At some time you have to stop programming and make a bundle. In spite the version number changes only from 2.9.0 to 2.9.2 close to 20,000 additional lines of code are included.

40+ features

50+ fixes

8 usability improvements

Features

the AI: the cube play was improved, fixed an error that led occasionally to weaker moves, improved heuristics, asymmetric cube live values in money play. In total a measurable improvement in the benchmarks (about 0.3 PR in sum)

More AI: I changed the move selection in the weaker levels. I was never really satisfied with the weaker levels. Top-moves followed by stupid ones.... I believe the new algorithm plays weaker in a more human way and the level of strength are carefully adjusted, about 3 PR difference between each level.

a new elegant Theme "Felt and Leather Green 4K/Retina" for large displays was donated by Markus Steinhilber

in the analyser you can configure the thresholds and select levels to skip with the next error button (so you see only the serious ones)

the running PR so far is displayed in the tooltip of the Real-Time-Tutor<

added the Romanian variant Tables which differs by having no backgammons and no cube.

the notation of all moves uses now the most widespread format

the new default match database contains now more than 300 matches of well known players, historic matches but also very recent ones as the UBC 2021 final.

an new feature, the "All Score Map" as a first attempt (feedback appreciated) where the cube decision is shown for all scores.

more random number generators, Ian Dunstans PR2 MET-table added, Esperanto as a new language, some more look & feels, a version for the RasperryPI 4 (just ask), in total more than 40 features and about a dozen usability improvements.

More than 50 bugfixes in total and about 10 serious ones

Some usability improvements, most notably the usage of a dice panel instead of drop down boxes and the best move dialog indicates the moves with arrows. And MacOS installation is Drag&Drop for recent MacOS versions

I appreciate feedback a lot.

You'll find it here:

Windows 64-Bit: https://bgblitz.com/download/win/Bgblitz_2_9_2_setup.exe

MacOS >= 10.10: https://bgblitz.com/download/macx/Bgblitz_2.9.2.dmg

Linux: https://bgblitz.com/download/linux/bgblitz_installer_292.jar

have fun!

If you don’t want to get this kind of emails anymore, just send me a short note.

best

Frank

P.S: BGBlitz has nothing to do with "Backgammon Blitz" on Steam and Playstation. I was told on reddit that it plays weak. No idea why they could come up with a name of their own...

On February 24, 2022 at 3:28:25 PM UTC-7, bgbl...@googlemail.com wrote:

> 40+ features
> 50+ fixes
> 8 usability improvements Features
> the AI: the cube play was improved

Bla bla bla...

> More than 50 bugfixes in total and about 10 serious ones

Now, this is noteworthy! There were that many bugs in the
previous version? Meaning it was such a pile of garbage?
Why should anyone not assume that your improved bot
will not have twicw as many, 100 bugs with 20 serious...?

> I appreciate feedback a lot.

Your bot isn't woth shit!

And you don't know how to market.

You need to get support from people like Simbad by giving
them commissions/incentives.

You need to give your software for free to people like Chow,
Mocky and me... :) and get free publicity by good reviews.

Then you need to give it for free to anyone who send you
their XG registration keys, which at thay point would become
invalid, forcing them to switch to your piece of shit bot.

I had offered some advice to you before and if you had
heeded any of it, you might have at lest me as a customer
for your bot but now you will probably have zero (at least
as far as new customers).

Go on. Keep jacking off imroving the doubling formula in
your bot... What a moron... :(

MK

MK schrieb am Montag, 28. Februar 2022 um 12:15:35 UTC+1:
> On February 24, 2022 at 3:28:25 PM UTC-7, bgbl...@googlemail.com wrote:
>
> > 40+ features
> > 50+ fixes
> > 8 usability improvements Features
> > the AI: the cube play was improved
> Bla bla bla...
Your feedback as one of the most credible and authorative persons in the BG community is highly appreciated.

> > More than 50 bugfixes in total and about 10 serious ones
> Now, this is noteworthy! There were that many bugs in the
> previous version? Meaning it was such a pile of garbage?

