Re: A method to increase the skill factor in money backgammon without changing fundamental rules

On Mar 12, 10:42 am, bob <bob_k...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


    When proposing a rule dont go monty on us.  Why not actually write
a rule rather than just a concept.
Questions I would ask include i) When can a player ask the opponent
for an equity estimate?
ii) You say 2 actions that B can do. Must B chose one of them or would
just continuing the game be an option also?

  Will you be at any ABT events this year? If the rules get solid I
would try this out with you.

Bob Koca- Hide quoted text -


Thanks Bob for your thoughtful response. Unfortunately, I have no
time to develop this idea into a concrete rule set. However, my
posting can be considered to be complete if you imagine the title
changed to "In a game theoretic sense, players can be theoretically
forced to give accurate equity estimates without the recourse to bots"

No, I will not be at any ABT events this year but thanks a lot for
asking -- it would be great to meet you but playing you over the board
would be quite expensive for me as I'm far below your standard.
Having said that I don't want to spend time on concrete rules, how
about this one: At any stage of the game, any player can demand an
appraisal. However, the player demanding an appraisal must pay 0.05 *
current cube value as the price of making that demand.

I think it makes sense to allow B to continue the game but I'm not
sure about that one. I was thinking that B would be bound not to want
that, because that could only arise if B and A agreed exactly about
A's equity (though that's probably being overly abstract.)

Paul Epstein



.

Relevant Pages