Serge Alard, with Guy Van Middelem, is 1st of 32 participants at 9th Leuven Open

Posted in Tournaments | Tagged | Leave a comment

BMS : great PR earns Marc Van Damme victory at Brussels BG Day.

Marc Van Damme is the only player in Belgium who currently holds a Master (Class 1) grading (< 4,75 PR). At the most recent Brussels Backgammon Day his performance over ten 5-point matches was almost exactly the same as his ranking on the BMS Grading Table reflects :

PR Marc Van Damme (10 x 5)

Marc was one of 6 players who won 7 matches out of 10. The others are : Akhbar Soltani, Nick De Ruyck, Leonidas Sotiriadis, Dan Pascu, and Serge Alard.

Dan Pascu was close to winning the event convincingly with 8/10, but in his final match he saw the decisive dmp-game slip through his fingers against a hard-battling Leonidas. Bad luck for Dan, as the computer programme awarded the victory to Marc based on the Buchholz criteria.

Marc (middle) with Nick (l) and neutral observer Alain Chif.

The event was a success. Tournament organiser Guy Van Middelem kept a tight rein on proceedings, making sure matches started on time and the playing schedule was respected. The catering was excellent, with croissants in the morning and sandwiches and three kinds of homemade soups for lunch.

BMS-participants were slightly dismayed, however, to find out that only 8 minutes were allotted for a 5-point match, instead of the standard 10 (i.e. 2 minutes per point). This whimsical approach stems from the wish to schedule “more matches”, but comes at the cost of valuable thinking time. 5-pointers are notoriously difficult, since take-points and gammon values are skewed from game 1. It is not like in a longer match, where the opening games have normal take-points (25%) and gammon values (0,5). Have a look at this position, for instance : Marc Van Damme is faced with a difficult cube decision in his match against me :

White redoubles. Can Black take or should he pass?

Let us have a look at the same position “for money” (or : in Unlimited Games):

White redoubles. Can Black take or should he pass?

With three blots floating and faced with a stronger board, Black faces a huge amount of gammons (45%). This results in a clear pass, not just “for Money”, but also at a 0-0 score in a 11-point match. Accepting this cube would be a clear blunder :

However, in a 5-point match, things become very complicated. After the cube is turned, it will have a value of 4 and with the gammon price being only 0,25, the 45% gammons only have a value of 11%, instead of 22% (for Money). Moreover, should Black ever have the chance to recube to 8, the gammon price would become 0 ( = zero) and all White’s gammons would evaporate. Here is the correct cube action ats ( = at the score). Suddenly, not accepting the cube would be a clear blunder :

(!!) Needless to say that this is a fantastic, world-class take by Marc. I think most players, even very good ones, would drop with a sigh of relief, myself included.

This shows that 5-point matches are very difficult from Game 1, especially the cube actions. Marc’s Cube PR (10,24) should illustrate that abundantly. I therefore urge tournament organisers to allow the EUBGF-approved and BMS-conform 2 minutes per point even for shorter match lengths.

To round off : BMS(BE) welcomes 5 new players on the BMS GT. Dan Pascu, Kristoffer De Weert, Leonidas Sotiriadis, Antoine Demey and Serge Alard decided to take advantage of the newly introduced CoP to play their match against Marc under ‘mutual PR agreement’ and thereby gained access to the BMS GT. Antoine Demey managed to do so with a Master (Class 1) result! Thanks for participating, guys.



Posted in Tournaments | Tagged | Leave a comment

BMS : revised Conditions of Play come into effect on 1 November 2017.

In an effort to facilitate participation and make procedures more transparent, BMS(BE) has revised the Conditions of Play ( = CoP). We asked Geert Van der Stricht what the revisions entail :

Geert Van der Stricht, BMS Committee Chairman

Geert :  An important change is the fusion of the BMS Grading Table and the BPR Ranking Table. When the two tables were conceived we expected a significant discrepancy between both tables because of match length. This has turned  out not to be the case. After processing the data of more than 1000 matches the average PR of the 11 players represented on both tables appeared to be less than 0,01 PR.

M : So now there is only 1 tabel?

Geert : Yes, the BMS Grading Table.  A lot of work went into the merging of both tables, but it is done. By the way, another improvement is the change of the rolling EP to 750. This decreases volatility and is more accurate.

M : Anything else?

Geert : Yes, something important.  From 1 November onwards, opponents of BMS-applicants [ = players who film for BMS-validation] will have the option to have their PR’s incorporated in the BMS GT, if they so wish. We call this ‘Mutual PR agreement’. That means that if you are a member who is not yet listed on the BMS GT and you play an official match in a tournament, Four Cubes encounter, or BIC match, against a BMS-applicant, you can  gain a spot on the BMS GT by saying so to your opponent, the BMS applicant. That means that your PR will be mentioned on the GT and you will be considered a BMS participant from then on. This was done to lower the access threshold and allow players who do not film themselves to gain access to the table. There was quite a lot of interest for that

M : Sounds good. More things members need to know?

Geert : Well, because the BPR RT has merged into the BMS GT, all applications for Master Series or other PR matches need from now on be sent to Johan Huyck, and no longer to Walter Meuwis. This can be done by mail ( or even with a text message (0496/644872), no later than 5 minutes before start of the recorded match.

M : Ok, so one table instead of two and one person who processes the data instead of two. That sounds like simplification to me.

Geert : We hope so. We have also added an extensive appendix covering what to do in cases of ‘technical failure’. We needed some rules to guide us in cases where recordings were flawed.

M : Where can people find these revised Conditions of Play?

Geert : By clicking on BMS(BE) in the black banner above.  A printed copy will also be available for perusal at the Brussels Backgammon Day of 1 November 2017 since that is the day when the new CoP come into effect.

M : Ok, thank you, Geert, for the update. Good luck further with BMS(BE)!



Posted in BMS(BE) | Leave a comment

9th Leuven Open, Sun 12 Nov 2017, Heverlee

Posted in Tournaments | Tagged | Leave a comment

BMS : signs of progress at the top.

Four of Belgium’s top-5 players finished another Master Series. With very encourageing results.

Marc Van Damme (2) and Geert Van der Stricht (3) played, recorded and transcribed ten 15-point matches in the course of 2 months. The encounter ended in a 5-5 draw. Here is how they did :

PR Marc Van Damme (10 x 15)

PR Geert Van der Stricht (10 x 15)

Johan Huyck (5) and Michel Lamote (1) chose a slightly less demanding format. They played six 13-point matches of which Michel won 5 and lost 1. Both players managed to do well :

PR Johan Huyck (6 x 13)

PR Michel Lamote (6 x 13)



Posted in BMS(BE) | Leave a comment

EUBTC 2017 : Did Belgium fail?

In Reykjavik last week, the Belgium Backgammon Team played 24 matches to 13 points against 6 other countries : Greece, Norway, France, Sweden, Gibraltar and Turkey. We only won 11 of those. That’s bad, right?

Not quite. Let’s hear what Johan Huyck has to say about this. Johan is a professional math teacher and responsible for data processing in the BMS Committee.

Johan (middle), setting up his recording equipment against Norway.

Johan : We can look back on the tournament with pride. Sadly, Lady Luck was not on our side.

M : Isn’t that an easy way out? Saying the dice were against us?

Johan : No. Let’s look at it objectively : over the 24 matches we played a PR of 5,52, which is very close to the PR of 5,40 that we could expect based on the current BMS rating. Belgium was the best team in every encounter. Only France came close. This means that based on performance, we could, or should, have won every encounter. None of the encounters yielded a fair result.

M : With fair you mean that the team who played best also won?

Johan : Right. Of the 24 matches we played, 20 times the Belgian player played better than his opponent. Still we only won 11 matches. Our performance was also very consistent. Our worst PR in 24 matches was PR 7,89, whereas in 10 ( = ten) matches our opponents played an 8+ PR.

M : I agree. I saw it happening on the boards with my own eyes. You cannot lose a match against a player who plays worse without having some brutal swings against you.

Johan : It is of course not unusual to lose matches against weaker players, but the frequency in Iceland bordered on the bizarre. Have a look at 5 of our losses :

Walter Meuwis (PR 6,87) loses to George Lazaris (PR 11,33)

Marc Van Damme (PR 5,72) loses to Nikos Dikaros (PR 7,98)

Johan Huyck (PR 6,16) loses to Johan Bynell (PR 9,01)

Johan Segers (PR 6,73) loses to Steve Blake (PR 15,32) (!)

Marc Van Damme (PR 3,64) loses to Kasuto Mahir (PR 7,10)

Losing these 5 matches is “very unlucky”, I would say.

M : Sure. Do you think we were among the best teams?

Johan : I think there is a fair chance that only Denmark and Germany performed better as a team than we did. Maybe France also deserved a place in the Final Four. But of Norway I am not so sure.

M : Hm… The UK maybe? And I think you are a bit harsh on Norway. A batch of 52 EP ( = four 13-point matches) is not really big enough to base a final evaluation on, right? And let us not forget that one of their very best players, Elias Kritikos, did not play against us.

Johan : OK, you have a point there. But let’s look at it in another way : if we were to award points based on performance and we agree that 2-2 would be a fair result if PR’s are within 1, we would be expected to have scored 19 victories out of 24. If a draw would be fair with PR’s within 2, we would have scored 18/24 and if we agree on a draw with PR’s within 3, we would still be expected to reach 16,5/24. In short, there is no doubt in my mind that 13 losses and 11 wins is a very unfortunate outcome, especially knowing that 14/24 would always have ensured a ticket for the Final Four.

M : I see. Anything else you want to highlight?

Johan : Well, Marc’s performance was really outstanding of course. His overall PR of 4,28 (!) surely ranks among the 10 best performances of the whole championship.

Marc (middle) before the Belgium v Turkey encounter.

And you did well too, of course, with a PR of 3,25 (3 x 13) on Day 2. Walter also played within his skill window, which is something of a feat if you know that his luggage had stayed behind in Brussels Airport. It is not easy to play well if your mind is burdened by worry. Me and Johan (Segers) feel we could have done better. We played slightly worse than our acknowledged skill level. All in all, I think we did very well as a team and have lots of positive things to take with us to the next EUBTC.

M : Any idea when and where that will be?

Johan : It was decided that Gibraltar will host the 2018 European Backgammon Team Championships in the first weeks of July 2018. We can be sure that the organisation will be excellent, as the organisers are quite experienced. Let’s hope we can send a strong team and play as well as we did in Reykjavik, maybe even a bit better.

M : How can we ensure this?

Johan : By keeping up the study and dedicated practice. And the good spirits. I feel that we stand a fair chance of reaching the Final Four, if we can only be spared some extreme bad luck.

M : I agree, although next year more strong teams may show up because the venue is more attractive. I’m thinking countries like Croatia, Italy, Russia, …

Johan : That’s true. We’ll see…

Ok, let’s conclude with a quote about ‘success’. Sadly, most have something to do with “overcoming failure” and I think it is clear that we did not fail in Iceland. Maybe Pele  sums it up best : “Success is hard work, perseverance, learning, studying, sacrifice and most of all love of what you are doing or learning to do”.

Thank you, Johan, for the insights.



Posted in EUBGF, Tournaments | Tagged , | 3 Comments

EUBTC : R6 : Belgium goes for broke against Turkey.

Some unfortunate swings of fortune left Belgium needing a 4-0 victory against Turkey to qualify for the Final Four. Chances of this happening are small, but stranger things have happened in backgammon…

Sadly, despite being the better player on every board, we only managed a draw : 2-2.

Here are the team PR’s :

PR Belgium v Turkey (4 x 13)

Every player excelled in this team effort and this resulted in a high-class performance, our best of the tournament. Sadly, outplaying your opponent is never a guarantee for victory in this fickle game, as was amply demonstrated in the 6 encounters we played in Iceland.

PR Turkey v Belgium (4 x 13)

Michel Lamote (PR 3,60) wins against Arda Findikoglu (PR 7,52)

Marc Van Damme (PR 3,64) loses to Mahir Kasuto (PR 7,10)

Johan Huyck (PR 6,19) loses to Cumhur Bekture (PR 7,15)

Walter Meuwis (PR 4,82) wins against Gokhan Kazandag (PR 12,91)

What conclusions can be drawn from this event? Come back to this website tomorrow and find an interview with Johan Huyck, who will shed his light on the data.


Posted in EUBGF, Tournaments | Tagged , | Leave a comment

EUBTC : R5 : Gibraltar pull one out of the fire against Belgium.

We needed a 4-0 victory against this dwarfish backgammon nation, but failed in our mission. Sometimes even an 8+ PR difference is not enough to guarantee victory, as Johan S. experienced in a gruelling match against his sympathetic, but endearingly incompetent opponent.

Here are the PR’s of both teams :

PR Belgium v Gibraltar (4 x 13)

PR Gibraltar v Belgium (4 x 13)

Michel Lamote (PR 3,36) wins against Gilbert Licudi (PR 13,52)

Marc Van Damme (PR 4,63) wins against David Frier (PR 10,92)

Johan Segers (PR 6,73) loses to Steven Blake (15,32)

Walter Meuwis (PR 6,83) wins against Michael Pitaluga (PR 14,40)

We now need a 4-0 victory against Turkey in the last round. Unlikely, but not impossible…

Posted in EUBGF, Tournaments | Tagged , | Leave a comment

EUBTC : R4 : Belgium rolls up its sleeves against Sweden … but loses.

After losing to France on Thursday night, we badly needed to score some points against Sweden. It was imperative not to squander equity in this encounter and I can say that we all appeared at the boards very focused. This resulted in a very fine team performance :

PR Belgium v Sweden (4 x 13)

PR Sweden v Belgium (4 x 13)

This is the best team performance by Belgium so far. Marc and I were the better of two of Sweden’s top players and both Johans kept a cool head in high-pressure conditions :

Michel Lamote (PR 2,71) loses  against Kare Aronsson (PR 3,88)

Marc Van Damme (PR 3,67) wins against Thomas Tenland (PR 5,18)

Johan Huyck (PR 6,16) loses against Johan Bynell (PR 9,01)

Johan Segers (PR 6,49) loses against Aron Tendler (PR 7,87)

This undeserved defeat leaves Belgium with 6/16. We can still qualify for the Final Four, but will have to score heavily in R5. Our opponents are Gibraltar, the weakest participant in this tournament. Surely a 4-0 victory is possible?

To be continued.



Posted in EUBGF, Tournaments | Tagged , | Leave a comment

EUBTC : R3 : Belgium and France play equally well.

With two draws under our belt, Belgium badly needed a win against France. Unfortunately, things turned out sour for us as we were beaten 1-3. Both teams came up with similar PR’s :

PR France v Belgium (4 x 13)

PR Belgium v France (4 x 13)

Marc Van Damme made his maiden appearance on Board 1 and did not disappoint. He won his match and scored an excellent PR :

Marc Van Damme (PR 3,66) wins against Vincent Nardi (PR 5,80)

Johan Huyck (PR 5,61) loses against Olivier Croisille (PR 5,26)

Johan Segers (PR 7,69) loses against Eric Maillebiau (PR 8,45)

Walter Meuwis (PR 5,77) loses against Aurélien Bionnet (PR 3,27)

After this defeat, Belgium was left with 5/12. We needed to score heavily on Day 2 if we wanted to qualify for the Final Four. Will we be able to lift our game a notch or two?

Come and see next week!

Posted in EUBGF, Tournaments | Tagged , | Leave a comment