Team Gammon

[sixty_something]

Rickr, you and angel are flying against the wind .. when you use words that have certain accepted meanings like team, match, and game the way in which you use them had best be consistent .. otherwise the result is confusion and none of us will live long enough to redefine those words in the context of FIBS and backgammon

there appears to be very strong interest in forming a true TEAM LEAGUE .. do a search here on that here and you will find tons of background information .. some will be useful .. some will be bullshit .. regardless, your best avenue toward success, imho, is to move toward a true TEAM LEAGUE, asap .. to continue to offer a TEAM anything without true teams will, i fear, be self-defeating .. attempting to redefine the usage of the word most certainly will

anyways, Rickr, your energy and ideas are most appreciated .. they seem to have stired up an interest in TEAM LEAGUE again .. when the customer base tells you what they want, it is a good idea to offer it as soon as you can, e.g. where is you nearest buggy whip retailer?

[RickrInSF]

60, i don't understand how anyone can offer a team league without knowing what that means. The only way to know what a team match is like is to play it first. flg team, IMHO, failed because it was boring, no team strategy, only 5 ptrs (that is why i left after one league). I wasn't around for souptree's league, but it seems to me that the game was good, but the structure/rules were not. I wouldn't know how to make the structure/rules for a league, until i first find out the flaws in match play (and hopefully correct them). Yes, the web site would be MUCH easier to understand and use, there would be no accepting of matches, teams would be set up, but i fear too many people would drop if they don't like the format. One restriction for my league will be team match experience (maybe only 10 exp, but you will have to at least have tried it).

My opinion, is that if it's not fun to play a team match, why would you ever want to play in a league based on that format? And if you have never played that format, why would you want to enter into a league?

oh, and i am not redefining words, i am only defining their use.

i would love to offer a league now, but this web site is not ready, not by a long shot, that is why i asked all of you to "beta test".

I'm not good at writing rules, or making things look pretty, what i'm good at is designing things like games, and making things work. So far, my biggest supprise is than everything has worked as i thought it would (although not intuitive, or laid out very well, no one has complained that they were unable to do something).

[moonshadow123]

Team Gammon is just my "brand name" for team backgammon, i think i've invested too much in it to change it now, but in hindsight, i should have named it "Team Backgammon", i just thought team gammon was easier to say and type.

I'm sorry but you failed to understand my point about why "team gammon" was slightly confusing. The problem is not whether you use "gammon" or "backgammon", the problem is the manner in which "team" is used. In the over all scheme of things this is a minor point.

I resist changing matches to tournaments, only because i plans for team tournaments and team leagues, and i wouldn't know what to call them if i called a team match a tournament. As per earlier post, i myself have a problem with the term "match", so defined the terms "match" and "game" for use in this post (game = backgammon match, played on FIBS, match = team match, scheduled and reported at Team Gammon)

Such a radical re-definition of the word "match" as you propose is inexcusable as there is already the English word "tourney" for what you are describing.

oh, and i am not redefining words, i am only defining their use.

This is oxymoronic.

Also, if you define how a word is to be used, you are giving a definition. If your definition of that word is not recognized by any authority (e.g. a dictionary)  other than yourself, then you are re-defining the word.

You need to make it a rule to force yourself to put your ideas and concepts into conventional backgammon terminology. And in backgammon, a match is never a tournament.

Furthermore, your reasons for redefinition are  baffling. It sounds like you're reasoning in this manner: "I plan on having some apples and oranges,  but because I also plan on having some pears later on, I must call the oranges apples."

Are you saying that you can't use the word "match" in the conventional manner because you plan to have "team tournaments" and "team leagues"?

Due to this penchant for radical redefinition of English words, I'm hesitant to even hazard a guess as to what you actually mean by "team leagues" or the word "league."  

Even if you later plan to add leagues, I see no issues.

Onwards and upwards.

[sixty_something]

moonshadow's comments are spot on .. we are going around in circles until we are all speaking the same language with standard backgammon and tournament terminology, you are implementing that in your programming, and the interface reflects it all.. good luck with your continued development .. i look forward to seeing the results

[diane]

I can see Ricks point though...a round of matches, where one team play each other isn't a match, a tournament or a league.

That is the word that needs to be chosen [preferrebly not using another perfectly good word and redefining it  ]

How about 'challenge'...it isnt a team match, it isnt a team tournament and it isnt a team league...can you use a 'team challenge' to cover the round of matches that will be played out to decide the winning team in this single event?

Or am I oversimplifying?

