Those Darn Dice

[diane]

May I highly recommend Chess    

[socksey]

Playing against GnuBG tonight, I saw some play that dropped my jaw

Have a chat with vegasvic!     He's an expert on Fibs dice.  He shouts about them all the time!  

socksey





"If you let that sort of thing go on, your bread and butter will be cut right out from under your feet." - Ernest Bevin, Former British foreign minister

[lewscannon]

Final evidence, I guess....

Playing against GnuBG tonight, I saw some play that dropped my jaw.  I had two blots on the GB home court, and 3 empty spaces on my own home board - everything else filled there.

GnuBG rolled, and hit both of my blots - leaving divots on it's home board.  3 points covered, one empty, and two divots.  Remarkably bad play, from everything I've ever learned about the game.  It's outer board was left a mass of divots - 4 divots, one point covered, one empty.  A suicidal move - getting one off the bar onto either of those divots would have been remarkably dangerous for it, getting both of them off the bar would have been more so - even if I only hit one divot.

Of course, I couldn't make it off the bar, and on its next roll, GnuBg was able to cover both of those vulnerable points from the divots it had in outer board.  Remarkably successful strategy, but too risky for standard (or match-grade) play - unless you know you have the dice in your pocket.

I'm tired of "interesting" dice.  I've taken to offering the cube when a gammon is almost certain, just because the dice on FiBs are being one-sided in my favor.  I've seen great runs of dice happen in RL - but they're nowhere near as frequent there as they are on FiBs, or playing against GnuBg.  

I can understand some folks, trying to come up with a backgammon program, who want it to be hard for meatpeople to beat, giving it something of an edge with the dice.  I can even understand someone, creating a playground for backgammon lovers, nudging the dice so that they're more 'interesting' than actual, random dice.  What I can't do is approve of either.

Anyone know of a BG-play site that's got honest dice?  I don't like when FiBs cheats - in my favor, or against me.  I just want honest dice.  I don't need good dice every time, and I'm sick unto death of amazing dice - against me or for me.

I used to have these problems, too, until I found the way to crack the dice code. Now I get whatever rolls I need whenever I want them. My confidence is back, no one kicks sand on me at the beach anymore, and the women on Fibs find me irresistable. I don't have to wait on line to get into clubs, and am being stalked by the Olsen twins. I have an entourage that consists of Mookie, Vic and Resh and the fun never stops. For the low price of $29.99, I will share my secret with other people, and you too can have this life-changing experience. Act now, and I'll throw in my entourage, absolutely free. Even if you don't act now, I'll still throw in my entourage. These people are ruining my life. The bathroom is always busy, the apartment smells of bad cigars, and my pets are nervous and jumpy.

[fivept]

Hi All,

I have been playing FIBS for over 10 years and I do believe that there may be a bias.

Why, well it would seem to me that when playing the bots, mainly Parlorbot, the number of times that the bot hits blots, rolls the only roll needed (ie 1,6 or 6,1), and other like events is dispropotionate to the number of time the roll should statistically happen.

I also realize that the bots will make the best statistical play and should long term be a better player.

My conclusion is that either Fibs random dice are not truely random or the programmer of the bot has figured out a way for the bot to manipulate the dice; but only when the bot is in trouble or to gain a gammon or backgammon.

As the cheating would only happen when "needed" rolls were necessary, there would be little to no impact on a statisical analysis of all the rolls.

THE TEST. - I do not have the patience to do this so I am hoping someone will take the initiative. Play between 50 and 100 fifteen point games against Parlorbot. However, have gnubg playing in the background and use gnubg to play for you, including determining doubles. This would pit bot against bot and if after the 50-100 games there is a signifigant statistical difference in winning % for Palorbot we can be sure that some form of manipulation is taking place. If not we know the dice are not being manipulated.

FYI - I have had way too many games where the bot needs three doubles in a row and I would need a series of very bad rolls such as a 2 on three consecutive rolls for the bot to win. This could happen but multiple chances are very unlikely. I see it all the time.

Please post if someone has tried the Test.