From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Former good article Backgammon was one of the Sports and recreation good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
WikiProject Board and table games (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Board and table games, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to board games and tabletop games. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.7 (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
Checklist icon
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.


/Archive 1

legality of money play in USA[edit]

some states ban money play due to the use of dice, although there is no doubt that the game requires skill. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:52, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Backgammon and computers[edit]

Perhaps someone could create a computer backgammon page? Since there exist pages for individual backgammon-playing programs. I still don't understand how the programs work: when a computer makes a move, does it really simulate thousands of games to their completion and check what comes out best? And how does it do the rest of the simulation, bearing in mind that just dice rolls alone aren't enough, it has to work out the best move for every subsequent move by both players in each simulated game? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:07, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

there is no completely self-taught software available as of this date. and the bots that do exist show enormous errors at times. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:50, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

There is a section in this article for backgammon software; I don't know that a stand-alone article would be justified, but the current section could be expanded. Mr. Swordfish (talk) 14:39, 3 September 2014 (UTC)


Some threads on this page are eight years old. Anyone have any objection to auto-archiving this discussion page? Mr. Swordfish (talk) 20:31, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Looking at the section headers, I don't see anything that is still an open issue. I agree with archiving. But if it's easy to leave the last section out of the archive (Backgammon and computers), you might consider it for two reasons which I haven't the time to go into right now. Willondon (talk) 21:35, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
The auto archive bots accept settings to specify how to archive. For this talk page I'd suggest a 180 day retention period, i.e. any topic with no activity for 180 days goes to the archive. Recent and active discussions remain until they age out. The process is ongoing and automatic once configured. Mr. Swordfish (talk) 14:08, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
That sounds good to me.Willondon (talk) 18:01, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Auto archive has been implemented; 180 day age-out with a minimum of four threads remaining each time it runs. Mr. Swordfish (talk) 20:03, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Luck vs. Strategy[edit]

I have changed the following statement from the introductory section:

Although luck is involved and factors into the outcome, strategy plays a more important role in the long run.

Besides the fact that I was personally certain this was not correct, I went to the actual source provided for this statement, an article from entitled, "Backgammon Luck Vs. Backgammon Skill" In the first paragraph, it answers the question: The answer is simple: the closer the players are in ability, the more luck there is. In fact, if you take two players of identical skill level, it’s all luck!

I've changed the wording to reflect this, taking into consideration that it takes only a very short time for a player to learn the moves. Unschool 16:19, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

I let the edit stand, but I'm not convinced, especially after the quote "If you take two players of identical skill level, it’s all luck." That's a tautology isn't it? Saying that skill is an important factor means if skill levels are different, the outcome is likely to be affected. In any contest, if skill levels are identical, luck is going to be the remaining factor. Willondon (talk) 22:26, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

This page needs to be merged with Tables (board game)[edit]

This is the same game as Tables (board game). The two pages need to be merged and one of them turned into a redirect. Jobava-ro (talk page) 13:00, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

I disagree - they are similar, but not identical and in my opinion both are notable enough to warrant their own article. Please see the policy on merging articles. If you still think this is a candidate for a merge, you can follow the procedure outlined in the link above. Mr. Swordfish (talk) 15:52, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Sources for future article expansion[edit]

Seems like a well-done and well-sourced page, so will put these here until they're being used to verify content in the article

but, given that this is Wikipedia, it seems unlikely this article doesn't have any passages lifted wholesale from the EB11. If there are, we should go ahead and source it appropriately. — LlywelynII 07:13, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

External links[edit]

I'd like to suggest adding to the external links. It is a print and play backgammon set released under public domain (and thus, free). Other board game articles have links to the site, which I think can be helpful for newcomers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isacvale (talkcontribs) 20:58, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

This site does not appear to be a good source for further information, so I do not think we should link to it.-- (talk) 14:52, 1 November 2015 (UTC)