[RickrInSF]

ok, this from www.dictionary.com

match    /mætʃ/  Show Spelled[mach]  Show IPA
–noun
1. a person or thing that equals or resembles another in some respect.
2. a person or thing able to cope with another as an equal: to meet one's match.
3. a person or thing that is an exact counterpart of another.
4. a corresponding, suitably associated, or harmonious pair: The blue hat and green scarf were not a good match.
5. Sports .
a. a game or contest in which two or more contestants or teams oppose each other: a soccer match.
b. a contest consisting of a specific number of sets: a tennis match.
6. any contest or competition that resembles a sports match: a shouting match.
7. a person considered with regard to suitability as a partner in marriage: a good match.
8. a matrimonial union; marriage: Neither family approved of the match.

a team match is a contest between two teams (definition 5a.)

But from now on, i will refer to a team match as a team match, a backgammon match as a bg match to avoid confusion.

tour·na·ment (tŏŏr'nə-mənt, tûr'-)  
n.
1. A series of contests in which a number of contestants compete and the one that prevails through the final round or that finishes with the best record is declared the winner.

2. A medieval martial sport in which two groups of mounted and armored combatants fought against each other with blunted lances or swords.


a team tournament will be a series of team matches (definition 1.) (although a team match could fit the definition of a tournament, it is not the best definition, it is one contest between two teams, not a series of bg matches between individuals)

league    /lig/  Show Spelled [leeg]  Show IPA noun, verb, leagued, lea·guing.  
–noun
1. a covenant or compact made between persons, parties, states, etc., for the promotion or maintenance of common interests or for mutual assistance or service.
2. the aggregation of persons, parties, states, etc., associated in such a covenant or compact; confederacy.
3. an association of individuals having a common goal.
4. a group of athletic teams organized to promote mutual interests and to compete chiefly among themselves: a bowling league.
5. Sports .
a. major league.
b. minor league.
6. group; class; category: As a pianist he just simply isn't in your league.

a team league will be a set of teams organized to compete between themselves (definition 4.)

So as you see, there is no "radical re-definition" here, only a definition of thier use

so, i plan to have oranges (team tournaments), and apples (team league), so i don't want to call a pear (team match) an orange, or an apple.

[RickrInSF]

PS. I use the same terms as commonly used in backgammon (match, tournament and league), not to be confusing, and not because the dictionary meaning fits perfectly, but because the relationships in team gammon are exactly the same as in backgammon.

team gammon match = a contest between two team       ----   backgammon match = a contest between two players
team tournament = a series of team gammon matches    ----   backgammon tournament = a series of bg matches
team league = a group of teams                                   ----   backgammon league = a group of players

a team match is to a team tournament what a bg match is to a bg tournament
a team match is to a team league what a bg match is to a bg league
a team tournament is to a team league what a bg tournament is to a bg league

just because i have a different kind of pear, pls don't ask me to call it an apple

[moonshadow123]

ok, this from www.dictionary.com

match    /mætʃ/  Show Spelled[mach]  Show IPA
–noun
1. a person or thing that equals or resembles another in some respect.
2. a person or thing able to cope with another as an equal: to meet one's match.
3. a person or thing that is an exact counterpart of another.
4. a corresponding, suitably associated, or harmonious pair: The blue hat and green scarf were not a good match.
5. Sports .
a. a game or contest in which two or more contestants or teams oppose each other: a soccer match.
b. a contest consisting of a specific number of sets: a tennis match.
6. any contest or competition that resembles a sports match: a shouting match.
7. a person considered with regard to suitability as a partner in marriage: a good match.
8. a matrimonial union; marriage: Neither family approved of the match.

a team match is a contest between two teams (definition 5a.)

I see I left the door open  for you to go down this road when I mistakenly challenged you to in essence use a dictionary in support of some of your claims.

However, your appeal to definition 5a as justification for using "match" in the manner you are wanting to use it in the context of backgammon fails because in the specialized and well-established vocabulary of backgammon terms, "match" already has a very specific meaning and therefore takes precedence, when talking about backgammon,  over any broader definition you cherry pick from a general dictionary.

Even though backgammon is played by a relatively small percentage of the general population, backgammon terminology is nevertheless fairly well established and universally acknowledged by those that actually play the game.  Most of these specialized terms and definitions are not going to be found in a general dictionary, yet if you are going to talk about anything related to backgammon, you must use backgammon specific definitions, otherwise, to all intents and purposes,  you are re-defining words and it will result in confusion with your intended audience.

But from now on, i will refer to a team match as a team match, a backgammon match as a bg match to avoid confusion.

I'm sorry,  but  this sentence is a bit confusing and I don't quite understand what you mean here.

I can see Ricks point though...a round of matches, where one team play each other isn't a match, a tournament or a league.

That is the word that needs to be chosen [preferrebly not using another perfectly good word and redefining it  ]

How about 'challenge'...it isnt a team match, it isnt a team tournament and it isnt a team league...can you use a 'team challenge' to cover the round of matches that will be played out to decide the winning team in this single event?

Or am I oversimplifying?

Though I don't quite understand rickinsf's point, I like diane's proposal of using "challege" or "team challenge" .

Its simple. Its appropriate (one team does in fact "challenge" another). It avoids the confusion of "match".

[RickrInSF]

ok, i guess i will have to concede that backgammon players live in their own world so much that they no longer understand words as used in the real world. (do you have a hard time when people use the term "soccer match"?)

kidding aside, i do understand the confusion with the use of the word "match", so i will use "match-up" (flg term), or "team match-up" where i used to use "team match"

i did consider others - challenge (thx diane), contest, bout and a few other synonyms, but no others fit (as well) my concept of what a team match-up is

site will be updated soon (updated - pls let me know if i missed any pages)

[sixty_something]

ok now, back up one level please .. while i have registered at Team Gammon, i have chosen to not play or participate yet (primarily due to time constraints), but the confusion evidenced in this thread (which i share) is another reason .. my confusion is over something more basic than a "match-up", i.e. what is a "Team" in Team Gammon?

when i have addressed that issue before with you, Rickr, i have not understood your responses .. i don't have them to quote, but i was never clear on it at all .. each time i read the "Rules" i was still unclear .. so, how about addressing that one again for me, please

i appreciate you accepting the feedback offered here, Rickr .. part of any good design, as you know, is to meet your customers needs .. it is always better to get that done now on the front end .. btw, i was never confused that a "match" might be "a corresponding, suitably associated, or harmonious pair" .. in FIBSland that would be an oxymoron

[RickrInSF]

ok 60, i guess i have to go back to www.dictionary.com  

team   /tim/  Show Spelled[teem]  Show IPA
–noun
1. a number of persons forming one of the sides in a game or contest: a football team.
2. a number of persons associated in some joint action: a team of advisers.
3. two or more horses, oxen, or other animals harnessed together to draw a vehicle, plow, or the like.
4. one or more draft animals together with the harness and vehicle drawn.
5. a family of young animals, esp. ducks or pigs.
6. Obsolete . offspring or progeny; race or lineage.

definition 1. fits here, the number of people is three (although i can see how fibsters would confuse it with definition 5.)  

again, kidding aside, i think your question is more about how teams are used, than what a team is.

i made it so that you could have as many teams as you like, i did this so that if you wanted to introduce someone to Team Gammon or simply wanted to play only one match-up with another team, you would be able to make a team with them on it and not worry about having to play ONLY with that team. if tournaments or league ever starts, you will, of course, only be able to enter one team. (eventually you will be able to "hide" teams from your list of teams that you do not want to use or have challenges presented to that team)

now, the strategy to Team Gammon is the placement of players (who is strongest player, who is best a long bg matches, who is best at short bg matches), so i have also made it so that you can change the order of the players (by making a new team), i made it so that these are different teams (up to 6), so that one variation does not affect the team rating of another. This part of what a team is, is not set in stone, i had also considered making it part of the game to choose player positions immeadiately b4 a team match-up is created, but this added one more step to an already (obviously) complicated system.

[diane]

What you are describing - re three people on a team, playing three people on another team would apply if they played one match, conferring.  This does happen IRL, but is typically doubles - ie a team of two, play another team of two in a single match of whatever length.

Avoiding the term 'match' to mean '3 matches' seems like a necessity to me.

[RickrInSF]

What you are describing - re three people on a team, playing three people on another team would apply if they played one match, conferring.  This does happen IRL, but is typically doubles - ie a team of two, play another team of two in a single match of whatever length.

Avoiding the term 'match' to mean '3 matches' seems like a necessity to me.

done, can we please argue about something else? (meaning, more feed back pls)

[moonshadow123]

rickrinsf,

done, can we please argue about something else? (meaning, more feed back pls)

There is still confusion about how your "Team Gammon" works and though I'm currently participating, I don't quite understand it either. i also don't quite understand the rationale behind why you structured some things they way you have and I suggest you may have unnecessarily over-complicated the concept.

The novelty and complexity of your "Team Gammon" concept, combined with the ambiguous manner I find you have tried to explain it go beyond a simplistic response to "What is it you don't understand?"

The other day someone kibitized to me while playing that they didn't really understand "Team Gammon" and I suspect a good many others don't as well, but are reluctant to speak out.

60 has candidly spoken out about what he does not understand:

ok now, back up one level please .. while i have registered at Team Gammon, i have chosen to not play or participate yet (primarily due to time constraints), but the confusion evidenced in this thread (which i share) is another reason .. my confusion is over something more basic than a "match-up", i.e. what is a "Team" in Team Gammon?

when i have addressed that issue before with you, Rickr, i have not understood your responses .. i don't have them to quote, but i was never clear on it at all .. each time i read the "Rules" i was still unclear .. so, how about addressing that one again for me, please

I don't want to throw cold water on your efforts--and I know that you have put quite a bit of effort into developing this-- but I find the following  explanations to be mind-numbingly ambiguous, maddeningly frustrating because I don't understand exactly what you mean  and generally confusing.

i made it so that you could have as many teams as you like, i did this so that if you wanted to introduce someone to Team Gammon or simply wanted to play only one match-up with another team, you would be able to make a team with them on it and not worry about having to play ONLY with that team. if tournaments or league ever starts, you will, of course, only be able to enter one team. (eventually you will be able to "hide" teams from your list of teams that you do not want to use or have challenges presented to that team)

now, the strategy to Team Gammon is the placement of players (who is strongest player, who is best a long bg matches, who is best at short bg matches), so i have also made it so that you can change the order of the players (by making a new team), i made it so that these are different teams (up to 6), so that one variation does not affect the team rating of another. This part of what a team is, is not set in stone, i had also considered making it part of the game to choose player positions immeadiately b4 a team match-up is created, but this added one more step to an already (obviously) complicated system.

Your explanations tend to bring up even more questions, which would suggest your plan is too complicated and unwieldy.

When I had originally seen the possibility and option to be on several teams when I signed up, I thought it was a bad idea and failed to see the rationale behind it. I had no intention of signing up for several teams at the same time.

Now that I see your rational for having an option to be on more than one team in the above quote, I don't think it practical.

You are making this far too complicated and unwieldy when you talk about 'strategy' and the placement of players within a team in a certain order so as to gain an advantage over the opposing team. Its not very realistic to assume as you do  that one player is better at longer matches, one player is better at shorter matches and so forth-- a strong player is probably going to play pretty well regardless of match length.

And since you introduced the notion--which I think highly impractical--of a strategy of arranging players in a certain order so as to gain an advantage, this brings up the question of what if the opposing team doesn't like your, to use baseball terminology, batting order, who is the final arbitrator?

A bit too complicated.

People like competition and that's not bad, but most will like to just play and have a good time and not have to spend too much time in figuring out a complicated rating system  or some complicated strategy to get an advantage over the opposing team.

This brings me to my final general suggestion.

Keep things as simple as possible. Don't try to reinvent the wheel.

Backgammon players understand things like Swiss style tourneys, round robin tourneys and chouettes.

Start with concepts and things people already understand and are familiar with, then if things take off, add some complexity or variations.

If people don't understand something, they are likely not going to participate. People that participate won't want to spend a lot of time trying to figure out complicated strategies or systems-- they generally just want to play and have a good time.

Good luck on this and I'm looking forward to seeing what eventually develops.

moon

[diane]

My approach to something I don't understand is to 'give it a go', I find things get easier by doing...

So, we are playing a match-up...nothing seems to have happened since myself and moonshadow finished our matches a week ago...I checked the website last night to see if there was anything I needed to do - but couldn't find out in under 10 mins, so I filed that under go and look tomorrow after a good nights sleep...

Today - a nights sleep helped and I did remember the instructions moon gave me to get to the match-up, so found we are waiting on WT and blots - I will go ask them if there is a holdup in the matchup..

Now we have talked about menus - so that is on the list for when you have time, nuff said.

I want to get through this first match before I go for any more feedback, I need to see the process through before I offer comments on the whole process...but my main comment at this point is...hang in there Rick - don't fall down with all the other team events that have tried to function - please, we do appreciate it, honest we do 

[RickrInSF]

Your explanations tend to bring up even more questions, which would suggest your plan is too complicated and unwieldy.

