return to indexE-mail me at kwoolsey@netcom.com
Congratulations. This is what the world has been waiting for. (Ithought you might want a testimonial. You can sign it Nick Ballard.)One question. Will each new issue wipe out the previous issue? If so,is there a way to save the old stuff?
Roger Gabrielson
I plan to keep back issues on line as long as disk space allows it, andcurrently it appears that there will be plenty of space to handle at least acouple of years back issues. This may seem unfair to those who subscribenow, since someone who waits and subscribes a couple of years from now wouldhave the access to the same material. But look at all the fun those whowaited would have missed!
Kit Woolsey
Have had a good look around and love the annotated match format; however, Ifind the dice colouring a little confusing and would prefer white for whiteand blue for blue. Also cannot find a way of going through the match/gamesoff-line but I presume that will be to prevent the files from being sent tonon-members or being illegally published/printed. It must be rememberedthat some Internet users pay *exorbitant* telephone rates and this coulddissuade them from subscribing. True, my costs are very low at weekends andgood after 6 pm but, as being retired, I spend mornings and afternoons atbg when costs are getting too high to be online for very long.
Martin Lee
Others have also said they would prefer the same color dice. I usedopposite colors to make it look more like actual play where players usuallyhave mixed colors on their dice. It can easily be determined who has rolledby where the dice are; if they are on the right then Blue (the player onthe bottom) has rolled, while if they are on the left then White (the playeron the top) has rolled. However this is not etched in stone. Assuming my"dice manufacturer" is willing to make the changes, I will put it to a voteof the membership to determine which dice coloring is preferred.
The off-line question presents a serious problem. Security is a major issue.If I created a downloadable file for the annotated match it would be to easyfor someone to copy and freely distribute it, so there wouldbe no incentive for anybody to subscribe. And without subscribers therewouldn't be a magazine. It would be nice to believe that everybody was100% honest, but we all know it just ain't so.
What I think I will do is create a downloadable version of the annotatedmatch (along with my comments) in text only format. This wouldn't be nearlyas nice to go through of course, since you would need to set things up ona backgammon board and play out all the moves. Still the content would bethere, so players with high internet connection costs will be able toplay through the match off-line.
Kit Woolsey
I'm thinking of my first question for your "letters to the editor" section.The basic question is how best to learn from the 'bots, and how tointerpret discrepancies between their opinions and human authorities. Forexample: If Robertie (in "Advanced Backgammon") claims move A is muchbetter than move B in a given situation, what should the student think ifSnowie thinks the opposite? Of course, the same situation arises if JFdisagrees with your analysis in your annotated matches (for example), but Iwould have thought that Robertie tried to choose somewhat more clear-cutexamples for his books. This is a diferent situation from chess, where the'bots are known to move quite pointlessly in many situations lackingshort-range tactical solutions. It's easier to disregard pointless movessuggested by a chess program, even if it is strong enough to thrash you ina complete game. Also, there's a fundamental difference between chess(where the only possible outcomes are win/loss/draw) and backgammon (wheremaximization of equity is the goal) - in a way, shades of gray are moreimportant in backgammon. Anyway, I'm trying to refine these ideas at themoment.
Paul Vianna
This is a very difficult problem. While the bots play very well and quiteoften their positional "understanding" is better than ours, they will comeup with some very questionable moves as well as some moves which are clearlyinferior. Having the bot roll the position out is often a way to weed outthe nonsense. However even that is not always sufficient. There may besome bias in the way the bot handles the position which makes the rolloutnot trustworthy. We must always keep an open mind. Listen to what thebot is telling you, but remember that it isn't gospel. Everybody still hasa lot to learn about this elusive game.
Kit Woolsey
In the July issue, game 3 of Davis/Woolsey Davis opens with 6/2 andmoves 24/18, 13/11 slotting his bar point. Woolsey rolls 4/2 and moves13/7*, hitting the blot on the bar point.I ran this through Jellyfish and Jelly made his 4 pt 8-4/6-4 EXCEPT whenit was the Crawford match, where he made the same move as in this match.Can you comment on this please? I've noticed several Jellyfish moveswhich are different in the Crawford match.
Barry Murphy
It is a matter of gammons. At the Crawford game the leader has no usefor a gammon, while if the trailer has an even number of points to go a gammonis very valuable for him. This can affect the choice of play. The trailerwill tend to choose more gammonish plays, while the leader will tend tochoose plays which are less likely to lead to gammons for either side.
On the 4-2 response to an opening 6-2, it seems to me that the hitting play13/7* will lead to more gammons for both sides than making the four point.Preventing the opponent from escaping or making an advanced anchor increasesthe chances that you will win a gammon, while exposing the blot and riskinghaving a third checker sent back increases the chances that you will begammoned. Since the plays are probably about equal, it makes sense toplay 13/7* if you are the trailer and have an even number of points to go butto play 8/4, 6/4 if you are the leader.
Kit Woolsey