New droppers

[Yvon]

Of course?  Why of course?

You were asked to use the same nick here as you do on fibs when you registered, why would I naturally think that you didn't do that?

Because they don't play equally skilled players all day, they are predominantly playing weaker players, and therefore win more often.  Obviously if they played with you exclusively and were still rated 2000+, they would have to be cheating  


And since you are now playing some other game than backgammon, I have lost interest.

Diane my dear, the "of course" was meant to mean you would have known me if my nick at Fibs was Yvon. If English is your native language please rephrase it for me. Let's not split hairs now shall we? btw I was never asked to use the same nick while registering in this forum...

As for the explanation you gave I am sorry to say but it is wrong.. think about it.

And finally I did not like the insinuation in your last sentence.

I honestly and without fear told my opinion,  yes i am  non beleiver, in the middle ages they would call me a heretic take me to the Inquisition and burn me on fire.

Guilty as charged i.e

[jackdaddy]

Me three, but only after guessing this is amarganth.

[diane]

Me three, but only after guessing this is amarganth.

No, I met armaganth, nice guy - no paranoid twit     

[Yvon]

Yeah, a nice pack of name callers....

[socksey]

I have a suggestion.     If you don't like Fibs players and you don't like Fibs dice, get out!     We're overcrowded as it is, and your exit would be appreciated.      Patti runs Fibs and has enough headaches without the likes of you complainers.    

socksey



"Having a child is surely the most beautifully irrational act that two people in love can commit." - Bill Cosby

[Yvon]

I have a suggestion.    If you don't like Fibs players and you don't like Fibs dice, get out!    We're overcrowded as it is, and your exit would be appreciated.     Patti runs Fibs and has enough headaches without the likes of you complainers.    

socksey



"Having a child is surely the most beautifully irrational act that two people in love can commit." - Bill Cosby

I also have a suggestion:Learn to read and make sure you UNDERSTAND what you 've read.
There are special courses for that in case you can't manage.

[socksey]

Perhaps you should take your own advice, Yvon.     I don't recall mentioning any names in my post.  It was meant as a generality but directed mainly at the one who did complain about the people of Fibs.  Take it or leave it.  Your choice. 

socksey



"Kites rise highest against the wind -- not with it." - Winston Churchill

[Yvon]

....

[rebcalale]

Atually THERE IS a way to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the dice at FIBS is neutral.
Playing through password protected  file containing the rolls. The file been emailed to both players before the start of the match, the password been emailed ONLY after the game is finished. WINRAR is known to  produced such password protected files, even the author of WINRAR states he cannot open a file unless he knows the password.
I suggested this some time ago.... the answer i got was "it's difficult".

Well...

Here's one experiment you can do to check FIBS dice:
Use 2 different clients. Login to Fibs with 2 different nicks. With each of your client watch a different matches. Record the dice when rolls appear either simulltaneously or say max 0.5sec from each other.
See anything strange?

R u on drugs  this is a ridiculus response

Edited by Diane to make it clear that this was a quote, not a repeat of a previous post.

[Yvon]

No, but from your symptoms I would say your problem is more complicated than a simple chasing disorder.

[rebcalale]

Don't really know Yvon yet, but rebcale is just your everyday dice whiner.  But you knew that.  (c:

At least and I know this will be difficult for you, get my name right.  However anyone who is honest and wants to understand, knows my statements are right on the money.  In other words, those who want to call me a winner prove your position instead of blatant name calling.  This response is just another confirmation that my position is correct. As I write this I have yet to see any scientific evidence that FIbs dice r legit and as I stated before, this will not ever be seen here.  WHY? simpley u can't push a rope.  In other words u can't offer proof for something that has no basis on fact.   

[stog]

good job it isn't a money server if the dices r twisted

[diane]

As I write this I have yet to see any scientific evidence that FIbs dice r legit and as I stated before, this will not ever be seen here.  WHY? simpley u can't push a rope.  In other words u can't offer proof for something that has no basis on fact.   

What you cant do, ever, is satisfy someone who does not wish to be satisfied.  This is why we, at fibsboard, mostly don't bother with this.  But once in a while, it is interesting to go and see what is new, or the same, in the wide world of dice whining....

