Here's a friendly little shout-out to adults who can't seem to manage a friendly game of backgammon.
chryktus: good match, thanks
(name redacted): I didn't think it was a good match. It's not that you played better than me,. I analysed the match and tou did outplay, and you deserve creidt for it. I have no problem that.. What I do have a problem with is having 4 games where my luck is so bad that GnuBg puts it in the "you might as well go to bed" category. Even that's not the problem. That's what luck does, to me and to my opponents. No, the problem is the insensitivity of saying "Good match" to an opponent who you beat 5-0 largely because they got terrible luck all through the match. I'm sure you didn't intend it to be offensive but but in this kind of circumstance that's how it comes across. + So, well played. Next time, please commiserate me on my awful luck. Keep the "good match" for when it was a fair fight. :-) ---
Sincerely, I hope that no opponent of mine ever interpreted a "Good match. Thank you." or a "Good game. Thank you." as anything more or less than a polite sign-off. It was never intended as anything else. In other parts of my life, I say "good day" or "how are you?" or "have a nice trip" or "congratulations" sometimes to people that I don't like, or that I don't think deserve a nice trip or a good day or any reward given. I believe it a clear mistake to take offence with anyone's otherwise-polite comment, regardless of the preceding game(s), unless you know the person's character to be nasty.
I agree with Jim. To interpret "good match!" at the end of a match, regardless of what happened within it, to be anything other than a simple pleasantry is to go out of your way to take offense. All the luck went the other way? So what. "Good match" is still a perfectly reasonable way to sign off at the end.
-- T.J. :-)
Re: Politeness is not the issue although friendliness may be
Jim, T.J., do either of you make a distinction between politeness and insensitivity?
_____ 1. Your words can be polite yet what you say can be insensitive. True or False?
_____ 2. You don't have to be nasty to be insensitive. True or false?
_____ 3. You can say something insensitive yet your words can still be friendly. True or false?
_____ 4. Insensitivity can be offensive even if the language is polite. True or false?
_____ 5. Finding polite words to be insensitive in a given context doesn't necessarily mean that you have "gone out of your way" to find offence. True or false?
_____ 6. Finding polite words to be insensitive in a given context isn't necessarily a mistake. True or false?
My answers are: true, true, false, true, true, true. What are yours?
Re: Politeness is not the issue although friendliness may be
I'm not going to engage with you on this, and I recommend no one else does either. (That recommendation is currently from me, personally, not from the First Primate.)
Regardless of their behavior, it is not okay to publicly chide them about it here in the forums. Please review the forum rules. I've removed the player's name from your message.
(The player in question should probably review the house rules, but that's a separate thing.) -- T.J. Crowder First Primate Pocket-Monkey.com
Re: Sore Losers
Message #21072 Replies: 1
posted by heartsvertigo (Bob Bowman) on 09/07 at 06:36
I'm guessing you haven't seen the exact same post in the backgammon forum
Wow I made a joke about its funny to blame Gnu for bad luck and now I am told <"What's not funny is your inability to read. xxxxxxx played better than me and I got a lot of bad luck. If I hadn't got a lot of bad luck the chances are that he's still have won due to having played better than me. Perhaps you don't know what "played better" means."> But you know I like the big I words in this message Inability and the one in the post Insensitivity. maybe all this is due to Intoxication.
Really people !!! These are games, entertainment..not life and death issues. Does your world really crash if you lose ?? If that was so I would be free falling every day. Lighten up, you can get kicked all over a board but in the end win , lose, or draw a closing word of well played or good game is just simple manners. Take it as such lick your wounded ego and move on to the next game. If you feel a player is using an unfair advantage such as a computer generated assist in a game, you have two options , report it to TJ or resign. Easy solutions...
I didnt know GNUBG was an assist program. I would like to know is there any enjoyment in using programs to help you play a 1 on 1 game? And then is it really a 1 on 1 game or is it me playing against a player thats nothing more than a puppet to the program?
ppl like to complain about anything i agree with fullmoon its only a game win or lose some ppl dont even say anything at all..i have ppl dont even say gl gg or good match they are just games here..u sure dont win a prize when u get on top of ratings..i have seen ppl get mad over a game cause they did make it to the top ratings i enjoy my games here have a blessed day
Yes, GnuBG is a backgammon analysis program (you can also just play against the machine on various levels). It's very useful for understanding the complexities of a situation, the odds of this and that, and what the best move in a given situation is.
