Search This Blog

June 6, 2016

Clarifying Review of Conquering Backgammon



Since my initial review of Ed Rosenblum’s book Conquering Backgammon the author has contacted the publisher of Flint Backgammon News a number of times to pressure me to remove or alter my review.  Ed has contacted me directly a few times asking the same as well as posted on this site.  See the comment section of my original review for Ed in his own words.

I am affiliated with the Backgammon Learning Center (BLC) and specialize in teaching its curriculum to beginners and intermediates.  Our course begins by covering fundamentals such as backgammon math, game plans, and the proper approach to checker plays cube decisions.  Then we proceed to break down the game into major categories such as Bearing In & Off, Early Game play, Backgames, Holding Games, Containment Games, etc.  We examine each game type independently, as each has its own special rules of thumb and triggers with regards to checker play and cube decisions.  Finally, we proceed to advanced topics such as match play and special one-off situations such as Pay Now or Pay Later.  Along the way, we teach the student how to use the computer to study on his own, provide handouts and reading materials for further study and engage in training exercises to give the student feedback on his thought process.

The entire program can take six months or longer to complete, even meeting weekly.  In short, I understand firsthand how difficult it is to teach the game to novice and intermediate skill levels.  

Mr. Rosenblum himself is a graduate of the BLC.  He was obviously inspired by the program as he has incorporated large chunks of our approach into his own work.  I should note that BLC co-founder Phil Simborg endorses the book.  Phil’s positive review can be found on the book’s back cover.

As I wrote in my original review, Conquering Backgammon is an ambitious work.  He attempts to move the reader from absolute beginner to advanced player in about 250 pages.  This is certainly no easy task and in my view the book falls short of this goal.  I outlined above how it takes me six months or longer of individualized one on one training to move a student from beginner to intermediate skill level. 

While there are aspects of the book I like, overall I find the book lacking in organization, depth, and insight.  Please see my original review if you are interested in my detailed take on the book.

Ed claims my poor review is unfair and has negatively impacted sales.

I am doubtful my review impacts his sales.  My readership is very low and my review doesn’t even rank amongst my top ten most read posts.

I was asked to provide an honest appraisal for the newsletter and I did just that.  Mine is just one man’s opinion but I stand by it.  I don’t like this book.  Readers can make up their own minds.

I list below the top books I would recommend instead of Conquering Backgammon.  Perhaps I will review these in the future.

  • ·        Backgammon Boot Camp by Walter Trice
  • ·        Backgammon by Paul Magriel
  • ·        501 Essential Backgammon Problems by Bill Robertie

** anything by Robertie is gold but if you choose only one try the 501 problems book **

June 5, 2016

Mochy

Below are selected errors from my match against Mochy from Chicago Open.

1. 54 to play.



is Mochy

score: 0
pip: 128


9 point match

pip: 152
score: 0

is Bill Calton

XGID=-----CC-Cb--bD---cbdAb-A--:1:1:1:54:0:0:0:9:10
to play 54

1.XG Roller+13/4eq: -0.430

Player:
Opponent:
31.35% (G:7.70% B:0.29%)
68.65% (G:23.24% B:0.77%)

2.XG Roller+20/11eq: -0.543 (-0.113)

Player:
Opponent:
25.61% (G:3.60% B:0.11%)
74.39% (G:17.39% B:0.29%)

3.4-ply6/1 5/1eq: -0.483 (-0.053)

Player:
Opponent:
28.96% (G:5.89% B:0.10%)
71.04% (G:21.28% B:0.55%)

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

I am feeling the heat as Mochy has rolled great and I am behind the 8 ball, holding the cube and not rolling the 3 I was hoping for.


Best was simply 13/4. I need to stand my ground. While I am likely to get pointed on, Mochy can't do everything next roll and I can hope to anchor somehwere.

I decided to run with 20/11. I was hoping to at least escape one man. I think the main problem with my play is I am diversifying his rolls. Hard to find a bad roll after this move actaully.

============

2. 61 from the air.

is Mochy

score: 0
pip: 69
9 point match
pip: 120
score: 0

is Bill Calton
XGID=----BCDBAb---B-----a-ccdbA:1:1:1:61:0:0:0:9:10
to play 61

1.xgXG Roller++Bar/19* 8/7eq: +0.926
Player:
Opponent:
73.85% (G:22.49% B:0.95%)
26.15% (G:3.60% B:0.04%)
2.XG Roller++Bar/19* 5/4eq: +0.911 (-0.015)
Player:
Opponent:
74.94% (G:24.08% B:1.11%)
25.06% (G:4.66% B:0.04%)
3.playedXG Roller++Bar/19* 19/18eq: +0.850 (-0.076)
Player:
Opponent:
72.80% (G:21.87% B:0.99%)
27.20% (G:5.58% B:0.05%)
eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

What a great shot by me.

Leaving the blot versus leaving the blot is actually fairly close.  XG prefers lifting it with Bar/19*, 8/7.  I am the verge of a recube here and leaving no blots is apparently the prudent thing to do.

