007 Backgammon

007Backgammon.com

The Affinities of Poker and Backgammon

On the surface, the games appear to have nothing in common.

Backgammon is played with dice; poker with cards. Backgammon is normally played against a lone opponent; poker is thought of as a multiple-player game. An involved backgammon game can take more than 30 minutes, while even a complex poker hand (if not involving Jim Meehan) is over in less than five minutes, and many hands take less than a minute to complete. In poker, my choices are to check, bet, fold, or raise.

If my opening backgammon roll is 4-3, I have a choice of at least 12 different moves (although many of them are poor alternatives to bringing two checkers down from my 12-point in an effort to start making points in my home board, or my aggressive preference of bringing one checker down with the 3 and starting my opponent’s 5-point with the 4). Poker chips are easy to shuffle, while not even Evelyn Ng can shuffle backgammon checkers. However, looking more closely at the two games, I believe we can make a case that they are similar in many ways.

• Both require skill, but are influenced by luck. Both are great gambling games for that reason.

• Both adapt beautifully to cash games and tournament play.

• Players can make raises in both games (by betting in poker and by using the doubling cube in backgammon).

• Learning the rules and mechanics of the games is relatively easy, but it takes long hours of study and practice to play each game at an expert level.

• Backgammon and poker are both games that we enjoy playing face to face. Each game can also be played online for fun or money at numerous websites. Both games lend themselves nicely to mouse-clicking gamers.

• In poker, when a player raises an illegal amount, if the opponent calls, the pot is pushed, another hand is played, and the error stands. In backgammon, if a player makes an illegal move, for example I move nine pips after rolling a 4-3, either my opponent or I can correct the situation, but it must be done before he rolls his dice.

• In both games, skillful players incorporate mathematical probability into decision-making. For example, in poker, we might calculate the probability of successfully drawing to a flush, and then determine if we have the correct pot or implied odds to make the call. In backgammon, when faced with accepting a double, we might calculate the probability of winning the game, and then compare the bottom line outcomes when accepting and declining the cube. For instance, if I am offered the doubling cube in a running game (one in which all of my pieces have advanced beyond my opponent’s pieces), whether I accept or reject an offer to double will be based on my chances of winning. In general, I will accept the cube if I have a greater than 25 percent chance of winning the game. Hmm, that seems pretty low, so let’s do the math based on this situation occurring 200 times. The first 100 times, I will decline and lose one unit. That’s an easy calculation. I will lose 100 units. For the second 100 offers I will accept each time. I will lose 75 percent of the time, and at the doubled value of two units, thus 75 x 2 = 150 units of loss. But, I will win 25 percent of the time, and at the doubled value of two units, thus 25 x 2 = 50 units of loss. My net loss, by accepting the cube, will be 150-50=100. So, we can confirm that 25 percent is the break-even point for accepting a cube. But, wait. Haven’t I forgotten something? Yes, once I “own” the cube, I have the ability to offer it back to my opponent. For example, after accepting said cube in a running game, my opponent may throw low numbers while I am firing boxcars and double fives. I will leapfrog ahead, and possibly own an 80-to-20 advantage (an estimated win probability that I would calculate based on how many pips I am ahead, and how many rolls might remain). Prior to taking my roll, I would offer the cube back to my opponent (staying with our example) at 4. He should decline, having less than a 25 percent chance to win. However, he might err and accept the cube. This brings another poker-backgammon similarity into the mix. Making decisions that will put your opponent to the test (usually by betting or raising in poker) is what good players do. So, in backgammon, if I fail to offer the cube with an 80-to-20 edge, and then roll a 2-1, I would have missed a great opportunity. I should have forced my opponent to fold, but instead, I gave him a freeroll of the dice. In poker, if I check a leading hand, and give my opponent a free card to his flush draw, I make a similar mistake. Making decisions that provide opportunities for your opponents to make errors is key to winning in backgammon and in poker.

• In backgammon, we are often faced with the dilemma of rolling a number that forces us to expose one or more blots, and we have a choice of where to expose them. The probability of getting hit and being sent to the bar comes into play. If getting hit is detrimental at that point in the game (some times you want to be hit for timing purposes), we calculate our opponent’s probability of hitting our blot. For example, of the 36 different outcomes (we will stipulate that 4-1 and 1-4 on the two dice are considered to be different outcomes) my opponent has six ways to hit a blot that is seven unattended pips away (6-1, 1-6, 5-2, 2-5, 4-3, 3-4). He has a whopping 17 ways to hit a blot that is six unblocked pips away (6-1, 1-6, 6-2, 2-6, 6-3, 3-6, 6-4, 4-6, 6-5, 5-6, 6-6, 2-2, 3-3, 4-2, 2-4, 5-1, 1-5). Realizing how many shots one has to hit direct (six pips or less) and indirect (seven or more pips removed) blots is rote to a seasoned backgammon player, in the same way that poker players commit flush draw probabilities to memory.

• In no-limit poker, ownership of a big stack is power. A player’s decisions are often made based on his stack size in relation to his opponent’s stack. In backgammon, possession of the cube is power. I can use the cube to force my opponent to make a tough decision whether to resign at one unit, or continue to contest a game where he is at a decided disadvantage, and for double stakes. The cube is also my protector. Should I fall well behind in a game, I will be able to play to conclusion, and possibly rally back.

• A good poker player calculates risk vs. reward on an ongoing basis during a day’s play. When playing backgammon, I will take more risk when trailing by a wide margin in a match. My cube and checker movement decisions are often based on the score in the match. For example, if I trail 12-4 in a 15-point match against a good player, I will be looking to take any marginal cube at 2 to give myself a chance to win a 4-point, or even an 8-point game (possible if I make an aggressive double offering to 4, and then gammon my opponent).

• Knowing your opponents comes into play in both games. In poker, reading an opponent’s motives and tendencies is paramount. In backgammon, being aware that your opponent has a propensity to take the cube in dangerous situations may allow you an extra roll before doubling. Conversely, knowing your opponent will typically fold to an offer more readily than he should allows you to double him out quickly, thus saving you from the risk of unlucky dice on the next roll.

• I believe good poker and backgammon players stay at least one move ahead of their intermediate counterparts. In backgammon, we foresee the development of a back game (defense driven), or a running game (offense minded), and make our moves proactively.