Back to "Advanced Angles" written by Steve Sax

Backgammon Kaz and Effect

by Steve Sax
20 July 2008

Steve Sax

When you play well you rate to win. That is cause and effect in backgammon and other contests of skill.

Well it had been just shy of three years since Neil Kazaross had won an American Backgammon Tour (ABT) event so the premise set forth in the first line of this article seemed to be betraying the all time ABT points leader.

It's not that Neil wasn't playing well, but he just wasn't scoring those points like he had in 1994, 1999, and 2005 when he won the ABT crown for the third time and mind you, no one else has even won it twice.

The rest of this article (80.04 K) is premium content. Please subscribe below.

GammonVillage Subscriptions:

You must be signed in to rate articles.

Feedback about this article:

Subject: Re: Backgammon Kaz and Effect

From: naz

Date: 22 Jul 2008 21:07 EST

great article Steve and wow, some really excellent positions. Looked like a great match you had with challenging decisions.

Quick note on position 11. To me, the BIG consideration is efficiency. If you make the 4, you have a big ugly stack on the 6. Those 3 spares on the 6 are only used efficiently to make the 5 point. They have to work really hard to do that since only 1's can do that. Alternatively, if you make the 9, the spares can be used in a more natural way with more flexibility...the 2 spares on the 8 can work to make the 7, 5, or 4, while the spares on the 6 can be used to make the 5 and 4.

Dana

Subject: Re: Backgammon Kaz and Effect

From: Fabrice Liardet

Date: 25 Jul 2008 06:29 EST

Yes, that is exactly what I thought - actually position 11 looked easy to me while I failed on almost the half of the other decisions. For a successful containment, using all 15 checkers is no luxury, and after 8/4(2) it is likely that 2 of the 3 spares on the 6 will stay out of play as long as the 3-point is too deep.

Subject: Re: Backgammon Kaz and Effect

From: Mary Hickey Member has a photo available

Date: 29 Jul 2008 11:38 EST

Regarding Position 11, I agree with the reason Naz and Fabrice give regarding the difficulty of making the 5 point later, and also with Steve's dislike of the gappiness resulting from making the 4 point now. We can see whether this reasoning holds water by changing the position so that we can make the 5 point right now, though not with the checkers we wanted (from the 6 point). We then avoid the gappiness, and of course solve the problem of how to make it later >>

I altered the position by switching the number of Green checkers on the 22 and 21 points, and making the roll 33 instead of 44. Snowie 4's 3-ply evaluation then prefers making the 22 and 5 points over the 22 and 10 by .094, showing that these reasons probably are the right ones. (And, as is often but not always the case, that "the 5 point is the 5 point.")

You must be signed in to post comments.