I carelessly played Bar/19*/18 instead of the reasonable Bar/19*, 5/4.  This gives an extra shot (33 from the bar) for no reason.  I was immedaitely punished by this oversight as Mochy drilled me with 33 next shake.  This is an example of how good players can be "lucky" more often than their opponents through superior play.  I gave Mochy an extra chance to roll a joker, and he got it.  If the position was reversed, Mochy would never make this play and I would never have the chance to pop the same joker.

==============

3.  41 to play



is Mochy

score: 2
pip: 133


9 point match

pip: 158
score: 0

is Bill Calton

XGID=----AADbC---cD---bbd---bAA:0:0:1:41:0:2:0:9:10
to play 41

1.xgXG Roller++Bar/21 6/5eq: -0.433

Player:
Opponent:
39.07% (G:8.65% B:0.33%)
60.93% (G:19.54% B:0.57%)

2.playedXG Roller++Bar/24 8/4eq: -0.476 (-0.043)

Player:
Opponent:
36.95% (G:8.64% B:0.28%)
63.05% (G:16.37% B:0.80%)

3.4-plyBar/21 5/4eq: -0.491 (-0.058)

Player:
Opponent:
37.33% (G:7.61% B:0.26%)
62.67% (G:19.39% B:0.54%)

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

A tough play.  Since Mochy has the 2 point made, I thought I could make the ace point anchor and cut back on the gammons.  I won't get cubed for a while because of the large gap from 5 to 3 of unmade points.

The computer prefers challenging immediately with Bar/21, 6/5.  This seems like the "DMP" play as I strive for the best anchor while making the best home board at the same time.  The only issue is the gammons lose.  Hard to judge over the board, but as the computer shows the bold play wins 2% more at the cost of getting gammoned 3% more often.  When in doubt, make the DMP play applies here.

==============
4. 53 to play



is Mochy

score: 2
pip: 130


9 point match

pip: 150
score: 0

is Bill Calton

XGID=--a-BADbB-A--C---bce---bB-:0:0:1:53:0:2:0:9:10
to play 53

1.xgXG Roller++10/5 6/3eq: +0.097

Player:
Opponent:
50.00% (G:16.27% B:0.57%)
50.00% (G:14.51% B:0.81%)

2.playedXG Roller++13/5eq: +0.018 (-0.079)

Player:
Opponent:
48.35% (G:15.38% B:0.55%)
51.65% (G:14.52% B:0.83%)

3.4-ply24/21 10/5eq: +0.037 (-0.060)

Player:
Opponent:
49.65% (G:14.54% B:0.67%)
50.35% (G:15.69% B:0.42%)

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

I moved 13/5.  My logic was to leave my blot in a spot where I make my opponent pay the most to hit me.

I was surprised to learn the beat play is in fact 10/5, 6/3.  To find this move, I would have needed to pause and consider how my opponent's next rolls play.  The ace duplication looks more powerful than the three duplication.

Leaving the blot on the 3 point, my opponent would probably choose to not hit me with 31 and 21 and perhaps 51 as well.  So not as risky as appears at first blush.

============
5. Mochy on roll leading 5 away 9 away.  Cube action?



is Bill Calton

score: 0
pip: 151


9 point match

pip: 147
score: 4

is Mochy

XGID=-A-BabC-B---bE--a-cbbbAA--:0:0:-1:00:0:4:0:9:10
on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in 4-ply No double Double/Take
  Player Winning Chances: 72.31% (G:32.24% B:1.10%) 72.28% (G:32.26% B:1.14%)
  Opponent Winning Chances: 27.69% (G:5.23% B:0.15%) 27.72% (G:5.23% B:0.15%)
  Cubeless Equities +0.714 +1.367
Cubeful Equities
     No double:+0.815 (-0.137)
played Double/Take:+0.952
     Double/Pass:+1.000 (+0.048)
Best Cube action: Double / Take
eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

I correctly took but it wasn't easy for me.  I figured I had a take only because of the lopsided score.  if things go my way I may be able to send a strong early recube to 4.

Turns out this is right.

=============
6. 32 to play.




is Mochy

score: 8
pip: 144
                         


9 point match
                         
pip: 196
score: 2

is Bill Calton

XGID=--B---BAB-bacBa---bfBB--AA:1:-1:1:32:2:8:0:9:10
to play 32

1.xgXG Roller++Bar/22 13/11* eq: +0.052

Player:
Opponent:
44.05% (G:11.69% B:0.41%)
55.95% (G:20.68% B:0.96%)

2.XG Roller++Bar/22 7/5eq: +0.004 (-0.047)

Player:
Opponent:
42.60% (G:10.50% B:0.33%)
57.40% (G:20.02% B:0.83%)

3.playedXG Roller++Bar/20eq: -0.026 (-0.078)

Player:
Opponent:
41.37% (G:10.06% B:0.32%)
58.63% (G:19.34% B:0.73%)

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

I was totally cornfused on this one.  I was reluctant to hit and give up the midpoint.  it seems unlikely I will win going forward.  I chose to to simply scoot up to the edge with Bar/20.

As this is Crawford 7 away this one plays out essentially as DMP.  Mochy has 6 men on his six point so I am absolutely no danger of being primed in.  Thus getting up to the edge isn't so important nor is keeping the midpoint.

Even though I am unlikely to win going forward there is no harm in trying.  Bar/22, 13/11*