Can't beat my Crawford game with Timo where I was 4-0 and we were both bearing off. Timo needed three doubles in a row to leap-frog me to the finish.
BOOM, BOOM, BOOM, three doubles in a row! I was left with my last pip sitting ONE space away from victory.. !!
Had to laugh.
We are still playing out our matches
The drama!
Haha. Oddly enough, EVERY game is pretty exciting. I guess because it's a real person you are up against. You nearly fall off your chair when you roll a double, it's quite strange
We really should have recorded it. We both had complimentary battle music (at one point, the Red Army Choir) and the winning game came down to a single pip.
Yeah right! I was going to correct Scott that playing to 5 points means maximum of 7 games (not 9).
Haha, no I'm serious.
Say we are 4-3 right?
If our opening rolls mean that you start AND have a good combination of numbers to allow you to group 2 pips together, I see no reason to accept your (inevitable) double.
Hell, I may even consider declining your double just on the basis of you STARTING.
You would then get your 1 point, putting us at 4-4 and we then move into the TRUE final game :-)
In which the cube will not be needed at all, as we only need 1 point to win. Unless you want to try to push over 5 points, and sure, I would be forced to accept the cube, as would you.
Timo was implying that for it to take 9 games there would have been an obvious and significant misplay, but he was wrong.
In essence, the argument is that at a score of 4-3 the player with 3 points has a mandatory double. However, that also means that the player with 4 points can drop the double essentially for free - basically, they get to choose whether the current game determines the outcome, or the next one does.
Still, making that mistake would make you think 8 was the maximum - I don't get where Timo got 7 from.
I got seven because I am a dumbass. There is a special case which is our play 0-0 -> 4-0 (four games) -> 4-1 (fifth game) -> 4-3 (sixth) -> 4-5 (seventh).
Doesn't work for situations where intermediate states are pretty much anything else; 2-3 etc.
You might be able to make an argument for 8 games.
Let's say you play 7 games and the score is 4-3. Regardless of what is happening in the game, assuming it isn't a Crawford game, why wouldn't the player with 3 double immediately? If they lose, they are going to lose anyway. They may as well raise the stakes to make this game truly a deciding game. It's easier to win one than to win two in a row.
Answer: they would and should, but the player with 4 points can easily have good reason to decline.
Fine, let them decline. Then make the next game a deciding game. If the double came before the first roll, it really makes not much difference. You will play one more game, and it will be the decider. Though, I guess if they decline it becomes the 9th game.
Answer: they would and should, but the player with 4 points can easily have good reason to decline.
Fine, let them decline. Then make the next game a deciding game. If the double came before the first roll, it really makes not much difference.
The double can't come before the first roll, since the first roll comes from both players and decided whose turn it is.
However, if your opponent wins the opening roll (i.e. gets to go first) and you don't get a good roll in return, then you are at a disadvantage in the current game, and so it makes sense to drop your opponent's double and play the next game instead.
As such, a 9-game match is possible even with optimal play.
Incidentally, a score of 4-1 is very similar to 4-3 in that the opponent has a mandatory double, and you have a free drop. This is not the case at a score of 4-2.
Answer: they would and should, but the player with 4 points can easily have good reason to decline.
Fine, let them decline. Then make the next game a deciding game. If the double came before the first roll, it really makes not much difference.
The double can't come before the first roll, since the first roll comes from both players and decided whose turn it is.
However, if your opponent wins the opening roll (i.e. gets to go first) and you don't get a good roll in return, then you are at a disadvantage in the current game, and so it makes sense to drop your opponent's double and play the next game instead.
As such, a 9-game match is possible even with optimal play.
Incidentally, a score of 4-1 is very similar to 4-3 in that the opponent has a mandatory double, and you have a free drop. This is not the case at a score of 4-2.
EXACTLY this. Might as well go into your final game with the best possible chance. So taking into consideration the OPENING roll (assume opponent wins) and then your OWN roll, when the inevitable double is offered you have a small, but important decision to make. Carry on with this game, or try again, hoping for either a start or at least a better set of rolls. Ie. Betting it can't be any WORSE than this opening for your opponent...
