| |
BGonline.org Forums
Which is more aggravating & why?
Posted By: David Rockwell In Response To: Which is more aggravating & why? (rew)
Date: Sunday, 15 June 2008, at 8:29 p.m.
I can't speak for poker. Backgammon is an extremely aggravating game because you will always lose to fish no matter how good you become. If you play a game like chess, you will not often lose to inferior players. Of course, we can all take up chess if we don't like the nature of backgammon. I believe that the frustration in backgammon is greater once one becomes a strong player rather than the other way around.
To me, there is nothing worse than losing to a weak player who has played terribly, rolled out of their mind and still has managed to whine about their dice the whole match. (Don't these people realize that the only time they win is when they have good dice?) Just as bad is when a weak player throws a joker and complains about it because they don't understand the position well enough to recognize it is a great toss. (And, of course they make the right move anyway because there is only one conceivable way to play the roll.) I am usually devoid of outward emotion at the board, but I struggle to maintain my composure at times like these. Sometimes I fail to hold my tongue. My fealing is that anyone who plays like shit and whines about their dice at the same time had better lose or they will face my ire.
Backgammon is a very aggravating game. It's a character builder. I compete at a lot of different games and none are as aggravating as backgammon. Nothing is close.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.