Backgammon Chouettes

Chouettes

Chouette cube strategy

From:   Stanley E. Richards
Address:   srichards@ameritech.net
Date:   7 March 2011
Subject:   Live Tournament Observations
Forum:   BGonline.org Forums

This weekend in Chicago, I listened to players who explained that the social aspect of backgammon is its greatest benefit. I had the opportunity to dine with excellent players whose posts have been educational. I have been a serious backgammon player for 8 years, but my lack of live play has limited my knowledge. I decided to not hide my gross ignorance due to my online player status. I asked, "What is a chouette?" Everybody at the table gasped, "Whoa!!" Later that evening I watched a chouette and understood the rules. Chouettes are perhaps the best game for social interaction between enthusiastic backgammon players. Now during this $10-per-point chouette, the following position occurred. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | O | | O X X X | X | | | X X X | X | | | X X X | X | | | | X | | | | X | | | | | | X | | | | | | | | | O | +---+ | | | O O O O O O | | 2 | | | | O O O O O O | +---+ +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 O doubled. Should X take? The technical competitive side of me was stunned. The box player dropped this cube and I immediately stated, "Hey, that was a take!" There was no question in my mind. One of backgammon basics is if there is a difference of five men off and one player is closed off on the bar, then that is a double/take. The box player knew that it was probably a take. He explained that if his karma was so bad to allow a late hit to lose a game that he preferred to just drop. I considered his explanation and the stakes involved. I knew without a doubt that it was a take. Nevertheless, I suspected that I would drop this cube instead of risking $120 versus three opponents. The chouettes gambling aspect would entice me to knowingly make a significant error. If this was online gambling at any stake, I would take without delay. The difference is that with online gambling I expect to play hundreds of games in a relatively small amount of time. With the increased sample size, I know that I will be ahead if I take this cube. With entertaining, socially interactive chouettes, there will not be so many games. Thus, the law averages may not justify the take. The purpose of this post is to ask others if they believe live backgammon gambling may lead to intentional technical errors. Also, I would like more backgammon players to play online for money. I know that you love the social interaction of live play. What could influence you to play online for real money? Stanley

Rich Munitz writes:

I usually find the reverse in Chouettes -- that the box and captain tend to take passes. People want the opportunity to play in the box. As a result, the captain will often take cubes that are passes in order to retain the chance to win the box. A very strong player has future "box equity" by being in the box against the team. It is therefore often correct to sacrifice a small amount of equity in the current game in order to have a chance to gain the potentially large box equity. However, if mandatory extras are in use in the chouette, it tends to control really reckless taking by the captain (or gives them a chance to play against the entire field in the current game). Similarly, the box will tend to take deeply against the captain, while often dropping takes against some other players in order to limit risk. Of course in spite of egos, only half of the players are above average. When chouette rules permit, it is not unusual for the box to drop the strongest player(s) so that they cannot consult. It is also not unusual for the strongest player(s) to double somewhat early when a fish is captain so that they may consult. As to money management, if you feel pressured to drop a 4-cube against several players, you are playing for uncomfortably high stakes. There are 2 kinds of discomfort: financial and psychological. I've heard a good rule of thumb -- you should be prepared to lose 100 points in a session at the current stake. If you actually can't afford to lose 100 points because you won't be able to pay the mortgage or buy food, then don't play for that stake. Usually however, you really can afford such a loss, you are simply uncomfortable psychologically with facing such an outcome. The answer there is to get over it. Pissing away equity is pissing away equity. Once you realize that taking such a beating does not kill you, it makes you stronger. You can be the one pressuring your opponent to make mistakes rather than the other way around. Chouette play can be very interesting.

Steve Mellen writes:

Box equity is perennially overrated, particularly when you consider how it tends to play out in practice (you take a pass in hopes of gaining the box, then once you get there you take a pass in hopes of retaining the box, etc). Also, in a consulting chouette the strong player's edge in the box is greatly diminished. I think Kleinman suggested that most of a good player's profits come when there is a weak player in the box, particularly if you get to be the captain against him. One of the most common mistakes in chouette play is to play as though the goal is to be plus on the scoresheet at the end of the session. You can lose a lot of money by making "scoreboard passes" at +8 or "scoreboard takes" at -8. This is a natural human tendency -- after all, who knows when a pretty girl might glance at the scoresheet and decide to go home with whoever is the most plus -- but mathematically it's quite misguided. There is a reason why diagrams say "money play" and not "money play, you're -8 this session."

Did you find the information in this article useful?

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