It seems like your living in a universe where software doesn't have errors. Or you simply have not the slightest clue about software development. Can't decide which one is true.
For all others: BGBlitz contains currently of about 230.000 lines of code. 50 errors means 1 error every 4000 lines of code (4000 lines printed are about 60 sheets of paper. Who can write 60 sheets of paper without an error? O.K. National Geographics, who else?), which is pretty damned good. And most "errors" are stuff like xprop called on non unix systems which had no consequences except wasting a few CPU cycles.

> Why should anyone not assume that your improved bot
> will not have twicw as many, 100 bugs with 20 serious...?
There are people that assume the earth is flat. I can't do anything about that.

> > I appreciate feedback a lot.
> Your bot isn't woth shit!
I'm very happy that at least a few people on this globe have a different opionion. Naturally your detailled arguments weigh heavy.

>
> And you don't know how to market.
Yes, that is absolutely correct. And I don't care. I do BGBlitz because I like to do it. I'm glad if some people like it too and if not it is perfectly ok for me.

> You need to get support from people like Simbad by giving
> them commissions/incentives.
No I don't need to do anything.

> I had offered some advice to you before and if you had
Oh, that was a good one! ! Nearly spilled my coffee over the keyboard. YMMD..

> Go on. Keep jacking off imroving the doubling formula in
> your bot... What a moron... :(
As I said before: I would be *really* concerned if I get accolade by you.

On Monday, 28 February 2022 at 14:49:00 UTC, bgbl...@googlemail.com wrote:

> > Your bot isn't woth shit!
> I'm very happy that at least a few people on this globe have a different opionion. Naturally your detailled arguments weigh heavy.
> >

Your bot pulls the plug when it's losing, doesn't it?

Some GnuDung excuse about 16% of games have to end this way due to the licence?

Just program your code to take progressively longer and longer to make it's move on the freebie licence.......don't bail out when your useless bot is getting thrashed.

Come on man, use that fat thing sat on your shoulders.

Nasti Chestikov schrieb am Montag, 28. Februar 2022 um 18:48:06 UTC+1:
> Your bot pulls the plug when it's losing, doesn't it?
As someone that posts on a BG forum you should have a rough idea what a probabilty is. Interrupting a game when the bot is loosing is quite on the same level as "the bot always rolls what it needs"

> Some GnuDung excuse about 16% of games have to end this way due to the licence?
For what good reason? Arguing that I would program to avoid loosing is so puberty minded. If I would cheat than in favour of the human.....

> Just program your code to take progressively longer and longer to make it's move on the freebie licence.......don't bail out when your useless bot is getting thrashed.
This is an nice alternative. Maybe I think about it's pros and cons.

> Come on man, use that fat thing sat on your shoulders.
Do you communicate in RL on a similar respectful and positive way? Just curious.

On Monday, February 28, 2022 at 8:30:50 PM UTC, bgbl...@googlemail.com wrote:
> Nasti Chestikov schrieb am Montag, 28. Februar 2022 um 18:48:06 UTC+1:
> > Your bot pulls the plug when it's losing, doesn't it?
> As someone that posts on a BG forum you should have a rough idea what a probabilty is. Interrupting a game when the bot is loosing is quite on the same level as "the bot always rolls what it needs"
> > Some GnuDung excuse about 16% of games have to end this way due to the licence?
> For what good reason? Arguing that I would program to avoid loosing is so puberty minded. If I would cheat than in favour of the human.....
> > Just program your code to take progressively longer and longer to make it's move on the freebie licence.......don't bail out when your useless bot is getting thrashed.
> This is an nice alternative. Maybe I think about it's pros and cons.
> > Come on man, use that fat thing sat on your shoulders.
> Do you communicate in RL on a similar respectful and positive way? Just curious.

I don't think so. His real name is Murat Kalinyaprak.
There's plenty there if you want to google him.

Paul

On February 28, 2022 at 7:49:00 AM UTC-7, bgbl...@googlemail.com wrote:

> It seems like your living in a universe where software doesn't
> have errors. Or you simply have not the slightest clue about
> software development. Can't decide which one is true.

Ha ha! :) If you only knew that I was first employed as a
computer programmer in January 1980.

> For all others: BGBlitz contains currently of about 230.000 lines
> of code. 50 errors means 1 error every 4000 lines of code (4000
> lines printed are about 60 sheets of paper. Who can write 60
> sheets of paper without an error? O.K. National Geographics,
> who else?), which is pretty damned good.

