Ever go "rogue" when playing backgammon?
Forums:
Attack your opponent at EVERY opportunity - even when the "book" says it's a bad move.
And unless your opponent adopts same strategy, only those players with sufficient restraint can resist "caving" at some point and attacking you when the book says otherwise; often leaving them untethered to the odds the book provides.
Sometimes it works, and when it does it's a bit of a rush; however, I would never put my $$ on this as either a part or full time strategy.
- Log in to post comments
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Bucky Badger
Yes. Sometimes when I get a
Yes. Sometimes when I get a bad opening roll and things haven’t been going well I’ll do this. It’s fun when it works out well.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: _
No, it makes no sense. Both
No, it makes no sense. Both players have all the information in backgammon, unlike poker. Occasionally making a mathematically unsound move makes sense in games like poker because it makes your play less predictable, opens up your range of possible hands and allows you to maximize your earnings.
In backgammon, going "rogue" is just making a bad move.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
It’s fun when it works out
It’s fun when it works out well. <<<<
Yes, although it could be considered at times to be like a "troll mode" for backgammon.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
No, it makes no sense. Both
No, it makes no sense. Both players have all the information in backgammon, unlike poker. Occasionally making a mathematically unsound move makes sense in games like poker because it makes your play less predictable, opens up your range of possible hands and allows you to maximize your earnings.
In backgammon, going "rogue" is just making a bad move.<<<
I believe you're correct in terms of how the odds would ultimately play out over time; in particular, if the "by the book" player is patient, and doesn't find oneself reacting in a "retaliatory" manner that's not sound. However, a lot of players will give in to what is invariably a growing desire to "strike back"; or, many will be thrown off a little by having to read and assess a "non-conventional board situation" (such as allowing many of your pieces to build up near the finish line on their side) & don't make wise decisions.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: _
>> a lot of players will give
>> a lot of players will give in to what is invariably a growing desire to "strike back"
I haven't played a ton of competitive backgammon, but haven't experienced that.
I thought more about this. I could see if you were playing with the doubling cube AND playing with someone who is likely to double/accept doubles (ie a gambler), then going rogue early in the game could be a great move. But that's a dream scenario.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
But that's a dream scenario<<
But that's a dream scenario<<<
Wouldn't the same assessment apply to Trump's unpredictable nature and pattern of operation? He does not appear to rely upon careful study of the factual composition and nature of any given issue, but rather a dependence upon a cloud of confusion and highly non-conventional tactics. Will not the odds be stacked against him by those who are much more well versed in the issues / nuances?
He might get lucky every now and again, but will not those entities who "play by the book" ultimately have an advantage if they adopt and maintain a position of patience? On the world stage, will not the collaboration of such entities who've adopted such a posture ultimately be too formidable?
Or, will he rely upon the potential energy of his ace in the hole? (military power)
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
I haven't played a ton of
I haven't played a ton of competitive backgammon, but haven't experienced that<<<
I'm not a "pro" either, but have gone on binges with online networked backgammon. IMO, the trick with going rogue is to "follow through": never hold back when an attack is an option; even when it's clearly an extremely bad move. Most opponents who are patient will resist making blatantly bad moves to counter attack (and fill their "desire for retribution"), but many will nonetheless "counter-attack" when it's less clear. Once they make their first (marginally) "bad decision", it's that much easier for them to repeat marginally ill-advised behavior. If they make enough repetitions, they're now in "your world".
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: _
Very strange FOM. I've surely
Very strange FOM. I've surely never repeatedly made bad moves so I've never seen the response to it.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
Definitely not suggesting it
Definitely not suggesting it's a winning strategy in the long run; mostly brought it up as an example to put some of Trump's mechanizations into perspective.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: _
Trump's strategy is not
Trump's strategy is not analogous to backgammon. It's not a solvable problem with all the information laid out in front of you with defined probabilities.
Theoretically, it makes much more sense to be unpredictable in his situation.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
Never said it was a perfect
Never said it was a perfect analogy, but believe the parallels re: strategy hold to some degree.
Given the enormous potential for destruction (a defined probability, given the scale of bloodletting in the previous century), why invoke a radical departure from convention with the stakes being so high?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Lucky Day
>>>>>>Never said it was a
>>>>>>Never said it was a perfect analogy
Nobody did.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Bucky Badger
I’ll take any of you punks on
I’ll take any of you punks on. Who has an app where you can give out invites.
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: 19.5 Degrees
>>>>>>Never said it was a
>>>>>>Never said it was a perfect analogy
Nobody did.<<<
What do you have to say?
Top of Page Bottom of Page PermalinkFull Name: Zzzzzz
I definitely go rogue. And
I definitely go rogue. And while I don't play for money I have a pretty good winning percentage. It's rare but there is a time when you just have to bury your opponent. Especially when you get multiple points for them not getting pieces home or worse.