[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums

I am now also convinced

Posted By: AP
Date: Thursday, 22 August 2013, at 7:19 p.m.

In Response To: I'm Convinced (Phil Simborg)

After reading this thread, I am also now convinced that the Jacoby Rule is not necessary for money play. The only positive aspects of the rule that I have read is the potential to stimulate money action and speed up play. So it made me wonder…when backgammon is played optimally, does the Jacoby rule even accomplish these things? If you have a very volatile position with high gammon chances, then I can see Jacoby causing an earlier cube…but other than that I am drawing a blank. I just wonder if you had XG play XG in 10,000 money games with Jacoby turned on, how many of the doubles would turn out to still be doubles if Jacoby was turned off? I don’t know the answer to this question, but I suspect the overlap would be high, making a strong case for abolishing the rule. That said, to the extent that players are playing sub-optimally and constantly missing the optimal double point, they will find themselves in many more positions where they are attempting to play on for gammon because they didn’t previously double at the correct moment. But what’s the problem with this? I may have to wait a little longer for the game to finish, but my opponent is paying me to do so by playing in such a poor manner. Maybe there could be a case for using the rule in chouettes where players are playing very sub-optimally, but even that seems like a stretch.

Messages In This Thread


Post Response

Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:

If necessary, enter your password below:




[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.