. Analyzing a live game will be out of sheer curiosity. Besides, a camera can do the job.

By making the board electronic it is likely that some of the traditional atmosphere of backgammon will be lost.

I'm puzzled by the idea that counting pips accurately has become 'a thing of the past.' Counting pips accurately under the pressure of a ticking clock is a key skill, something that good players do well and bad players do poorly.

If your point is that eliminating skills is essential to making backgammon more popular, then I guess automating pip counting is a good goal. In the same vein, why not eliminate the messy business of remembering match equity tables? Let's let every player bring a printed copy of the MET to agame and consult it during play. That would be so much simpler than trying to remember all those messy numbers.

Other "improvements" suggest themselves. It's easy to make a mistake trying to remember the proper replies to opening moves. How about a cell phone app which would let everyone instantly get the right reply for every reply and match score?

And doubling properly in the bearoff? Wow, how 20th-century is that? Out with it! The possibilities are endless.

You are missing my point, Bill. The pip count is provided for both players on every BG site I've played on except Game Colony, where there is a rarely used option to turn it off. Given that the vast majority of backgammon games are played online it really is a question of uniformity.

This begs the question, why do these sites provide the pip count in the first place? I think most people feel it makes for faster and more efficient game play. Look at it this way. Two great players play a match on gamesgrid. Both know the other can can take a manual count. T/f, there's no advantage to be gained from removing the count from the screen so nobody complains about it.

like it or not, the automated pip count is something online players have become accustomed to. The sites show the pip count because players want it shown--even the highest rated ones do.

There is no reason why this dynamic would change Over-the-board if the technology were available. Of course there would be the same objections you made in your post from BG "purists." But then, when they actually sit down to the board, they'll turn on the pip counting machine and start rolling.

As a matter of fact it is impolite for a stranger to keep pushing. And you are escaping the question of the fraud vulnerability.

What vulnerabilities are you specifically concerned about?

I am not very much concerned, because I don't play for big amounts of money. I don't have so much money, because when you are really principled and straightforward it is not easy to make a lot of money in this world. I could talk about the importance of ethics, but I already referred to this in my thread(link) a fresh approach to backgammon; neither about an ugly world, because I hinted at it in my thread(link) backgammon for education; neither about “black friday”, because I already mentioned about elite organized swindle in a recent post.

Getting a display for the pipcount will need electric circuits within the board, while on the computer it is more of a -given-. A trojan horse will be created, because (as I already mentioned) pipcount is a very minor issue, and we are more interested in the board positions*(also no sine qua non). So the next step will be a built-in memory for games and matches. However, now the infrastructure has been established to sneak in a transmission device that will send the board position to a pc, and will signal the results back.

You've done 8 posts up until now, but it strikes me that they are very long, never to the point, and make the impression of carrying a hidden agenda. So I will be very clear now, and though slyness is not my main thing, I will tell you how I would cheat.
The pc gets the board position, but still has no dice numbers. The dice numbers could be transmitted by a wiggling toe, wiggling knee, tapping on a ring around the fingers, or by a third person at the table. Now the bot can do the calculation, and signal the player by pulses on the body. For the first quadrant of the board one pulse, for the second two pulses … So if the checker on position 19 should be moved it would be translated into 4 pulses and then 1 pulse, and position 20 by 4 pulses and then 2 pulses, and the same (if) for the other checker(s). So the pc signals only when I send the dice numbers, and I only send the dice numbers if I am not sure. Only when I need to double, I get the signal spontaneously. And when I am doubled I wiggle or tap 10 times or so.

Gameplay appeals to the child within us, and keeps our inner being young and healthy. We should cherish it, because it is an antidote against a world that is dominated by excessive ego-instincts. People have become largely automated themselves without them being aware of. So let the backgammon board be as it is and has been for hundreds of years.


*If there is a real demand, I think of a wide-angle lens attached at the sternum, which sends the images straight to a little memory box next to the board.(presuming that it takes some time to convert the video images into coded positions.)

Sorry for the off-topic question... What are normal time controls set to in tournaments?

Yogi, cheating could easily be prevented in your scenario by making the players play in the nude.

I think an electronic board is a great idea and would buy one in a flash. Mostly for the transcription feature. I take photos of really puzzling moves and doubles, but it is awkward and inconvenient. Pip counting is possibly the easiest part, possibly the only easy part , of backgammon and I hope it is around for a good long while.

The electronic board I envision is pretty simple: Reed switches are placed under the points, bar, and bear off trays. Each checker has a magnet so that its position on the board can read by the switches. the board would interface with GNU Backgammon either by USB or Bluetooth so that a mirror of the over the board match would be saved to an.ssg file. The BG board essentially acts as a keyboard for GNU. That's all there is too it. Any Trojan issues could be avoided by watching to make sure the move made over the board corresponds exactly with the move entered into GNU. Btw, the dice numbers are superfluous in that the movement of the checkers allows for an easy calculation of what the roll was.

Sorry you feel that way. The notion that I would have some sort of "hidden agenda" strikes me as sounding a v bit nourotic on your part. what agenda could I possibly have, in your estimation? Nevertheless, your hurtful critique of my writing skill is hypocritical and without merit. If you don't see the value in what I write, skip my posts. But please do not insult me.

That's the entire problem. The cheater will play the move in correspondence with GNU or XG.

If the backgammon elite heads in the same direction as the poker elite a few years ago, it's for sure that you are going to push this scam through. I came with very good arguments in post #32, but this post will be buried to oblivion because you are never going to give up.

The idea is awful but I'm more optimistic than yogiman. The backgammon community is pretty tight-knit and the folks running tournaments and organizing the game have, for the most part, a lot of common sense and experience. Players have been practicing against bots that show pip counts since Jellyfish came out 20 years ago, and it hasn't resulted in any outcry to take pip-counting out of the game. I wouldn't be too worried.

AS this post is about Backgammon boards has anyone seen one of these Foster boards by Fosters of London? They look great, pricey but great..

http://foster.co.uk/our-products/lug...gammon-boards/

Ah, but seeing which checkers moved would not necessarily tell you what was rolled. For example, let's say a checker moved a total of eight pips. What was rolled? It could have been 5-3 but maybe it was 6-2... or 2-2. If a checker moved seven pips was it 6-1, 5-2, or 4-3?

It's mandatory to know exactly what was rolled when the game is analyzed later.

(Andy yes, I realize I'm responding to a post that originally appeared in 2002.)