Using GnuBG or similar tools to analyze your current position in a game on PM and basing your move on what that analysis tells you is cheating by our definition here at PM. But using GnuBG or similar after you've made your move to better understand whether you made the right call is perfectly fine. Players who seek to improve their play will use analysis tools to do that, it's a perfectly reasonable thing to do. We prefer you wait until the end of the game (doesn't have to be the whole match, just the game), but as long as you're not using it on a position before you make your move, you're fine.
And indeed, if someone is just plugging a position in their PM games into GnuBG and then playing the move GnuBG tells them to play (which I have no reason to believe was the case in the game this thread relates to), that's rather pointless, isn't it? As you say, a puppet to the machine.
posted by robin (Happy Johns other half x) on 09/07 at 21:43
JUST ENJOY YOUR GAMES EVERYONE!!!! Its a GAME....fun!!! Chill out people xxx Don,t take things to seriously...There,s enough problems/pressures in everyday lives without having it on here too...
well Chryktus is not a cheat..i played him many times..most times the rolls was in my favor at the end but he always told me vgg..however looking at somebodys else statistics......
Mia, you are on the tail end of a conversation and you are going in the wrong direction, no one has accused Chryktus or anyone else of cheating, we are speaking in general about the known use of play enhancement programs used here.
I may be wrong but TJ posted this that could have lead into a further thought or convo. I agree with TJ
And indeed, if someone is just plugging a position in their PM games into GnuBG and then playing the move GnuBG tells them to play (which I have no reason to believe was the case in the game this thread relates to), that's rather pointless, isn't it? As you say, a puppet to the machine.
I would like to know: Can any of these programs manipulate the roll? Do any of the programs take risks like a human would? I'm guessing it cant manipulate the roll and in BG does it really matter if someone uses a program since (I maybe wrong) programs wont take risks when used to play? Isnt there more variables in BG that would make it harder for a program to suggest a move versus chess?
They can in the program itself (you can set the dice to set up a situation). Not on PM.
Do any of the programs take risks like a human would?
Yes. Calculated risk is what BG is all about.
Isnt there more variables in BG that would make it harder for a program to suggest a move versus chess?
I doubt it's harder, but either way, computer BG is now well past the grandmaster stage. Nearly all of us mere mortals would be dramatically overmatched by GnuBG on full power.
Nearly all of us mere mortals would be dramatically overmatched by GnuBG on full power.
That said, a highly skilled and experienced player who knows their opponents' individual styles would do better than GnuBg against non-world class players. GnuBg is programmed to be most effective against world class players and doesn't know anything about exploiting the weaknesses of lesser mortals (ie. the vast majority of players on the planet).
For instance, some players are scared of the cube and will drop a cube that really ought to be taken. GnuBg cannot conceive of such an idea, let alone make that play, so it loses points that a canny human cubist would gain.
There is a rule of thumb in backgammon, "If in doubt, hit", which is applicable because hitting, even in what seems to be an amazingly risky situation, is often the best course of action. Sometimes such a hit requires knowing how to deal with the aftermath, be it favourable or not, but many times it doesn't take top expertise to come out better on average after a hit.
Yet there are situations where most people will hesitate and others where many will be cautious. More than that, there are players who, in some situations where a hit is clearly the best option, will still not do it, perhaps for fear of being hit in return. GnuBg (and every other bot that plays backgammon) knows nothing of opponents missing hits that they should make. It always assumes that the opponent will make the hit and so it doesn't leave a blot when being hit would lower its chances too much. A canny human player will sometimes leave provocative blots knowing that doing so improves their position and that the blot will probably not be hit.
Another advantage that human players have over GnuBg is that GnuBg always expects the opponent to cube when the time is right for it. There are so many players who are slow to cube or even don't cube at all and each missed cube means that a different move might have been more advantageous. The bots miss these and all sorts of other opportunities to play less than world-class moves yet win more points.
Do any of the programs take risks like a human would?
Yes, except for the risks outlined above that require understanding and recognising playing styles other than world-class perfect.
I always wondered what some players meant by cheating. I had no idea you could get help playing these games. But what's the use in playing withour your own skills? I love to compete, not cheat.
getting back to saying good game to someone, when they lost by a lot. I feel that is not the right thing to say, but then I don't think wishing some one good luck at the start of the game is the best thing to say either. Does anyone really want their opponent to have good luck? I don't think there is much meaning to either one.
yup some ppl think they cant lose or it breaks there heart they have to stay on top they are only games
Forum
software by
Crowder Software Pocket-Monkey and the Pocket-Monkey logo are trademarks of T.J. Crowder and Jock Murphy. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.