Re: New idea for those who don't like the luck variation or...

On Dec 18, 4:01 am, monty1...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Grunty:

Are you suggesting that there is no possibility that an online BG site
will consider what I'm saying at some point in the future? If there
is such a possibility, then why would I refrain from posting about it
here?

And for all others:

What, exactly, is the problem? If it's a bad idea, nobody will want
to choose the option, and that will be the end of it. On the other
hand, it could lead to more players willing to play for money online.

Isn't it rather odd that nobody has complained (to my knowledge) about
pip counts being updated during online play? Where were all the
"purists" and "traditionalists" then? What about GE's "swing" format
tournaments? They are a new format.

Let us review this "horrible" idea of mine once again, point by point:

1. It is optional - nobody would ever be forced to use this format.

2. The site would use Snowie or GNUBG to analyze the match once it
ended.

3. Players would be informed of their skill rating and of the luck
rating.

4. If certain parameters were met, the match would result in a "chop"
or "draw."

5. Just as in online chess, where time limits can be determined by
the player who "creates the board," the BG player who creates the
"table" would determine the parameters. At first, I would try
parameters of a skill rating within 50 points and luck rating at or
above 2.000 - that would be a "draw," and the site would take a small
rake.

Note that those who dislike this kind of idea have yet to explain
why. They seem to get some sort of perverse thrill by attacking my
posts, no matter what I actually say. Chess is more, not less
popular, since new formats were introduced (mainly having to do with
time limits). Poker has also become more popular, especially since
the "hold'em" variants were introduced, which are very different from
the older "stud" or "draw" variants. And as to the "fun" factor, one
would have to explain how losing to those who you outplay very often
due to lopsided luck (even in long matches) can be construed as
enjoyable. Yes, money game players might not "get it" because there
is no way to reduce luck much in that format. My idea is for those
who want more of a skill oriented game, but for some reason people
like "Stick" want to be a "stick in the mud," and won't even explain
why.

Hi Monty,

OK, here are my thoughts on your 5 points....

1. Optional - no worries about that one :-)

2. Snowie or GNU. This may start to cause a problem. Which one to
use and which settings to use. These would have to be very clearly
stated and I can see a site getting a lot of complaints from people
who either would not understand the settings or complaints when these
2 options gave divergent results - I've no clue how luck is calculated
in either but the error rates vary and I've had Snowie report high
error rates when analysing GNUs moves. This could be a major problem
with it - too much confusion. Also, you're making the assumption that
the bots play perfectly. I understand Mr. Ballard consistently beats
Snowie and I would hazzard a guess that his error rate is around 3.
Are these real errors or better plays than Snowie makes? Why should
anyone be penalized for making "better than bot" moves?

3. That's OK, but I would double check. Often an error on the first
pass through "disappears" or is reduced after a roll out. This is
related to point 2 but I would complain and I'm sure others would.
This agin makes the proposition less attractive to on line sites.

4. I'm not sure exactly how this would work. For example, if I make
an inferior play leaving a blot that you subsequently hit - this will
give you a positive luck augmentation on that move. If I play
correctly, you may not have that ability. Therefore, your luck gain
due to my error may then push your luck rating over the threshold and
a draw is announced due to my poor play leaving you penalized for my
poor play.

5. No problem there except that the site would take it's full rake and
I imagine from both.

A couple of other points that I think you've disregarded:

1. I believe that you mentioned that in some cases you've deliberately
held a cube and not doubled if your opponent tends to take
incorrectly. That is a valid option but not in this mode. It's
something to be aware of.

2. I have no proof but I do believe that it's likely for the "loser"
in a game to have a reduced error rate simply by virtue of there being
more forced moves. Again, I don't know if both bots calculate the
same way for forced moves but there's also the "not forced but
everything else is ridiculous" type of move. Figures may be needed
but this is definitely a block for me unless my argument is completely
wrong here.

3. The skill/luck calculations would be performed after the event.
So, for example, I win the match then wait only to be told that I
haven't and it's a draw even if I outplayed my opponent, my luck to
0.001 too high and so, don't get my winnings and have to pay a rake
for the pleasure. That would guarantee that I would never use this
again.

There are a few more points but I've run out of time.

All in, I don't think it's viable and I think most sites would not
entertain this due to the complaints that they will receive. Even if
the fault is with the consumer not undertstanding the concept fully,
why would the site invest in this, have the additional resources of
the bots analysing games with the potential to irritate it's customer
base?
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: How about "straight race" mutual agreements?
    ... If I'm the stronger player, ... more opportunities to get this huge turn of luck, ... ideas (which are now easy to implement with online play, ...
    (rec.games.backgammon)
  • Re: Is it true that 97% of poker players lose in t
    ... "Luck is maximized when the skill differential is minimized. ... It doesn't matter whether they all play very poorly or all play ... This might not be a factor online. ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: Full Tilt Current Status?
    ... > Any word on the status of FTP coming back online? ... With any luck it never will. ... I used to play there. ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: New idea for those who dont like the luck variation or...
    ... want to "chop" would simply not accept the invitation to play. ... avoiding those who are on a similar skill level. ... matches I play have very lopsided luck. ... fun than a game like poker (meaning the combination of luck and skill, ...
    (rec.games.backgammon)
  • Re: Betting patterns and reading hands
    ... The luck says you'll win X amount of the time, ... I typically play 50c/1 and 1/2 NLHE and PLO. ... I see this scenario ... If you find yourself saying "yeah yeah ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)