Back to "Advanced Angles" written by Steve Sax

Backgammon Settlements

by Steve Sax
20 February 2009

Steve Sax

In money games when a critical juncture is reached, opponents can decide to either continue the game, or make a settlement. A settlement is simply an agreement to end the game for a specific amount as a way of reducing the variance and potentially gaining some equity.

In tournaments you can't settle positions, but you can make hedge or trade agreements that swap a portion of a player's future earnings in that event. That can be done by hedging a prescribed amount or by trading or swapping a percentage of the action.

Some of the variables that come into play regarding settlements of money games are ownership of the cube, gammons or backgammons, future shot equity or future race equity.

The rest of this article (56.21 K) is premium content. Please subscribe below.

GammonVillage Subscriptions:

You must be signed in to rate articles.

Feedback about this article:

Subject: Re: Backgammon Settlements

From: PhilSimborg Member has a photo available

Date: 05 Mar 2009 01:18 EST

Excellent article relative to the math, but I have one basic problem relative to settlements. If you make a truly fair settlement, what has either party gained over and above playing the game out and letting the odds play out? Then only answer can be money management.

I believe in settling large cubes, even if I have to give up a little, because I don't want to lose too much money in one game. I also don't want to win too much money in one game, as most of the people I play with are friends (or fish) and I don't want to lose either.

So if I am right, and it's a matter of cash flow or not having too large a swing on one game (or one roll), it stands to reason that there really is no point in settling unless:

a) it is a very large cube or potential for a very large game with gammons or backgammons, or b) you are getting an edge in the settlement--for example, you win if you hit the 6 (17 shots) and lose if you don't (19 shots) and your opponent is willing to wash (call it a tie).

I have yet to understand why people want to settle money games with a 2 or 4 cube when there are no gammons, and personally, I hate hearing the bartering and discussions when that is the case. I have long tried to have a rule in our chous that there can be no settlements unless the cube is on 4 or higher.

Phil

Subject: Re: Backgammon Settlements

From: STEAMSAX Member has a photo available

Date: 05 Mar 2009 07:05 EST

Making deals to gain equity is a perfectly legitimate practice. When you double your opponent and it is a take, you are hoping he drops and you gain equity. The same can be said for trying to gain equity by settling.

The trick is to not be too greedy and just gain a fraction of equity that your opponent either knows he is taking the worst of it by a small amount an doesn't care, or he doesn't know and you have gained by your negotiating skills.

Poker is very popular and rewards those who are most skilled at deception. I don't think that backgammon is so different that you need to always look to be fair as you are trying to win as much as anyone else.

As far as being disturbed by cubes settled at low levels, I can see how you might be frustrated by a delay that is caused by two stubborn "settlers" but different people have different tolerances as to how much is too much to gamble for.

It may be a regional phenomenon but settling in our chouettes is commonplace and consulting is not allowed. In different regions of the country consulting is standard practice after the cube is turned and as you have stated, settling is frowned upon at a low level.

You must be signed in to post comments.