not the friendliest game?

[SebiCools]

I use to play differents games on BGA, and mostly the messages on the chat are friendly (most of the time it's just hello / GG but nothing special)

I noticed that on backgammon there are way more grumbling players (complaining against dices / bad luck etc)

Am I the only one who noticed it?

[N_Faker]

I noticed that on backgammon there are way more grumbling players (complaining against dices / bad luck etc)

Yes, the forum does reflect this too.

[veggivet]

It is because the dice rolls are not anywhere close to being random. This changes the entire game, where you have to assume if there is a 1 in 36 chance of a certain roll that will hit your blot, the opposing player has a much better than a 1 in 36 chance of getting it. This makes the game more of an 'avoid to get hit at any cost' rather than allowing players to take reasonable risks and not get punished way more than chance would dictate.

[dschingis27]

I think it is also because some players persist on that this is a very strategic game and their knowledge of the game should be reflected in Elo. However, the way the game is currently implemented on BGA (with just 1 game at a time and no double cube), the game (or match result) is much more random than you might expect from other experiences or sources on the internet. Even if you are one of the best players, your Elo is bound to bounce between 200 and 400 simply because of randomness, some players (including me actually) have a hard time to accept this.

[T72on1]

It is because the dice rolls are not anywhere close to being random. This changes the entire game, where you have to assume if there is a 1 in 36 chance of a certain roll that will hit your blot, the opposing player has a much better than a 1 in 36 chance of getting it. This makes the game more of an 'avoid to get hit at any cost' rather than allowing players to take reasonable risks and not get punished way more than chance would dictate.

No. It's because people think this is what's going on, that makes them more grumpy.

For any dice based game there's plenty of forum posts complaining about this. Yet none of them has ever provided any 'evidence'.

[veggivet]

Here's evidence for you; Table. #261299524. If you replay the game and then can say that the number of doubles is within any type of statistical probability that resembles the real world get back to me.

[Silene]

Here's evidence for you; Table. #261299524. If you replay the game and then can say that the number of doubles is within any type of statistical probability that resembles the real world get back to me.

I'll come back to you instead:

In that game your opponent had 8 doubles out of 18 rolls. The propability for getting 8 or more doubles on 18 rolls is 0.534%. So about half a percent. That means it would happen in about 200 games on average (assuming 18 rolls is a normal duration of a Backgammon game). Given the fact that you played almost 1000 games of that on BGA it would be a strange if that hadn't happenend to you a couple of times.

So yeah - absolutely resembling real-world statistical propability. It's not evidence but an example of an extreme result that is normal to encounter at times.

[Jellby]

Anything between 0% and 100% is within statistical probability.

[Silene]

Anything between 0% and 100% is within statistical probability.

That's true. But i.e. had they shown a game where 18 rolls are all double-6, I'd see it differently (even though it is a possible event). But the example they gave isn't raising any suspicions.

[Jellby]

Sure.

Now, if the same happens in multiple consecutive games with the same player... I could start to be suspicious.