Backgammon Luck versus Skill

Luck versus Skill

Does backgammon need less luck?

From:   Raccoon
Date:   24 January 2008
Subject:   Reducing luck: Bill Robertie weighs in
Forum:   GammOnLine

> A game that for a very large part depends on luck is not that attractive, > and that applies to BG at the highest level. From Inside Backgammon 4:6, Nov-Dec 1994: [In response to a suggestion for reducing luck in backgammon], I would say this: I agree that your suggestion would "reduce the luck" in backgammon. My question is simply, why would you want to do such a thing? Backgammon has existed, in various forms, for almost two thousand years as a game of risk management. The skill of backgammon is a matter of evaluating the relative risk and reward of different plays leading to often very different types of positions. The doubling cube adds another layer of complexity onto the game as it forces the players to compare the strength of a position to concrete benchmarks, namely the doubling and taking points, which in turn may vary wildly in matches of various lengths. None of this is especially easy, and most of today's top players have spent anywhere from 10 to 20 years honing their skills. Backgammon's finely-tuned balance between luck and skill is precisely what makes it a popular and enduring game, and the best two-player gambling game ever devised. Eliminate some of the luck, and the wild swings become less wild, the game is less exciting, the poor players lose too quickly, and the game dies. Add more luck, and the big swings become too commonplace, the good players win too infrequently, and they drift away, and the game dies. Sorry, but ideas to "reduce the luck" in backgammon don't get any applause from this corner. --Bill Robertie

Did you find the information in this article useful?

Do you have any comments you'd like to add?