Why I switched to backgammon.

**Michael Vondung** · December 19th 06, 04:54 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc

On 17 Dec 2006 23:18:25 -0800, wrote:

In "money games," it's important that people who aren't very good win
once in a while, or else it is a "dead" game.

That is true for gambling where the "experts" relay on weaker "opponents"
to be cash cows. If your criterion for what makes a game worthwhile or
worthless is the question whether you can make money from it by gambling,
then backgammon is indeed a better choice than chess. I don't think anyone
here is likely to disagree with that. If I enjoyed backgammon as a game,
not as a way of making money, I'd probably be less thrilled with your
gambler mentality, though.

Chess is a "semi-money
game," in that there is a small number of real "pros" who make a very
good "living" at it

Nonsense. Chess, like Go, isn't a "money game", not semi, quarter or
whatever. That's like saying that car driving is a semi-racing sport only
because there are some people who make money at racing, By your definition,
almost any activity and every hobby is a money making activity, because
some people earn cash with it. Again, you seem to be very focused on money.

a secondary group that is either just "getting by"
or have "second jobs," and the dreamers, or whatever you want to call
them.

I play chess because I enjoy it. I know that I will never make any money
with it, I have no plans to ever play in a tournament, and I enjoy it even
when I lose a game, if it's been a good game. You assume that your mindset,
which appears to be totally dominated by "money" and "competitive success",
is shared by everyone else, and at least in my case that is most certainly
not applicable.

As a former "serious" chess player, I can
identifiy with the desire for "purity" - if you play "perfectly" you
want to win, but again, who except for a dozen or so people would play
Kasparov 20 games for "serious money," and only have to win one of
those 20 games (or keep the score even, in the event that all the games
were draws)?

Again you talk about money. Playing a game and enjoying it does not have to
be about winning or losing, but can well be about the experience. You are
so driven by the desire to succeed and have measurable success (money,
winning, beating better players) that I can't see you getting enjoyment
from any game simply for the experience and the intellectual pleasure. Go
players have a saying: "If you win, you were playing against the wrong
opponent." It is most certainly all right to be the way you are, but please
allow for the possibility that your views are not the only valid ones.

1. Free, "pro" software that allows you to improve you game quickly.

The best "pro software" for backgammon is commercial (Snowie). GnuBG is
weaker. There is free "pro software" for chess as well. Crafty, the free
versions of Rybka, and Fruit, will kick your butt unless you are a world
class player, and possibly even then. #1 is therefore not an advantage
unique to backgammon. Also, the existence of "pro software" allows for
online cheating and would, for me, destroy *any* desire to play for money
online. We covered this before, but you seem to completely ignore responses
to your posts and just repeat the same tained views over and over. Please
do say if you are not interested in dialog, then people don't have to waste
time on responding.

2. Plenty of weak players willing to play online for money.

It is an advantage to be able to exploit weaker players? If that is what
makes backgammon good, I'm darn glad I don't enjoy the game! What a
horrible, embarrassing attitude.

3. Speed: you can play a lot of games in the time it takes to play one
chess game (even in a game where you have to play all your moves in
half an hour). Go to youtube.com, search for backgammon, and watch the
"pro" play to get a sense of it.

You can play blitz chess, which is very fast as well. I do not enjoy
rushing games, however. Again, this is not an advantage, nor is it
something unique to backgammon. I find it hard to believe that you were a
chess player, because you seem to know so little about chess.

4. Various formats, which allow you to "groove" your game to a specific
format that you excel at - and you know that many if not most of your
opponents don't, even if they are not especially weak.

There are chess variants. Again, another irrelevant point.

5. It's easy to tell if you opponent is cheating, and then you can just
avoid that player in the future and notify the site.

Same with chess. So it's easy to cheat at backgammon and your way to combat
this is to "avoid that player"? Hey, that sounds like an attractive game!
Not. If you don't want to deal with cheaters online, play Go -- computers
only play it at a low amateur level.

6. Ease with which one can learn the rules and become an "intermediate"
level player, allowing more money to continually come into the game.

Here we go again: Money.

7. Obviously, the internet. Plenty of chess to be played on the
internet, but not for money. This is the key point. Plenty of people
playing poker for money, but that is a game that is just about focus,
patience, discipline, etc.

There are more places to play chess online than there are places to play
backgammon online. Again, your point is irrelevant and has no merit.

8. Lastly, and very important to me, there is an intellectual
satisfaction to backgammon that is superior to chess. As I said in
another post, I found myself not learning much about chess [...]

I think we all understand by now that you have not learned much about
chess, but it's good that you are at least realising this.

Personally, I
find chess and Go to be far more intellectually satisfying than a game that
involves the luck factor, namely dice. I enjoy dice games for
entertainment, but I don't find them intellectually stimulating.

So, eight points that allegedly speak for backgammon, and I conclude that
not a single one of them is attractive to me, unique to backgammon (not
even in their sum), or even an advantage.

Good job at "promoting" the game!

M.

**markgravitygood@gmail.com** · December 19th 06, 01:02 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc

Michael Vondung wrote:
On 17 Dec 2006 23:18:25 -0800, wrote:

In "money games," it's important that people who aren't very good win
once in a while, or else it is a "dead" game.

That is true for gambling where the "experts" relay on weaker "opponents"
to be cash cows. If your criterion for what makes a game worthwhile or
worthless is the question whether you can make money from it by gambling,
then backgammon is indeed a better choice than chess. I don't think anyone
here is likely to disagree with that. If I enjoyed backgammon as a game,
not as a way of making money, I'd probably be less thrilled with your
gambler mentality, though.

Chess is a "semi-money
game," in that there is a small number of real "pros" who make a very
good "living" at it

Nonsense. Chess, like Go, isn't a "money game", not semi, quarter or
whatever. That's like saying that car driving is a semi-racing sport only
because there are some people who make money at racing, By your definition,
almost any activity and every hobby is a money making activity, because
some people earn cash with it. Again, you seem to be very focused on money.

a secondary group that is either just "getting by"
or have "second jobs," and the dreamers, or whatever you want to call
them.

I play chess because I enjoy it. I know that I will never make any money
with it, I have no plans to ever play in a tournament, and I enjoy it even
when I lose a game, if it's been a good game. You assume that your mindset,
which appears to be totally dominated by "money" and "competitive success",
is shared by everyone else, and at least in my case that is most certainly
not applicable.

As a former "serious" chess player, I can
identifiy with the desire for "purity" - if you play "perfectly" you
want to win, but again, who except for a dozen or so people would play
Kasparov 20 games for "serious money," and only have to win one of
those 20 games (or keep the score even, in the event that all the games
were draws)?

Again you talk about money. Playing a game and enjoying it does not have to
be about winning or losing, but can well be about the experience. You are
so driven by the desire to succeed and have measurable success (money,
winning, beating better players) that I can't see you getting enjoyment
from any game simply for the experience and the intellectual pleasure. Go
players have a saying: "If you win, you were playing against the wrong
opponent." It is most certainly all right to be the way you are, but please
allow for the possibility that your views are not the only valid ones.

1. Free, "pro" software that allows you to improve you game quickly.

The best "pro software" for backgammon is commercial (Snowie). GnuBG is
weaker. There is free "pro software" for chess as well. Crafty, the free
versions of Rybka, and Fruit, will kick your butt unless you are a world
class player, and possibly even then. #1 is therefore not an advantage
unique to backgammon. Also, the existence of "pro software" allows for
online cheating and would, for me, destroy *any* desire to play for money
online. We covered this before, but you seem to completely ignore responses
to your posts and just repeat the same tained views over and over. Please
do say if you are not interested in dialog, then people don't have to waste
time on responding.

2. Plenty of weak players willing to play online for money.

It is an advantage to be able to exploit weaker players? If that is what
makes backgammon good, I'm darn glad I don't enjoy the game! What a
horrible, embarrassing attitude.

3. Speed: you can play a lot of games in the time it takes to play one
chess game (even in a game where you have to play all your moves in
half an hour). Go to youtube.com, search for backgammon, and watch the
"pro" play to get a sense of it.

You can play blitz chess, which is very fast as well. I do not enjoy
rushing games, however. Again, this is not an advantage, nor is it
something unique to backgammon. I find it hard to believe that you were a
chess player, because you seem to know so little about chess.

4. Various formats, which allow you to "groove" your game to a specific
format that you excel at - and you know that many if not most of your
opponents don't, even if they are not especially weak.

There are chess variants. Again, another irrelevant point.

5. It's easy to tell if you opponent is cheating, and then you can just
avoid that player in the future and notify the site.

Same with chess. So it's easy to cheat at backgammon and your way to combat
this is to "avoid that player"? Hey, that sounds like an attractive game!
Not. If you don't want to deal with cheaters online, play Go -- computers
only play it at a low amateur level.

6. Ease with which one can learn the rules and become an "intermediate"
level player, allowing more money to continually come into the game.

Here we go again: Money.

7. Obviously, the internet. Plenty of chess to be played on the
internet, but not for money. This is the key point. Plenty of people
playing poker for money, but that is a game that is just about focus,
patience, discipline, etc.

There are more places to play chess online than there are places to play
backgammon online. Again, your point is irrelevant and has no merit.

8. Lastly, and very important to me, there is an intellectual
satisfaction to backgammon that is superior to chess. As I said in
another post, I found myself not learning much about chess [...]

I think we all understand by now that you have not learned much about
chess, but it's good that you are at least realising this. Personally, I
find chess and Go to be far more intellectually satisfying than a game that
involves the luck factor, namely dice. I enjoy dice games for
entertainment, but I don't find them intellectually stimulating.

So, eight points that allegedly speak for backgammon, and I conclude that
not a single one of them is attractive to me, unique to backgammon (not
even in their sum), or even an advantage.

Good job at "promoting" the game!

M.

Nice Bitch-slap, Michael.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Chess and Backgammon	contact@in-the-casino.com	rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess)	0	August 7th 06 02:14 PM
$22 Free at Play65 / GammonEmpire (the world's largest online backgammon site!)	Tessa	rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General)	0	July 25th 06 08:27 PM
TOP20BONUSES.COM - Cash Bonus Codes for Online Backgammon, Chess, Poker, Casinos, Bingo, Sportsbooks, and more.	KrazieCanuck	rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General)	0	December 29th 05 09:53 PM
TOP20BONUSES.COM - Cash Bonus Codes for Online Backgammon, Chess, Poker, Casinos, Bingo, Sportsbooks, and more.	KrazieCanuck	rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General)	0	December 21st 05 09:01 PM
TOP20BONUSES.COM - Cash Bonus Codes for Online Backgammon, Chess, Poker, Casinos, Bingo, Sportsbooks, and more.	KrazieCanuck	rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General)	0	December 18th 05 02:33 PM