Game 1 he conceded to the cube. Game 2 he accepted the cube and was defeated. I was in a position where I could have made it a pure race very early but I held back and let the dice play out. It was conservative in that it let him catch up but it also helped solidify my exit. 10 of my pips were on my 6 and 5 of home and 2 pips were sitting 2 points out with Bronz having a block on the point in front of them. A few large doubles put him out and the end game was fairly routine. Game 3 was a bit odd, positionally. Bronz would hit me out on his side of the board and leave himself vulnerable. and I ended up putting 5 of his pips in my home. It ended in a gammon, giving me the match.
InvaderREN just won our final match. In the beginning there was a small capture war which I won putting me ~30 pips ahead but then REN kept steadily rolling better than me and pulled out a double at the end.
InvaderREN just won our final match. In the beginning there was a small capture war which I won putting me ~30 pips ahead but then REN kept steadily rolling better than me and pulled out a double at the end.
Final score REN 6 - Timo 3
Yep, that was purely a numbers game, we both held our ground then leap-frogged out and raced for the finish.
You guys are actually doing a good job of playing all these matches. I did not expect this. I guess the weeding out process of having a registration/sign up worked. I am definitely confident about having more tournaments of this format in the future.
We've only managed to schedule and play once so-far. There is like a 30 minute window where our schedules allow for play every day and it's easy to miss.
So both of my rounds, we wound up playing on different Kongregate backgammon games where the doubling cube was not built in. Doubling via chat is kinda janky and the other person may not see it. Does anyone have a better online backgammon solution?
Comments
Failed to Gammon though because REN pulled the crazy doubles out of his behind while racing for safety. One game left!
But yes, nearly done.
And fuck that
Say we are 4-3 right?
If our opening rolls mean that you start AND have a good combination of numbers to allow you to group 2 pips together, I see no reason to accept your (inevitable) double.
Hell, I may even consider declining your double just on the basis of you STARTING.
You would then get your 1 point, putting us at 4-4 and we then move into the TRUE final game :-)
In which the cube will not be needed at all, as we only need 1 point to win. Unless you want to try to push over 5 points, and sure, I would be forced to accept the cube, as would you.
In essence, the argument is that at a score of 4-3 the player with 3 points has a mandatory double. However, that also means that the player with 4 points can drop the double essentially for free - basically, they get to choose whether the current game determines the outcome, or the next one does.
Still, making that mistake would make you think 8 was the maximum - I don't get where Timo got 7 from.
Doesn't work for situations where intermediate states are pretty much anything else; 2-3 etc.
Let's say you play 7 games and the score is 4-3. Regardless of what is happening in the game, assuming it isn't a Crawford game, why wouldn't the player with 3 double immediately? If they lose, they are going to lose anyway. They may as well raise the stakes to make this game truly a deciding game. It's easier to win one than to win two in a row.
However, if your opponent wins the opening roll (i.e. gets to go first) and you don't get a good roll in return, then you are at a disadvantage in the current game, and so it makes sense to drop your opponent's double and play the next game instead.
As such, a 9-game match is possible even with optimal play.
Incidentally, a score of 4-1 is very similar to 4-3 in that the opponent has a mandatory double, and you have a free drop. This is not the case at a score of 4-2.
Game 1 he conceded to the cube.
Game 2 he accepted the cube and was defeated.
I was in a position where I could have made it a pure race very early but I held back and let the dice play out. It was conservative in that it let him catch up but it also helped solidify my exit. 10 of my pips were on my 6 and 5 of home and 2 pips were sitting 2 points out with Bronz having a block on the point in front of them. A few large doubles put him out and the end game was fairly routine.
Game 3 was a bit odd, positionally. Bronz would hit me out on his side of the board and leave himself vulnerable. and I ended up putting 5 of his pips in my home. It ended in a gammon, giving me the match.
Final score REN 6 - Timo 3
The dice were the winners in the final match.