Page 1 of 2

Playing the lower die only

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 10:32 am
by Wanderer
Silvercreek Backgammon allows players to play against the rules. Where do you stand?

"A player must use both numbers of a roll if this is legally possible (or all four numbers of a double). When only one number can be played, the player must play that number. Or if either number can be played but not both, the player must play the larger one. When neither number can be used, the player loses his turn. In the case of doubles, when all four numbers cannot be played, the player must play as many numbers as he can."

The Silvercreek Backgammon AI doesn't enforce this rule.

Basically, if you roll a 3-1 for instance and by moving a piece with the 1 it results in the 3 becoming usable. That shouldn't be permitted. Though it's not specifically a bearing off issue, this is a useful cheat during the end game where a defending player needs to slow their own progress in the hope of hitting an opponents blot as they bear off. If they can keep their men back, their chances for survival are improved.

Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:21 pm
by furdell
It's wrong to do it, because it's against the rules of would be like letting a bishop in chess move like a knight. If you're willing to do that, you're not really playing chess anymore.

But the real problem is that the AI doesn't have any such moral compunctions, and will gladly bend the rules. And, of course, you can't avoid starting the game with doubles if the computer makes you.

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 6:07 am
by the count24
Any competitive game that's played must be played by the rules, or why even bother playing?

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 6:40 am
by Wanderer
I agree totally. I keep a list of people who I won't be playing again because they play by different (illegal) rules than I do. Problem is, this site is so small it's hard to avoid these players. In fact, two of the top three backgammon players are presently on my list!!! The number 1 player suggested that it was OK to play the "illegal" lower roll because I would accept to play opening doubles! I think he exepected me to resign. Cheeky monkey! lol :roll:

It would be so much better if the game simply detected rules infringements and didn't allow them.

PS, I expect the rankings have changed since I wrote this. So the anonymity and pride of the players I refer to is intact.

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 8:27 am
by grandmaS
Some people have never played until they learned to play here. Or have no idea about this rule. So it becomes just another point of stratagy.

Plus many people played games growing up, with their parents, siblings etc. and may or may not have even used all the rules.

Its amazing to me how many versions of varrious games there are, depending on how and where you learned to play, what part of the country or even what country your from etc.

Many people have not read an official book on the game they are playing. How many people read the instructions on how to put something together, or study up on a game before they start playing? It is probably true in some book of rules somewhere its against the rules to do this, however if you never read the book, there is no one at the kitchen table controling what you can and can not do in a game. Computers can if programed to do so control this type of thing, but since our back gammon game doesn't I don't find it to be cheating or unethical, just someone's stratagy using what they have learned rather then what you may have learned.

:) In the end its a game, try to have fun at it :)

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 9:10 am
by Wanderer
grandmaS wrote:It is probably true in some book of rules somewhere its against the rules to do this...
Meaning no disrespect to anybody's Grandma, this rule is true in EVERY book of backgammon rules. It is about as fundamental as not allowing users to land their pieces on covered points. Silvercreek shouldn't be calling their game Backgammon if doesn't enforce this rule. It is simply NOT Backgammon and you're doing a disservice to learners by sending them out into the world thinking it is. At best, you are dumbing down the game and insulting your players intelligence.

Considering the number of posts you've made, I'm assuming you and Silvercreek are inextricably linked and you are in a position to represent them.

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 10:07 am
by grandmaS
No I do not represent SCE or their practices. I have been a player here for over 5 years, I am a guide for them which means I am a volenteer worker for them to help keep the site rules and keep it fun for players to play here.

But when I post, it is only my words and my feelings, not a representation of what SCE is feeling or thinking. There are times when I do represent SCE, like when I tell you or anyone that they can't say post the nick of a player on the board they feel cheats etc. Then yes I am posting as a guide and as a admin of the board. Outside of that I am just a player like everyone else posting my feelings same as everyone else does. I guess I need to put a disclaimer on my posts that these are just my feelings and in no way represents those of the owners and or creators of the games.

I was speaking as a player, who plays for fun, and never knew of this rule. I believe many people who come and play any of the Silver Creek games are unaware of some of the rules that other players believe to be to be the rules. Or are official rules in official books on the game.

I believe you that in the Official book of rules, that is not something that is not allowed. All I am saying is that many players have not read the offical book of rules. Or any rule book pertaining to any of the games.

As a kid my parents taught me how to play pinocle, did they teach me the rules that were in an official rule book. I have no idea, my father in law taught me how to play Cribbage, did he teach me how to play by the offial rules again no idea, hearts and spades I also learned as a kid, I don't know if I learned the official rules or just whatever who ever taught me played by.

