Vic, your premisse is false to begin with.

2pt matches don't wager twice as many rating points as a 1pt match, but just 1.4 times as much (square root of matchlength).

Second, FIBS rating system already accounts for the fact that longer matches favor the stronger player in terms of winning chances.

(type 'help ratings' on FIBS for the formula)

Example:

Strong (1900) plays Weak (1500) a 1pt match:

FIBS assumes Strong should win 61.3% of these.

If Strong wins, Strong gains 1.55 points, Weak loses those.
If Weak wins, Weak wins 2.45 points, Strong loses those.

Compare:

Strong (1900) plays Weak (1500) a 2pt match:

FIBS assumes Strong should win 65.7% of these(!).

If Strong wins, Strong gains 1.94 points, Weak loses those.
If Weak wins, Weak wins 3.72 points, Strong loses those.

CONCLUSION: If Strong wins, he only gets 0.39 extra rating points if it is a 2pt match. If Strong loses however, he loses 1.27 extra rating points.

Based on that, it's not at all clear stronger players would prefer 2pt matches. In fact it looks like 1pt matches are more advantegeous to stronger players.

 

It is difficult to get this point across though - I have tried to explain it to many - but they resist it - much as I resisted it - and still do to some extent!!  Thats the great thing about looking at this situation via this tournament - it gives it much more meaning to a new player - and empirical evidence is always great for changing resistant minds  

And thanks for doing the maths on the rating change for me - I knew from experience it favoured the weaker player - but that formula makes my head spin!!

Why do bots not take 2 gamers ?
why do some interfaces won't let you play them ?

and as far as who is favored go read kit woolsey on 2 away
even if weaker player cubes stronger player can refuse and play two away 1 away and still have the odds in his side with gammon chances and error  rate .

Sorry it just doesnt wash with me and its not fair to players that do not know as much as we do here .

Zorba then stop ######ing about  how NIHLIST got to 2300 ok ?

He sure as hell was not cheating just a healthy diet of 2 gamers early on . ask him your self !!

I wasn't "######ing" about NIHILIST; you are attacking TD's without REALLY knowing the facts about the rating system or 2pt match play.

But anyway, since when is NIHILIST a reliable source for anything? He lies about  everything, even his own cheating.

One of NIHI's favorite ways of cheating was to make sure his opponents were overrated.

And with Bob Ebbeler's many accounts, there are sure plenty of easier ways to cheat even.  

But fortunately this is all in the past. Bob Ebbeler's true bg skills are well reflected in his "NIHolympic" rating of around 1750.

 

First lets take out NIHl from this discussion.

i think you know his skill level well as i do and it is high and for his new nick for your info

he is messing with backgames

here is this site you can go to http://www.bkgm.com/rgb/rgb.cgi?view+75[/URL]

is also worth considering that take-points are very different
when one player can win an even position 58.5% of the time. Gammon
rates will also be different -- gammons might be something like
30% of the stronger player's wins but only 15% for the weaker
player. This means that at 2-away/1-away the stronger player
would still have about a 40% chance of winning the match but for
the weaker player it would only be 20%.

I am sorry NIHl i dragged you into this

 

It still makes no sense at all. Stronger players always have "all the advantage". That's why they are stronger players.

Nowhere on this site do I read any expert saying that 2pt matches are "unfair" or anything.

In fact, none even mentioned FIBS rating system.

BTW, both the stronger and the weaker player can and should sometimes refuse a double at -2,-2. It's also possible either player should play on for the gammon from some point.

All things considered, there's a lot going on in a 2pt match. Some simple statements aren't going to demonstrate anything about them being "unfair". You'd need a lot of math to make your point and probably even a lot of statistical data.
 

Zorba now i see how you frustrate others

You asked me about the 40% 20% i posted it for you . you dont even respond to that
you repond to where does it say 2 gamers are unfair .

Well no where is there a mention of 2 game tourneys i am sorry they all talk about 2away games
and you read a little more and i am sure you will see the light .  

My response to the "40% 20%" was indirect, but simple: all this says is that stronger players win more often than weaker players from the same matchscore. There's nothing new about that and it happens in all matches.

Basically Walter Trice is saying in that article, that cube handling against weaker players can be quite difficult in 2pt matches.

In no way does he suggest that this would be "unfair" to the weaker player.

From my own experience, I'd say that 2pt matches against weaker players can be interesting if they don't double you. But it's far from easy to get the most out of it. You better know all the math involved to start with, and there's judgement of the opponent involved as well.

I don't think this is really the place to discuss these technical match play issues. I'd be willing to engage in any further discussion about this in itself interesting subject, but on USENET r.g.b. where there's much more expertise available.

It's hard to believe that Vic is (a) so willing to expose his own ignorance and ( so unreceptive to the many clear and polite posts that have utterly dismantled his position. Two point matches are commonplace as a side event in tournaments, usually for a very low stake and very popular and they are also commonplace for no stake on Gamesgrid where there is a twice daily 2-point match tournament. It is perfectly true that the more skilful player has an advantage, by why does Vic object to this? A game where the better player has no advantage is Ludo. The longer the match length, the greater the advantage that the better player has, so longer matches are even more unfair according to Vic's "logic".
Weak players note; turn the cube on the first roll, regardless. This may be clearly right or it may make no difference or it may be a minute error, so just turn it and get it over with. For the stronger player it is usually correct to wait until the water has been muddied a little, to take advantage of the incorrect takes and passes that he can expect later. 2-pointers are fun and a good oportunity for newbies to play somebody better, thus learning something. Sadly, Vic appears to be incapable of learning anything. We should extend our sympathy to him.