| |
BGonline.org Forums
SHG
Posted By: W Womack In Response To: SHG (Rich Munitz)
Date: Tuesday, 22 December 2009, at 5:43 p.m.
It was interesting to follow the forum of the tournament group that was most vocal about returning to the "old dice." Initially the argument started out claiming that the number of doubles with the correct dice was not like "real dice" but soon turned into "people should be able to play with the dice they want." This groups was, however, outraged when I suggested that the game they were playing with these dice should be called something other than backgammon.
To Rich's point having only been playing this game with any degree of seriousness (as opposed to skill which I still have a long why to go on) for a short time and starting out on SHG with the old dice I did find changing from 9.2% doubles to 16.67% doubles to be very frustrating.
I think overall the game is easier with fewer doubles. All sorts of things change with fewer doubles, and many of these I think make the game easier. 4 and 5 primes with two checkers behind them are extremely powerful with fewer chances of your opp escaping both checkers on a single roll, modest race leads don't seem to evaporate as often, and even entering from the bar against a 1 to 3 point board is easier with fewer doubles.
Given that doubles are often more difficult to play can add to the frustration if you are mainly interested in the game as a casual activity. And seeing a virtually won position turn into a loss because of 2 or 3 big doubles is certainly frustrating.
So I can see why those that are interested in playing the game mainly for the "social" aspects might prefer the game with fewer doubles. However many of the people that wanted to go back to the old dice fancy themselves as very strong players and claimed that the "extra" doubles took the skill out of the game.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.