Number of lines of code by itself doesn't prove anything
except perhaps being bloated, convoluted, buggy product
of mediocricy and incompetence.

These comments reminded me of the full-featured real
estate multiple-listing software that I had developed in
1993, single-handedly in about 2.5 months. I had a web
site for it until 2000. I still have the files but it doesn't
look right in modern browsers. It will only take a minor
effort to add a style-sheet to it, which I will do when I
find time, for the sole pleasure of reminiscing. I will
post a link to it here later.

I sold my server version for $10,000 and a good number
of broker/agent client versions for $1,000/$500. (Compare
that to your bg bot or other software of yours). The local
MLS dropped its multi-user dumb-terminal Xenix system
and switched to my networked PC's system and used it
for many years until it was dissolved. Unfortunately
I couldn't sell it to neighboring or other MLS's because of
my software being too good in a way. Telling MLS's that
it would cut their staff and modem lines in half was the
wrong marketing approach. They wanted to increase
their budgets, employess, phone lines, etc. and brag about
how they paid $150,000 for a software that didn't even
offer color pictures when mine did. Anyway, to stop my
uncontrolled ranting here, let me just say that you have
no idea whom you are talking to...

MK

On 3/03/2022 11:35 am, MK wrote:

> On February 28, 2022 at 7:49:00 AM UTC-7, bgbl...@googlemail.com wrote:
>
>> It seems like your living in a universe where software doesn't
>> have errors. Or you simply have not the slightest clue about
>> software development. Can't decide which one is true.
>
> Ha ha! :) If you only knew that I was first employed as a
> computer programmer in January 1980.

Such a shame you didn't bother keeping those skills up.

You might have some clue about what Frank and Axel talk about
if you had. Things have changed a bit since 1980 but you seem
stuck in the past, Murat, determined to remain ignorant at all
costs.

On March 2, 2022 at 6:50:48 PM UTC-7, Simon Woodhead wrote:

> On 3/03/2022 11:35 am, MK wrote:

>> Ha ha! :) If you only knew that I was first employed as a
>> computer programmer in January 1980.

> Such a shame you didn't bother keeping those skills up.
> You might have some clue about what Frank and Axel talk about
> if you had. Things have changed a bit since 1980 but you seem
> stuck in the past, Murat, determined to remain ignorant at all
> costs.

What are you talking about? My real estate software was
in use until past year 2000. Then I switched to developing
web sites in hand coded html until today. People's interests
change over time. Details of technology change but the
basics remain mostly the same, thus experience is just as
important, especially in analysis and design, leaving the
brute coding to younger, lesser capables.

Last nite I spent a little time to make my Realty Vision site
decently viewable. if you take a look at it, keeping in mind
that it was 1993 and the days of Windows 95, 2400 baud
modems, infancy of internet, etc. I think you will be impressed
that a single person could develop such a complex software
in 2.5 months (and improve later, of course). The capability
is still in me. I can still code if I want to but while pursuing
20 different interests at the same time, it's hard to excel in
any one of them but that's okay with me at this stage of my
life.

Still, Frank's approach to software (specificly bg bots) is
way more obsolete than I could ever be. I have been asking
for years here for assistance in developing radically different
bg bots to no avail. I have been accumulating scribblings
about a bg bot which I would call "lego-bg-bot" and push
comes to shove, I may take a stab at such an "infinitely
reconfigurable bot" myself just for the satisfaction of
showing up the asses of sick gambler math phd's (I assume
you to be one of them).

As for Axel, he can't even point to his dumb ass but he has
the audacity to call himself a mathematician. Still, I'm making
disproportionate efforts to be nice to even the stupidest ones
among you just in order to utilize them to prove things to
themselves that I will never be able to prove to them.

For the 25+ years that I posted in RGB, I witheld bragging
about being intelligent, capable, etc. in software development
because I am against what I call "unearned credibility" in an
aread becaus of "earned credibility" in another area. If you
are a famous math phd and assert that zuccini increases
male potency in TV ads, would I give a shit? No. Neither do
I give a shit about sick gamblers' making assertions in the
areas of math related to backgammon even if they are math
phd's, machine learning programmers, etc. either.

Do you know how many centuries it took for the herds of
bovine scientists after Copernicus to finally acknowledge
the heliogentric universe (solar system)? My existance in
RGB is still just a fraction of that. You guys have plenty
of time yet. Take your times...

MK

On March 3, 2022 at 5:06:44 AM UTC-7, MK wrote:

> Last nite I spent a little time to make my Realty Vision site
> decently viewable. if you take a look at it....

Oops, forgot to give the link:

https://montanaonline.net/realtyvision

MK

On 3/03/2022 10:06 pm, MK wrote:

>> Such a shame you didn't bother keeping those skills up.
>> You might have some clue about what Frank and Axel talk about
>> if you had. Things have changed a bit since 1980 but you seem
>> stuck in the past, Murat, determined to remain ignorant at all
>> costs.
>
> What are you talking about?

Don't need your resume, Murat, we all have those.

The point is, you don't have the skills to compile gnubg, yet you're
always demanding others run experiments for you. So before you go
bagging the efforts of Frank, Axel, the gnubg team and Xavier, maybe
you should consider learning how it all works and running your own
experiments to prove your hypotheses? You might gain some credibility
that way. Just sayin'

MKs attitude to bg-bots reminds me to that:

Radio: there is a wrong driver on the highway 88
MK: One? Hundreds!!

On March 3, 2022 at 5:37:48 AM UTC-7, Simon Woodhead wrote:

> On 3/03/2022 10:06 pm, MK wrote:
>>> Things have changed a bit since 1980 but you seem stuck in
>>> the past, Murat, determined to remain ignorant at all costs.

>> What are you talking about?

> Don't need your resume, Murat, we all have those.

As I said, I didn't volunteer it but in response to the comments
that "I have not the slightest clue about software development"
and that "I seem stuck in the past and determined to remain
ignorant at all costs", I have been nice to give you an example
so that you will have a clue about my software capabilities. My
resumee has lots more but you don't need to know since I enjoy
being retired and am not looking for work.

> The point is, you don't have the skills to compile gnubg,

Again, you don't know that but more importantly challenging
someone to an uncecessarily difficult task of compiling piles
and piles of garbage code in a nerdy operating system may
well prove that it's just that but not necessarily prove the lack
of someone's competence. Gnubg-bug forum has always been
full of people complaining and asking help about this very issue.

> yet you're always demanding others run experiments for you.

I already explained that one reason for this is that my running
experiment have not been effective in the past, because you
guys are so deeply, religously "indogtrained" about the "cube
skill bullshit". Thus, the best or only way for me to convince
you "flock" is to make you convince yourselves. This has been
proven true with Tim's (colleague's) and Axel's experiments...

> So before you go bagging the efforts of Frank, Axel, the gnubg
> team and Xavier, maybe you should consider learning how it
> all works and running your own experiments to prove your
> hypotheses? You might gain some credibility that way.

Fair enough and I'm trying just that in two different ways. One
is mathematically, like Axel claimed that hypotheses can be
proven theories that way. Even though I'm not a math PHD,
I try my best to communicate and offer logical arguments to
go with it. If sick gambler math PHD's make a similar efforts
to understand me, they may (I believe they will and they did)
become compelled to do their own calculations and run their
own experiments in order to find answers to questions that I
may succeed in implanting in their heads.

Two is by experimenting and observing. Knowing how machine
learning works is not critically important at all. In fact, doing it
wrong will be worse by resulting in a bad bot. Even if the bot is
halfway decent, running rollouts with the bot playing against
itself is plain asinine!

I have ran manual experiments significant enough for me but
for more convincing results longer experiments with bots are
needed. I may eventually tacle developing what I will call a
"lego-bg-bot" on my own. It's just that it would be ten times
easier and faster if some people who already have mastery
of existing bot code would help me with it.

The bots from the people you mentioned above are "all" like
toy trains on short circular tracks. I'm envisioning a bot as a
"real learning tool" through creative playing like with legos.

For example, when you guys discuss positions here, often
times you also discuss variants of it by rearranging checkers.
For the same reason that you guys do this, after analysing a
position, I want to be able to analyse a variant in a different
way, by leaving the checkers where they are and modifying
instead the equity numbers. If you don't see any use in doing
such things, you're perfectly entitled to live happily ever after
with XG, GNUBG, etc. I on the other hand have a mind that
never stops asking questions and trying to find answers to
them, without even concern whether the answers will have
any use or not. To each his own....

