On 5/16/2025 4:40 AM, Øystein Schønning-Johansen wrote:
If these two gameplays do not make the same decisions
it will be clear evidence that it really is cheating.
Yes and I say that there are other, easier, better
ways to show that is't cheating.
What would it take to convince you, for example that
the doubling cube magnifies luck more than skill in
gamblegammon?
This is actually an interesting question. Intuitively
the cube reduces the luck-factor, but my (and others)
intuition can be wrong.
I'm glad you acknowledge that you folks had nothing
better to offer than intuition for your claims and
arguments. What is really unfair and wrong is that
you all have been patronizing, dismissing, mocking,
insulting some people who don't agree with you all
based on nothing more then your intuition. :(
Can you suggest an experiment that can answer such
questions?
Okay, I will but I think this subject deserves its
own thread and so I will respond on it separately.
Completely misses the point - but with the right
circumstances I would back a GNU Backgammon
financially against (nearly) any human player.
I can't speak for other human players but I assume
you would do this against me, who is a "nobody" in
the gamblegammon circles, who never participated in
a competition let alone win even a regional one.
But one match, or even 100 matches, won't really
prove anything, will it? Remember that backgammon
is a game of luck and skill. A human can be lucky
- but so can also a computer player..
Human life span is not long enough to play millions
of games. Unless you are using this to weasel out of
a bet, tell me how many games will be enough for you?
..... you have to be interested in finding the truth
about GNU Backgammon (cheating or not cheating) by
I already know the truth. I'm trying to make money
for my bothering to prove it to you.
I will not follow up on any answers to this thread
unless you have concrete hypotheses that can be
tested through an experiment. (Or an elaboration
of the above sentence)
Okay, let me give it a try.
I agree with you that GnuBG may beat "nearly all"
other human players because it cheats.
However, I can beat GnuBG because I know how it
cheats and I can utilize/exploit that knowledge.
Thus, my beating GnuBG, (while even "giants" can't),
should be proof enough for my claim that its cheats.
Like many other bot developers, online servers, etc.
have been doing, you should offer anyone, including
me, some amount of prize money for providing such a
proof, (let's say maybe $10,000..? ;), instead of
just asking people to show the cheating lines in the
source codes without any incentives.
After this, we can move on to how much you would bet
on GnuBG against me, under what conditions, on what
odds, etc.
MK
