Celebrating 14 years in backgammon games

When Not To Bear Off

by Walter Trice
15 November 2004


Walter Trice

Backgammon is a goal-oriented game, and most constructive checker plays are directly focused on concrete objectives. For example, if building a prime is important to your game plan and you roll something that lets you make a point in the partially completed prime then you generally should do so instead of trying to find some fancy reason why it might be better to put off making the priming points. A roll that doesn't let you make a point can be used to prepare to make points as soon as possible by creating direct builders for the priming points. A roll that won't even do that might be used to prepare to prepare to make points, by moving a checker closer to the direct building range for the prime
 

The rest of this article (21.31 K) is premium content.

GammonVillage Subscriptions:

Choose a subscription length. Your best value is the lifetime subscription.

Duration:
Price:
Expires:
3 Month Subscription
$30
21 Aug 2013
1 Year Subscription
$50
21 May 2014
Lifetime Subscription
$125
Never

Proceed to Step Two

We accept Visa, Mastercard, American Express, Discover Card and PayPal. Google Checkout available.

Article text Copyright © 1999-2013 Walter Trice and GammonVillage Inc.

 
You must be signed in to rate articles.

Feedback about this article:

2.
Subject: Re: When Not To Bear Off
From: trice
Date: 19 Nov 2004 12:06 EST

Thanks, Ian!

With the article fresh in my mind, I looked for smoothing bearoff plays in my Vegas matches, but didn't find any :-)

Michael Strato is vacationing, and he probably did the editing and formatting for this article from a temporary office consisting of a towel on some Caribbean beach. Perhaps he'll do something with The List when he gets back to his regular office in the igloo. In the meantime I have sent you a text version -- easily imported to Excel -- by e- mail, and I'd be happy to do the same for anyone else who might care to post a reply here.

-- Walter Trice

4.
Subject: Re: When Not To Bear Off
From: TheRake
Date: 21 Nov 2004 09:23 EST

Thank you for providing the list of positions (type A) where it is wrong to bear off with a single number to play.

You also note positions (type B)where it is wrong to bear off two men instead of one man. Three questions occur to me. (1) How many type B positions are there ? (2) Is there any generalisation for type B positions, comparable to the rule that in type A positions it is never wrong to bear off directly from the 1, 5 or 6 points ? (3) Are there any positions (type C) where it is possible to bear off two men but the correct play is to bear off none ? I hope there are because that would be an amazing result ! Or perhaps there is a theoretical reason why that cannot be possible ?

Extending this topic even further, what can you tell us about positions, if any, where a double is rolled but it is correct to bear off 3 or 2 or 1 or 0 when 4 are possible; or 2 or 1 or 0 when 3 are possible ?

Ray Kershaw

6.
Subject: Re: When Not To Bear Off
From: TheRake
Date: 30 Nov 2004 18:37 EST

Walter

Thanks. I think it's clear there are, alas, no Type C positions.

All smoothing deuces require at least one checker on the deuce point, by definition. All smoothing fours require no checker on the deuce. So there cannot be a position requiring simultaneously a smoothing deuce and a smoothing four.

All smoothing threes require exactly one checker on the three point. No smoothing deuce has exactly one checker on the three point. (Some have zero and some more than one.) So there cannot be a position requiring simultaneously a smoothing deuce and a smoothing three.

Finally again all smoothing threes require exactly one checker on the three point. All smoothing fours require more than one checker on the three point. So there cannot be a position requiring simultaneously a smoothing three and a smoothing four.

Ray

8.
Subject: Re: When Not To Bear Off
From: robadams   
Date: 13 Nov 2005 07:42 EST

Hi, I just thought I'd note here since it is on this topic that in the 2005 MonteCarlo final match, John O'Hagan had a smoothy 4 to play in Game #15 move #27. His position was "305102" which unless I'm missing it isn't in the list given here. But Snowie's and Sconyers' databases both liked the smoothing play probably because O'Hagan was way ahead in the race and so smoothing catered to the small numbers (2's) that would be more likely to cause him to actually lose the game.

You must be signed in to post comments.

List Price: $695.00Sale Price: $495.00
Join the Gammon Village Store Affiliate Program today.
Help Wanted
Backgammon Board Game Cartoon
Social Networking
Become a Fan on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter

Follow Us
U.S. Backgammon Federation
USBGF.org
The U.S. Backgammon Federation
Terms & Conditions I Privacy Policy I About Us I Contact Us I Advertise I Affiliates I Site Map
Celebrating 14 years in backgammon games