MK

On March 3, 2022 at 3:38:10 PM UTC-7, bgbl...@googlemail.com wrote:

> MKs attitude to bg-bots reminds me to that:
> Radio: there is a wrong driver on the highway 88
> MK: One? Hundreds!!

Did you even notice my comment about Copernicus?
If you didn't, here is another way (your way):

Radio: there is a wrong driver on the highway 66
Copernicus: One? Thousands!!

After his book "De revolutionibus" was published in 1543,
his heliocentric universe theory gained general acceptance
among astronomers/mathematicians/scientists/etc. only
after Newton's "Principia" (giving credibility to his theory)
was published in 1687, about 150 years later.

After that, it took about another 150 years for his book, along
with Galileo's book about him, to be taken off the Church's list
of forbidden books in 1835.

You guys need 300 years also? It's okay with me...

MK

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 9:21:45 AM UTC-3, MK wrote:
> On March 3, 2022 at 5:06:44 AM UTC-7, MK wrote:
>
> > Last nite I spent a little time to make my Realty Vision site
> > decently viewable. if you take a look at it....
>
> Oops, forgot to give the link:
>
> https://montanaonline.net/realtyvision
>
> MK

I enjoyed navigating your RV site, and congratulate you for it. Much care and passion must have been invested there.

Yet a number of typos persisted all this time, so here goes my symbolic QA contribution to the site:
"countless other features that you can disco_w_er in the following pages."
:-( on the presentation page, no less! )

Didn't make a complete trip all over, but there seems to be around 2 mistakes per page on average.

(Why did I even take the time for this, must have triggered reminiscences :-)

On Monday, 28 February 2022 at 20:30:50 UTC, bgbl...@googlemail.com wrote:
> Do you communicate in RL on a similar respectful and positive way? Just curious.

I'm 6 foot 7lbs and weigh 36 stone, I can say what I want when I want in real life, if snotty assed punks fancy their chances then one punch usually (actually, always) reminds them of their place in the scheme of things.

But my height and weight has no relevance here - don't be jerking my chain when I'm whipping your bot's ass by pretending that "oh, actually, 16% of games finish early".

If you're going to offer a freebie licence, good........just make the bot play slower and slower and slower.

Now come on, up your game man, it's not difficult.

On Saturday, March 5, 2022 at 12:45:15 PM UTC-5, Nasti Chestikov wrote:
> On Monday, 28 February 2022 at 20:30:50 UTC, bgbl...@googlemail.com wrote:
> > Do you communicate in RL on a similar respectful and positive way? Just curious.
> I'm 6 foot 7lbs and weigh 36 stone, I can say what I want when I want in real life, if snotty assed punks fancy their chances then one punch usually (actually, always) reminds them of their place in the scheme of things.
>
> But my height and weight has no relevance here - don't be jerking my chain when I'm whipping your bot's ass by pretending that "oh, actually, 16% of games finish early".
>
> If you're going to offer a freebie licence, good........just make the bot play slower and slower and slower.
>
> Now come on, up your game man, it's not difficult.

Where in the world uses 'stone' as weight and doesn't use the metric system? Well, that's giving you the benefit of the doubt that you meant 6'7" tall and not '6 foot 7lbs and weigh 36 stone' [sic]. Weighing both 7 lbs and 36 stone at the same time is quite impressive. Something about it's not difficult ...

One Snotty Assed Punk

On March 5, 2022 at 6:45:16 PM UTC-7, Stick Rice wrote:

> On March 5, 2022 at 12:45:15 PM UTC-5, Nasti Chestikov wrote:

>> I'm 6 foot 7lbs and weigh 36 stone.....

> ..... giving you the benefit of the doubt that you meant 6'7" tall
> and not '6 foot 7lbs and weigh 36 stone' [sic].

Maybe he is a stick man or a stick scarecrow or something..?

> Weighing both 7 lbs and 36 stone at the same time is quite
> impressive.

I agree that it would be. One stone being 14 pounds, being
504 pounds would already be impressive enough without
the additional 7 pounds. :-o

Punnily fitting your nickname, although as a word by itself
it's less precise than a "rod" or a "pole", when specified as
yard or meter, "stick" can be a common length measure also.

