Backgammon online

[XxPenguinxX]

PartyGammon dumped a free $15 into my account the other day, and so I took a day off poker to play backgammon.

This was the first time I have played online, and I had a few thoughts / questions:

1. Some of the play is really bad - I played a $17 4-point match (seemed to be high-ish stakes compared to most of the games going) and he made a few bad errors with the cube and by leaving loads of blots for no apparent reason. Is this most people's experience?

2. The rake seems pretty punitive to me - is it actually possible to beat it for a worthwhile amount?

3. It strikes me that the variance playing BG is at least as high as poker. I obviously didn't play perfectly, but I gave a decent account of myself and still lost just under half my games to the muppets I was playing against. Apologies if this is an irritating / hard to answer question, but what would be a good-ish winrate playing ~$10 matches? Presumably the longer the matches you play the lower the variance?

I still have $35 in my PG account, and I'm trying to work out whether it's worth carrying on playing or whether I should just add the free money to my poker BR....

Any thoughts?

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]

1. Some of the play is really bad - I played a $17 4-point match (seemed to be high-ish stakes compared to most of the games going) and he made a few bad errors with the cube and by leaving loads of blots for no apparent reason. Is this most people's experience?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, there are many bad players.

It's also possible that you thought some correct plays were mistakes just because you wouldn't have made them. It's good to get objective feedback from a computer program after the match.

[ QUOTE ]

2. The rake seems pretty punitive to me - is it actually possible to beat it for a worthwhile amount?


[/ QUOTE ]
I haven't looked at the rake recently, but I was soundly beating the past structure which increased the rake when there was a large rating difference between the players.

The best backgammon players in the world... usually make more money playing poker. Poker takes little time to learn compared with backgammon, and the stakes are higher. Most of the top backgammon players switched over because so many poker players hate money and can't be bothered to learn poker theory.

[ QUOTE ]

3. It strikes me that the variance playing BG is at least as high as poker. I obviously didn't play perfectly, but I gave a decent account of myself and still lost just under half my games to the muppets I was playing against. Apologies if this is an irritating / hard to answer question, but what would be a good-ish winrate playing ~$10 matches? Presumably the longer the matches you play the lower the variance?


[/ QUOTE ]
In both games, skill dominates in the long run. A reasonable question is how long it takes for skill to dominate, which depends on the skill advantage assumed.

In backgammon, winning 0.1 ppg in a money session is considered substantial. That can be achieved by making 0.5-1 fewer blunders per game than your opponent. Of course, it is possible to win much more with a larger skill disparity. The standard deviation per money game (not match) is about 2-3 points, depending on the playing styles. You may be able to play about 15 money games per hour online, depending on your speed and your opponents.

If you win 0.100 ppg after the rake with a standard deviation of 2.5, then it takes about 2500 games for breaking even to be 2 standard deviations below average. Assuming 15 games per hour, that's 167 hours.

In limit Hold'em, if you win 1 BB/100 with a standard deviation of 15 BB/100, it takes about 90,000 hands for breaking even to e 2 standard deviations below average. Assuming 75 hands per table-hour, that's 1200 table-hours.

In general, I believe it is possible to hit the long run faster in backgammon than in poker. However, this depends on the players. A NL expert who multitables in soft games will reach the long run faster than a backgammon player with a slight advantage.

[XxPenguinxX]

Thanks very much for the detailed response. I might continue to give BG a go, particularly (as you suggest) by running my games through GNUBG after the event.

I have to say I hadn't appreciated there even were ratings (that's how much of a newbie I am to online BG), let alone that they affect the rake level. I'm going to have to do some reading on how both the ratings and the rake are calculated. I just noticed that any rake I paid was above the 5-10% range which I am used to from poker.

I suppose you're right about the merits of switching over. BG has almost no profile, and certainly not the same sexiness as poker's image has. So to even find the game, let alone the online sites (and still less be prepared to risk money on those sites) means the average player is going to have a much better idea about "good" play than your average low level poker player.

[thesilkworm]

I like the idea of playing Backgammon online for money, but isn't it just too easy to cheat?

Anyone sitting there with Snowie can just work out the perfect move every time can't they? Can Party detect this?

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
I like the idea of playing Backgammon online for money, but isn't it just too easy to cheat?

[/ QUOTE ]
This is a common suggestion. It has been discussed before.

The short answer is that
[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] It's possible to cheat, but much harder than you might imagine.
[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Detecting cheating is relatively easy. If you cheat enough to get an advantage, your serious opponents are likely to detect this and complain to the site with convincing evidence, and the site may detect you even before there are any complaints.
[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] The vast majority of players obviously don't cheat. They play badly, think for a long time and then err, etc.

[thesilkworm]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I like the idea of playing Backgammon online for money, but isn't it just too easy to cheat?

[/ QUOTE ]
This is a common suggestion. It has been discussed before.

The short answer is that
[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] It's possible to cheat, but much harder than you might imagine.
[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Detecting cheating is relatively easy. If you cheat enough to get an advantage, your serious opponents are likely to detect this and complain to the site with convincing evidence, and the site may detect you even before there are any complaints.
[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] The vast majority of players obviously don't cheat. They play badly, think for a long time and then err, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks - maybe I will give this a shot then (for micro stakes because I'm a bit of a noob still)!

[LoyalFrush]

[ QUOTE ]

I have to say I hadn't appreciated there even were ratings (that's how much of a newbie I am to online BG), let alone that they affect the rake level. I'm going to have to do some reading on how both the ratings and the rake are calculated. I just noticed that any rake I paid was above the 5-10% range which I am used to from poker.


[/ QUOTE ]

PartyGammon used to have a complicated rake system based on ratings but they trashed it a few months ago. Now the rake is a flat 6% on single games and 5% on matches. There are no ratings any more. As an aside, it boggles me why the vast majority of play is single games when the rake is higher and more punitive.

Personally, I just play $5-10 matches for entertainment and as a break from poker. The threat of opponents using software help keeps me from playing higher. Party security protecting me from cheaters ... [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] ... I'm not going to count on it.

[axelM]

What makes Backgammon even more appealing is, that Backgammon is a game of complete information. Which means u can much faster find out, that you are outmatched than in poker. So table selection is very very easy