I disagree, i think what it means is that i'm not good at explaining things. (as you can tell from my rules page)

please don't just tell me my explanations are "ambiguous", tell me why and what you you think is ambiguous (i still don't see anything that can be taken in more than one way)

if you don't understand the strategy, i have already told you my recommendations, put highest ranked player in position 1, second ranked player in position 2 and third ranked player in position 3. I didn't really expect people to understand the strategy without playing it (more than once).
my recommendations are for the following reasons (i will use a 5.3.1 match-up for this example, but the second set of statements are true for all match-ups):
Player 1 is responsible for a 5 ptr, a 3 ptr, and a 1 ptr
Player 2 is responsible for a 3 ptr, a 3 ptr, and a 1 ptr
Player 3 is responsible for a 5 ptr, a 1 ptr, and a 1 ptr

Player 1 is responsible for the most amount of points
Player 2 is responsible for the second most points
Player 3 is responsible for the least amount of points

next, i don't believe that backgammon players don't like to "spend too much time in figuring out a complicated rating system  or some complicated strategy" - one of the first things i did when i started playing backgammon was spend too much time figuring out a complicated rating system and learning strategy, i know that not all players understand the backgammon rating system, but i think most of the top players do. Team Gammon, like backgammon, can be played without worrying about those things, but without those "complicated" systems, backgammon would not be much fun to me and i still believe Team Gammon would not hold much interest if it was not complicated (like flg team was not much fun to me)

I don't understand your question "what if the opposing team doesn't like your, to use baseball terminology, batting order, who is the final arbitrator?" - the order is chosen when you create the team, the opposing team has no say in it, just as you have no say in their order. and since match-ups are not created without first creating the teams, the order of your team and the order of the opposing team is already set and known.

Next, i realize i'm breaking new ground here, Team Gammon is ONLY set up for team match-ups, not tournaments, not league. This is a new concept, but since it is "one step back" from a tournament or league, i really don't understand the confusion. Your idea of starting with something simple and then adding to it is EXACTLY why i started with only match-ups, i plan to add complexity with tournaments and league.

Now i have a question for you, why do you find having more than one team not practical? The program is set up so that you will not be able to create a match-up against another of your teams, or another team that has one of your team mates on it, so why is it not practical?

diane,
i'm sorry you had to spend so much time just to find the match-up, did the new menus not help? Did you go to Your Match-ups and click on your active match-up? or did you find it from All Match-ups and then click on the match-up? Did you see the new menu at the bottom of page or is it still not what is needed?

[diane]

diane,
i'm sorry you had to spend so much time just to find the match-up, did the new menus not help? Did you go to Your Match-ups and click on your active match-up? or did you find it from All Match-ups and then click on the match-up? Did you see the new menu at the bottom of page or is it still not what is needed?

That comes across a bit tense...I am really not trying to be awkward - if it wasn't, please disregard that 

Ok - The first time was not obvious I think because I was tired - I cant recall what I did, which says something...today I went to 'your match-ups', which seemed logical to me..you get the two team names and your challenges - which is 'no challenges' right now...then, once you know to click the team name, it is easy [and you have added the instruction on the other route in..'all match-ups']

menu at the bottom - all teams is good 
profile is good 
rules are good  but from rules you have to backspace to where you were..no direct link

But I still think 'your match-ups' is the most logical path to where you are, or your team is - and the instruction to click the team name would be useful there.

Other than that - looking gooooood ;-)

Fibsters are a shy bunch, they will all get the hang of it in time - then sixtie will wander by and ask you to change it all because he likes chocolate ice cream 

[sixty_something]

actually i like chocolate chip, diane .. but "chip" is a misnomer .. even though i say "chip" i know that i don't really mean "chip".. so, if you were to attempt to satisfy me with chocolate chip, i might still be disappointed .. what i really like i don't have a name for - think big chewy chunks of fudge made with walnuts and almonds, not pecans .. some call that Rocky Road and that is close, but Rocky Road has those stupid chunks of marshmellow in it

when i put marshmellow on ice cream i like that creamy stuff you melt first and then pour on top .. you can then stir it in at your leisure or desire .. in other words, i like my marshmellow, if any, Last In First Out just like i like to view threads .. it's just a personal preference

oh wait, i just had a better idea .. add a layer of super sticky caramel running through it all .. for me, that's a "match-up" made in heaven

[RickrInSF]

I think if sixtie wanders by and actually tastes, he will find out that Team Gammon tastes just like chocholate fudge brownie ice cream. (chocholate ice cream with chunks of fudge brownie in it, and plenty of nuts)

even if there aren't enough nuts in it yet

[diane]