So, assuming that your assuming that he meant he was 6'7",
he would be 2.1944 yard sticks or 2.0066 meter sticks tall...

Queerly enough, "stick" can also be a weigth measure, such
as a "stick of butter" being 4 ounces.

So, taking his word that he really weighs 7 pounds, that would
make him weigh 28 butter sticks.

And also taking his word that he is 6 feet tall, we can say that
he is 2 sticks tall and weighs 28 sticks.

Har har... :))

> One Snotty Assed Punk

I'm not sure if I want to get into this one as deeply, since it can
get pretty dirty but I can't just pass it up altogether either.

So let me just say that with blowing one's snotty nose in public
being embarrassing enough, I hope that you won't ever have to
blow you snotty ass in public... ;)

MK

On March 5, 2022 at 7:04:18 AM UTC-7, Grunty wrote:

> On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 9:21:45 AM UTC-3, MK wrote:

>> https://montanaonline.net/realtyvision

> I enjoyed navigating your RV site, and congratulate you for it.

And you made my day with your friendly, praising feedback
for a change among all those constantly hostile, attacking
ones from most others on almost all subjects.

> Much care and passion must have been invested there.

I loved designing and developing software for sure but I
and my gf/wife had both just quit our technical jobs and
moved to Montana, wanting to live a rural life out of the
Country Magazine, operating a plant nursery or a cherry
orhard. While looking for properties, I made many friends
with real estate people and fell right back into software
development to help them out and to start out easy by
making a living with something I knew how to do well.

The first version was developed in 2.5 months, working
until wee hours, using the sewing machine as my desk.

We never got to raise cherries but thanks to the income
from my software, we were able to build a new house on
acreage, have and breed horses, goats, chickens, cat, dog,
etc.. and live our dream at least for 5-6 years together.

> Yet a number of typos persisted all this time, so here....

That was a hastily made web site in 2000 and never got
updated. Ironically, even as my software had a spelling
checker, Windows Notepad didn't... :) Have you looked
at the source code of any page to see how spartan it is?
I still code strictly using Notepad. Also, of course, my
English ASL was even worse back then... ;)

The web site was in hopes to reach beyond the local
market which never realized. Potential customers' first
question was "What if you get run over by a truck?". As
I never wanted to operate anything more complicated
than a one-man show it all came to a stall. For a brief
while I tried to sell the whole thing and then abandoned
it in order to pursue other projects. :(
> (Why did I even take the time for this, must have
> triggered reminiscences :-)

I hope you don't regret it(?). The fact that someone not
just took a quick look at it but also read some of it made
me want to go back and read it all myself. It is just brief
enumerations/descriptions of the features/functions but
it still took me over an hour to read all pages. Wow! May
I be allowed to say that, having forgotten the details of it,
I was impressed myself (it should be okay for me to brag
a little also while everyone else are bragging about their
abilities to develop bg bots, etc.)

One needs to be real estate broker to really appreciate
the capabilities of that software. Granted, I didn't reinvent
the wheel and used already available compression and
communications libraries or other widgets, but it was an
all comprehensive multiple listing, agent productivity, etc.
software. Even had an Intuit Quicken compatible accounting
module! I'm pretty sure that if it were recompiled today for
the current OS's, with minor updates/improvements, it still
could compete with what's out there today. (I can make
this statement because I'm still involved with real estate
businesses and know what software are available to them).

How is all this relevant to BG? If I could focus my time and
energy the same way towards a BG bot today, I feel that I
could produce one better than anything that currently exists.
And the fact that I may not be able to it myself single handedly,
doesn't mean that my vision and advice based on experience
can't be useful to some others who may want to do the work.

MK

On Sunday, 6 March 2022 at 01:45:16 UTC, Stick Rice wrote:
>
> One Snotty Assed Punk

Hmmm,

"Stick Rice can be seen in many of the ABT events, often with his long time partner and new Giants of Backgammon inductee Matt Cohn-Grier"

from https://bkgm.com/articles/MastersOfBG/Biographies/

I guessed as much. Your profile pic on that site looks more like George Michael than George Michael ever did.

Your "ass" being snotty is the least of your problems I suspect. But that's a matter for your doctor and you, not this newsgroup.

I imagine that you must be very proud of yourself?

Now get back under your bridge or I'll fetch the hose. And neither of us wants that, now, do we?