Terrible algorithms

[Romain672]

I'm still fascinated by the number of person which (imo) are biaised by the random generation.

@Radio, more documented posts than just "lol you lost and are mad" are present in other posts.

[Barolla]

Hi. Agree on that this game is totally destroyed here. Up to 7-8 doubles for one of the players in a game? Dont think so. Never happens in the "real" world. A shitgame here.

[Tisaac]

Hi. Agree on that this game is totally destroyed here. Up to 7-8 doubles for one of the players in a game? Dont think so. Never happens in the "real" world. A shitgame here.

Sure, definitively never ever happenend before in real world......

[Romain672]

Hi. Agree on that this game is totally destroyed here. Up to 7-8 doubles for one of the players in a game? Dont think so. Never happens in the "real" world. A shitgame here.

I checked your second last game, but I suppose it wasn't this one. The doubles was pretty much reparted between both players.
First player got 3 doubles of 19 rolls.
Second player got 5 doubles on 19 rolls.

Let's check the probabilities for 19 rolls:
0double => 3,1% (1 specific player of one game out of ~32)
1 => 12% (8)
2 => 21% (5)
3 => 24% (4)
4 => 19% (5)
5 => 12% (9)
6 => 5,4% (18)
7 => 2,0% (50)
8 => 0,61% (165)
9 => 0,14% (675)
10 => 0,030% (3.377)
11 => 0,0048% (20.639)
12 => 0,00065% (154.795)

So this game was totally in the average. So maybe you was talking about another game.
But even 7 doubles is one game out of 50 if your game has 19 rolls, multiplied by 2 because there is 2 players, and I suppose the real % is a lot higher on games which are longer.

7 and 8 are still not impossible. You did 126 games. In average, you will have more (because it's doubles for any player) than one game with 8 doubles on a specific player.

I'm still fascinated by the number of person which (imo) are biaised by the random generation.

And it's even worst than that, many people are so sure of them, that they 'insult' the generation or something else

[Manolillo55]

Hola, soy jugador de bacgammon. Y aquí en boardgamearena, he jugado una sola partida. No voy a volver a jugar más aquí hasta que no arreglen el algoritmo de los dados. Lo siento pero es la realidad. Además para mi parecer falta el dado doble. Gracias y saludos cordiales

[Jest Phulin]

Hola, soy jugador de bacgammon. Y aquí en boardgamearena, he jugado una sola partida. No voy a volver a jugar más aquí hasta que no arreglen el algoritmo de los dados. Lo siento pero es la realidad. Además para mi parecer falta el dado doble. Gracias y saludos cordiales

Lovely how you can say the algorithms need to be fixed from a sample size of 1 game.

[Manolillo55]

Hola, ya he dicho que soy jugador de bacgammon. Y precisamente, no fui yo quien comento lo de los algoritmos, fue mi contrincante quien dijo que no era nada normal la partida. No he visto ninguna partida de backgammon en la que haya jugado, y son unas cuantas, los algoritmos que ví en mi primera partida aquí en boardgame arena. Por cierto, si los he visto jugando en alguna plataforma online o app.
Gracias y saludos cordiales

[Giordano Bruno 1974]

It's funny how those complaining about the backgammon dice aren't the players with the highest ELO ratings.

[N_Faker]

It's funny how those complaining about the backgammon dice aren't the players with the highest ELO ratings.

That is because we are oh' so obviously exploiting the flaws in the algorithm for our own benefit.

Tabulam, Ludo et Harena. Sicut erat in principio, et nunc, et semper, et in saecula saeculorum. Amen.

[Giordano Bruno 1974]

It's funny how those complaining about the backgammon dice aren't the players with the highest ELO ratings.

That is because we are oh' so obviously exploiting the flaws in the algorithm for our own benefit.

Tabulam, Ludo et Harena. Sicut erat in principio, et nunc, et semper, et in saecula saeculorum. Amen.

Fair play that made me take a quick look at your backgammon score.

Well done you. Top of the pyramid!