Backgammon

Chris Bray
Friday 27 June 1997 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

There is no disagreement about how the opening rolls of 31, 42, 53 and 65 should be played. With the other opening rolls, however, there is continuing debate as theory evolves. What about an opening 64? In the Seventies there was no argument: you ran a man out by playing 24/14. The theory was that escaping one back man gave you an edge if your opponent didn't roll a 2. In the Eighties, players realised that even if you weren't hit by a 2 you would have to spend your next roll tidying up the blot; meanwhile your opponent could be building up his board. For this reason the major split 24/18, 13/9 became fashionable. This normally provokes an exchange of hits on your opponent's bar point, and can lead to complex games with many men back for both sides.

In the Nineties came backgammon-playing computers. Early versions of Jellyfish recommended making your own 2-point with 8/2, 6/2. However the computers quickly realised this was too committal and put men out of play too early. Later versions of Jellyfish and other programs preferred 24/18, 13/9.

Now Jellyfish 3.0 has arrived and it marginally prefers 24/14! It clearly believes that the possibility of getting one man close to the safety of the mid-point now outweighs the tactical possibilities of 24/18, 13/9. So where does this leave us? First, remember that computers are not yet all-powerful, so Jellyfish's view is but one of many. Second, the two moves normally lead to radically different types of game, so you should choose the move that leads to one with which you are comfortable. For simple games, choose 24/14; otherwise 24/18, 13/9. If you are playing someone stronger than yourself go for 24/14; against a weaker player I would always play 24/18, 13/9.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in