If you do a simple google search, you will rapidly end up at rgb....but I will speed that up for you http://www.bkgm.com/rgb/rgb.cgi?view+10


There you will find a long list of articles which had to be written to satisfy a long list of 'this or that electronic backgammon game/software cheats with the dice'

Have fun reading your proof....personally, that list in itself is enough to satisfy me that humans wouldn't know a random roll if it took the top of their head off...Simians are built to see patterns - our very survival depends on it ['there will be food here in a few weeks, cos that happened the same last year' - that sort of thing]


   

Dice on backgammon servers  (Hank Youngerman, July 2001) 
    Does Agushak Backgammon cheat?  (Mr Nabutovsky, June 2000) 
    Does BG by George cheat?  (George Sutty, Nov 1995) 
    Does Cybergammon cheat?  (Goto Informatique, Aug 1996) 
    Does David's Backgammon cheat?  (Joseph B. Calderone, June 1998) 
    Does GNU Backgammon cheat?  (Robert-Jan Veldhuizen, Nov 2002) 
    Does Gammontool cheat?  (Jim Hurley, Sept 1991) 
    Does Hyper-Gammon cheat?  (ZZyzx, June 1996) 
    Does Jellyfish cheat?  (Fredrik Dahl, June 1997) 
    Does MVP Backgammon cheat?  (Mark Betz, Oct 1996) 
    Does MonteCarlo cheat?  (Matt Reklaitis, June 1998) 
    Does Motif cheat?  (Rick Kiesau+, Mar 2004)  [Long message]
    Does Motif cheat?  (Billie Patterson, Feb 2003) 
    Does Motif cheat?  (Robert D. Johnson, Oct 1996) 
    Does Snowie cheat?  (André Nicoulin, Sept 1998) 
    Does TD-Gammon cheat?  (Gerry Tesauro, Feb 1997) 
    FIBS: Analysis of 10 million rolls  (Stephen Turner, Apr 1997)  [Recommended reading]
    FIBS: Are the dice biased?  (Kit Woolsey, Oct 1996) 
    FIBS: Entering from the bar  (Tom Keith+, Apr 1997) 
    GamesGrid: Too many jokers?  (Gregg Cattanach, Sept 2001) 
    Jellyfish: How to check the dice  (John Goodwin, May 1998)  [Recommended reading]
    Jellyfish: Proof it doesn't cheat  (Gary Wong, July 1998) 
    MSN Zone: Security flaw  (happyjuggler0, June 2004) 
    Official complaint form  (Gary Wong, June 1998)  [Recommended reading]
    Synopsis of "cheating" postings  (Ray Karmo, Feb 2002) 
    Testing for bias  (Kit Woolsey, Jan 1995) 
    The dice sure seem unfair!  (Michael Sullivan, Apr 2004) 
    Too many repeated rolls?  (Stephen Turner, Mar 1994) 
    Winning and losing streaks  (Daniel Murphy, Mar 1998) 

[jackdaddy]

Thanks Diane. I like this one from Kit... http://www.bkgm.com/rgb/rgb.cgi?view+52

I have no objections to people stating that they think the dice on FIBS
are biased, even though I disagree with them.  It's a free world on the
internet, and such points of view do spark interest and perhaps will show
that there is some bias.  I do hope, however, that these people will make
more of an effort to substantiate their case with proper testing, rather
than mentioning a few isolated runs of good or bad luck or expressing
their feelings that the dice are biased.

My main reason for writing this is to persuade FIBS players not to let
their game be affected by thinking that the dice are unfair.  Once you
start to believe there is something wrong with the dice it is very easy
to think you should distort your play in order to compensate for the
dice, and the results will not be good.

[dorbel]

Actually you can prove that the dice have no bias. Here's how. Unbiased dice are unpredictable. The chances of any given number appearing next turn are the same as for any other. If they are predictable, then those who can predict them can make money betting on the next number, much as a roulette player could if he knew that number 13 say, was more likely to appear than any other. When those who say that the dice are predictable are offered the opportunity to bet, they don't take it, even though the queue of those willing to take their wager stretches around the block.
If people won't bet on a sure thing, it isn't a sure thing. QED.

[Yvon]

I would agree with Woolsey's article that

"It should be noted that statistical tests can't prove anything one way or
the other; they can only give us indications."

