Last Saturday, 14 March 2015, a 49-point match was played at the Royal Sandeman Club in Ghent. Only a few spectators witnessed the match, among them Ghent player Johan Vervust, who could not believe his ears when I told him about the lenght of the match.
I have had this idea for a couple of months and eventually found Dutch player Paul Van Dijke, never shy of a real challenge, prepared to take up the gauntlet. Play started at 1:30pm and finished just before 8:30pm, when Paul got gammoned in the last game of the match, which ultimately finished 50-33 in my favour.
The match was clocked, each player starting with 1 hour and 38 minutes in the time bank, with a 12 seconds increment each move. Only 7 or 8 small 2-minute breaks were taken, in order to be sure we could finish the match that same day before the Sandeman closed its doors.
In the match we saw two 16-cubes, which both had to be passed (either player won one). The match was fully recorded and the full transcription in Extreme Gammon will follow in about a week. For the moment, only the score sheet is available (see picture above).
In the first round of BBD1 two players of the Brussels Four Cubes team were pitted against each other. Zsolt Tasnadi and Alain Chif have worked their way up the national ranking to the edge of the top-10. They are working hard to make the step from Intermediate to Advanced level.
Their match was witnessed by nobody except the camera. All other players were completely wrapped up in their own decision-making processes. Their matches have disappeared into nothingness. The Tasnadi-Chif match, however, has now been transcribed in XG and fully annotated. If you are a member of BGFed, you can send me an e-mail (kynos8000@gmail.com) and we (i.e. Zsolt, Alain, and I) will share this fascinating contest with you. You can review it at leasure and – hopefully – learn something from the annotations.
Game 3 was particularly instructive. Zsolt is leading 2-1, which makes this a 5-away 6-away game. This is a very challenging match score, especially when the cube has been turned. It requires some in-depth understanding to fully grasp the implications of re-cube action. Fortunately for us, this is no issue here, as the game played itself out with the cube in the middle. Let us see what happened :
Position 1. White on roll. Should he double to 2? Can Red take?
This is a borderline No Double for money, but ats ( = at the score), White can turn the cube. White’s Gammon Value (GV) is slightly higher and so is Red’s Takepoint (TP). White is up 21 pips in the race, has a better position (one checker semi-escaped + the bar- and 4-point) and some powerful threats.
No double: +0,763 (-0,076)
Double/Take: +0,840
Double/Pass: +1,000 (+0,160)
Best Cube action: Double / Take
6. 65 : 23/17 8/3*
7. 31 : bar/22* 6/5 61 : ?
Position 2. White on roll to play 61.
61 : bar/24 17/11
After entering with the ace, White cannot afford to give up the 17-point. Alain must be suffering from early morning drowsiness, because this is an error you cannot afford to make. With a stranded checker on the 24-point, you simply must keep the 17-point to keep that man connected. This is a bad mistake (0,166) simply because the correct move is so obvious.
8. 21 : 6/4 5/4 61 : ?
Position 3. White on roll to play 61.
Alain is lucky to have rolled a joker, but unlucky in that there is such an attractive alternative (with a 63 the choice would be crystal clear). How can making the 5-point be wrong? Well, this is a pvp-position (prime-vs-prime) and this territory is governed by different laws. A useful guideline is : Do what is most difficultfirst. Here, your back man is away from the edge of a 4-prime, so he can only successfully jump to the 17-point with 61 and 52 (4 rolls out of 36). Making the 5-point is much more probable : 61, 63, 31, 66, 44, 33, 11 do the job (10/36).
Still, the resulting position after Alain’s move is worth a look :
Position 3a. After 11/5 6/5.
It is easy to see the lure of this position : White has a 5-prime with a spare and only one man behind a stripped 4-prime. Red on the other hand has 2 men behind a 5-prime. The value of the assets is clearly in White’s favour. However, the problem is that Red is on roll : 15 rolls hit the blot on the 17-point and nine 2s anchor up (Red hits with 32). In other words, Red’s initiative negates his positional disadvantages. This is a very important concept in pvp-games. By the way, I would not be surprised if chess players were more likely to go for the 5-prime here than non-chess players.
Another aspect is the cube. After reconnecting with the blot on the 17-point, White is close to a Double if Red does not roll something spectacular like 42, 62, 64 or 22. After making the 5-point, Red has 5s that hit and 2s that anchor, leaving a No Double, Take position. The computer labels this a monstrous blunder (0,447). However, pvp-positions are notoriously complex, so I would not beat myself up over this, had I got it wrong.
Alain was not punished for his mistake and should have doubled here. Failing to do so, costs 0,112. Once again, the dice offer him a tricky choice : one might be tempted to make a full 6-prime with 13/9 (2). Alain keeps a cool head though and finds the right priorities : safety the blot (17/13), come to the edge of the prime (24/22) and put a spare on the 6-point (8/6). Well played!
10. 31 : 13/9 44 : ?
Position 5. White on roll to play 44.
It is almost comical how Alain is once again confronted with a great roll which is so difficult to play. What would you do? Surely one looks at 13/9 (2) 13/5, right? This builds a 6-prime with a great distribution of spares. However, this is a massive blunder, costing 0,342! The key to this position is that Alain is behind a broken 5-prime himself and needs to roll a 5 to escape. Chances of doing that are only 30% (11/36), so that may take a few rolls. Alain’s timing is precarious : his 6-prime may only hold for one or two rolls if a 5 does not come quickly. Therefore he needs to prevent Red from either counter-priming or attacking him. This is achieved by putting Red on the bar. Several plays are worth considering, but the best way to do that is to point-and-shift : 7/3* (2) 5/1* (2)(!!). Congrats to the reader if he got this one right.
After this game the score was tied at 2-2 (7). Game 4 turned into an exciting blitz : Alain found a world-class Take and Zsolt struggled with the checker-plays. You can review this game and the rest of the annotated match by simply sending me an e-mail (see above).
When Line, Peter, and I made the first steps towards organising a small-scale tournament in Brugge, we had no idea what to expect. Would it work? Would the backgammon community show up en masse or would we be completely ignored? These were some of the anxieties we struggled with as our plans became more and more concrete.
Now that the event is history, we are delighted by the enthusiastic response we received. Due to the limitations of our playing room, only 26 players could be admitted, so, with that number, we achieved maximum attendance.
Moreover, notwithstanding the required adherence to rules and schedule, all players effortlessly contributed to the success of the tournament. Thier punctuality, sportsmanship, and placidity under duress were the key ingredients of a memorable backgammon day.
Also, with this low-threshold tournament, Brugge BC has tried to put some of the aims and aspirations of the recently founded BGFED (Belgian backgammon federation) into practice :
by making the tournament accessible to players of all levels, we hope to have encouraged active participation
by adopting a different, fun-oriented approach (wedstrijdleider Geert, player presentation, …) we hope to have increased enjoyment
by putting a playing table in the café, we have aimed at stirring curiosity and generating some public awareness of our beloved mindgame
a fourth pillar of BGFed’s mission is education. As announced, the matches filmed at the feature table will be used to put certain elementary aspects of the game in the spotlight. In that way, we hope to enhance players’ insights and performance levels.
Johan Segers hammered his way to a convincing triumph at BBD1 yesterday. He nailed a 5-win streak to clinch a resounding victory.
Paul van Dijke was runner-up (4/5) with Geert Dooms, Zsolt Tasnadi and Bert Van Kerckhove sharing 2nd place (4/5).
The hometeam was able to hold on to the Brugse Zotten, but only with the narrowest of margins. Leuven BC came close to achieving a sensational steal, but 5th round victories by Brugge’s Eddy Cabooter and Nigel Vergaerde made sure the hoard of local beer stayed in Brugge.
At BBD1 next Saturday in Brugge, a decorative canister with Brugse Zot beer will go to every player of the club which wins most matches. Can anybody but the Brugge team win this challenge? We asked celebrated backgammon writer John Squeeze for his opinion :
– “With 12 players the home club is of course well represented. True, half of their players are recreational players or at least players who cannot claim to have reached a playing level beyond Beginner. Still, they should be good for an occasional win and will probably collect at least 6 points for the team. Add to that the presence of the complete Four Cubes team plus an experienced veteran like Mark Steyvers, and it is already starting to look like mission impossible for the other clubs. If you throw an extra handful of Intermediates in the mix (Peter, Line, Nigel) it is truly starting to look bleak for the other clubs”
– “Is Leuven BC the only challenger?”
– “At least with 7 delegates, they represent a good chunk of equity. If it had not been for the absence of Toon, who is, as you know, currently ranked number two on the national ranking, I would have given them a 40% chance to grab the trophy. As it is, their best players will really have to come up with their A-game to stand a chance”.
– “What about the other clubs?”
– “Brussels of course has a strong, but small team. Their Four Cubes team is present, which on a good day could be good for 9 wins, but I do not see them play a significant role in the contest. Ghent has top player Bert in their ranks, but their chances are of course seriously crippled by the absence of 2013 BIC winner Geert, who acts as wedstrijdleider. They cannot have more than 5% chance to grab the Brugse Zotten”
Thank you, John, for this lucid preview to the 6 Brugse Zotten Challenge.
31 players showed up for this tournament. After playing 6 matches each (except for the persons who had a bye) Toon Van Herreweghen won the cup, runner up was Leonidas Sotiriadis and Michel Lamote ended on 3th place. Thanks to all others players who participated!! (also Bert and Ernie). Read full report. Michel gave a professional lecture, also to be seen on previous link.
By beating Leuven 1 with a convincing 3-6 score on Friday, November 29, Brugge became the convincing champion of the 4 Cubes 2013. Congratulations!
On the picture: team captain Michel Lamote (left), Peter Allemeersch (substitute for Paul van Dijke), and Guy Van Middelem, proudly showing the trophy. The Brugge team will keep the trophy for a whole year, passing it on (or keeping it) to the winner of the 4 Cubes 2014.
On Tuesday, 22 Oct 2013, Guy Van Middelem won a 3-pointer from Dominique Stuyck around lunch time and Michel Lamote won an 11-pointer from Robin Bilderbeek at the club evening in Ghent. As a result, both players overcame the 1800 barrier at Bigelo, Guy at 1801.15 and Michel at 1800.93. They were the first to do so since the creation of the Belgian rating system for live backgammon matches in 2005. Congratulations!