We have grown kids, family and friends that come to our house and play cards. And we go to thier houses and play cards (vairous kinds) and we play by what we call "house rules" so who evers house your in you play by their rules. None of us have read a book on any of the games we play. :) We just have FUN :)

Over the years I have played many games in many places and I always went by the rules of where I was playing and who I was playing with.

If SCE wants to institute a rule that says you can or can't do something its ok by me. I just hate seeing the game become less fun for someone because someone else wants the game to be played one way and the others want it to be played another way. I grew up that games were recreation to have FUN with friends. Not a job, or for money just a fun way to pass the time with friends and family.

I understand in live tournaments and such that going by official rules is important. But to me this is SCE's house and I will go by the rules they set forth. I can agree though that it would be good for the games to be set up so that the official rules and SCE rules are in agreement in the games, with games that are variety games for fun added, (like in spades we have many varriations of the game, which are lots of fun but are not Official spades games) But, as long as it is not set up that way, I am not going to expect everyone that sits across the table from me to know the offial rules and to play by them. And I am not going to put them on a list of people not to play with just because they play differently then me. Part of the challenge for me is to adjust to someone else's style of playing. :)
Like in spades for example some people bid low and try to bag you to death, others like each hand to come out to a 12 or 13 bid. If your good you adjust your style of play so that which ever way they play you can play a good competitive game with them.

(disclaimer, these are my feelings and mine alone, in making this post I am not representing SCE either as a guide or admin of the site)

Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 8:28 am
by Manny
This issue has been addressed by the recent update.

Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 9:02 am
by spotthedog
Manny wrote:This issue has been addressed by the recent update.

If you are referring to the dice rule ...then it's still happening.

I just can't go along with these arguments about not knowing the rules of the game.

Two people sit at the same Backgammon table ready for a game. One person has one set of rules in his/her mind, and the other has another ..... rules about a fundamental law of the game.

It's not normally until a critical stage in the game that one person finds out what's happening.

Most members are from the US and quite a few are from Europe (like me). They both play football ???? ...not quite the same game, but there will be a few clues to look out for before they start playing
Please don't get picky about my analogy
I just came out of two games where I played two different rules with two different people.Image

grandmaS wrote: Part of the challenge for me is to adjust to someone else's style of playing. :)
Like in spades for example some people bid low and try to bag you to death, others like each hand to come out to a 12 or 13 bid. If your good you adjust your style of play so that which ever way they play you can play a good competitive game with them.
Isn't that tactics? not variations of the rules ?

Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 2:00 pm
by Wanderer
Manny wrote:This issue has been addressed by the recent update.
It appears that the the update only enforces the rule during single-player games. During online matches between human players, it's still possible to play the lower die only.

Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 6:12 am
by spotthedog
That's fantastic news if you want to play against the Bot :wink:

I would recommend *SNIP* Backgammon because you play against humans and it plays to the rules that I go by ...however if your opponent doesn't like your first three rolls s/he will be out of the game as fast as something that's very fast !!! :)

No need for *SNIP* followup comments .... it just amused me to make the remark.

I'm going back to the main game right now and see who is playing which rules.

EDIT .... I have to make the observation that it seems to be the N00bies that it confuses the most, and they are more than likely playing the 30 day free trail version ....I'm not sure how many this happens to and don't actually buy the full playing rights.

I can tell you of two of my friends that I asked to join and backed out because it wasn't playing the 'correct rules '

Anyway ...keep smiling :) :D :) :D

Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 11:08 am
by Jonas
@ wanderer

Could you give me the situation where the online game was still allowing an inappropriate play. It should already be fixed.

Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 3:32 pm
by Wanderer
I can't say what the specific board position was or the exact roll (a 6 and something else i think) but I'm pretty sure it happened during the match:

445242 R 2007-05-03 10:08:16 SummerKatrina (6) Tavli Man (0)

I tested the fix in one of the earlier games. It permitted me to cheat during the end game and, suffering from honesty, I resigned.

I hope that helps.

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 2:01 am
by Wanderer

After reinstalling Backgammon to fix a connection problem I was having, it occurs to me I may have been on a pre Build 28 at the time I reported the reoccurrence.

Does this mean the rules are enforced according to the Build you have installed? Now that I think about it, it would make sense. Maybe I need to check an opponents Build level is 28 or higher before I "start" a game.

I will let you know if I encounter any B28+ non-enforcement of the rule.

Thanks for your help.

Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 12:34 am
by spotthedog
I noticed this 'build' thing.

I few weeks ago I got a prompt asking me if I want to receive the latest update (patch) ....I replied yes, and I'm on build 22 now.

Tell me ...what do I need to do to upgrade further (build 28+ ???) without waiting for another prompt?

Is there a list of what the upgrades actually upgrade ??