I wonder whether anyone has ever tried to make statistics. Bear in mind that statistics that simply target the randomness of rolls are totally useless. Assume that someone has the means to cheat, s/he would most propably just need  one joker roll per game. That joker roll differs from game to game therefore in the overall the randomness of rols still remains INTACT.

You need statistics for each and every parameter of the game separately. These are some of the main ones:
a)  Getting off  bar statistics.
b)  Statistics from the point the "confrontation game" is over until end of bearoff.
c)  Statistics on the first few rolls
d)  Joker statistics over total availability of jokers.

The first 2 are relatively easy to do. In fact I have already made an Excel macro for "A".
Here's an example:  (attached below)



It doesn't need a rocket scientist to realize that both players were actually lucky regarding this very SPECIFIC parameter.Therefore Red cannot complain for bad luck in getting off the bar. What costed him the game was the too many rounds on bar, and the critical round #5 where he got 2 on bar. However there are times this parameter is critical. A 60% success over a total availbility of 50% for player X, compared with a 40% success over the same availability for player Y is usually decissive for X winning the game.

B)This is fairly easy to do. 10 + pips difference while it is your turn to play should normally win you the game. The same of course is valid for the opponent. Notice this statistic cannot apply on a game to game basis but on the total number of games you played.

C)  Here you have to decide which rolls are critical to secure an initial advantage within the first say 3 rolls. 33s, 11s ,22s 31, 42 etc. Then make your statistics accordingly.

In the end as Woolsey said you will end up with just indications, no solid evidence whatsoever....

There can only be one solid evidence  for internet backgammon and that is a password secured file containig rolls. Each new game starts from next available roll in file, so the set of rolls for each player is unpredictable.

[socksey]

That all sounds way too complicated for fun and I prefer fun first.     I'll take my chances like everyone else.   

socksey



"The biggest sin is sitting on your ass." – Florynce Kennedy

[rebcalale]

Too bad calling me a liar and stuff... At a time that I alllll...most started respecting you dorbel.Well I am not geissenpeter if that's important for you. Why don't you  all  just stop and listen carefully for a moment. I 've seen many people complaining about the dice at FIBS. Most of them newbies and most of them on on wrong grounds. In fact when I personally first complained in this forum they called me newbie, and the fact was, I was a newbie then, so i had no defence. Now I have, and I have hard evidence that I can use any time I wish. It's like holding the cube if you like So for the moment I will just continue "holding the cube" without revealing my nicks at fibs...

The SUSPICION though about the dice at FIBS is still there and THERE IS NO WAY to remove it unless the runners of FIBS convince us otherwise by providing evidence that goes beyond any reasonable  doubt. I already proposed one way to do it perhaps there are other ways, i don't know. Such assurances that the rolls come directly from Fibs server, or watch the rolls getting generated through Telnet etc etc cannot convince me.

I know very well how the bots play. Yes they play at top level so we agree on that. What I disagree with you, is your absolute conviction that they generally play better than the BEST human players.
I keep my reservations.

As always talk is cheap there is no evidence that fibs rolls r legit?  I'm guessing there is a simple reason ; because the facts r clear, FIbs dice are biased and this results in absurd rolls.   Use GNU, ranked players have just as many questionable moves as anyone else and yet somehow, more often than not, FIBS dice favor ranked players and BOTS.  Guess what, BOTs can and do  leverage biased rolls.  Lets stop the cheap talk  PUT UP OR SHUT UP!!!!!

_{edit: rebcalale, could you please put your own text OUTSIDE the quote tags, thank you - Zorba}

[dorbel]

Along with David Icke I firmly believe that Prince Phillip is a shape-changing lizard from the planet Zog. He and Prince Charles, who is also an alien, receive their instructions from an UFO that hovers nightly over Buckingham Palace.
I challenge you to provide proof that this isn't so. You can't? Hah!

[Yvon]

Along with David Icke I firmly believe that Prince Phillip is a shape-changing lizard from the planet Zog. He and Prince Charles, who is also an alien, receive their instructions from an UFO that hovers nightly over Buckingham Palace.
I challenge you to provide proof that this isn't so. You can't? Hah!

Hah! We have a stalemate now! Score 1/2-1/2 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalemate