Always an England? Shinned by Dragons
This pioneering and thrilling week of backgammon has been a tremendous success so far with an electrifying snap, crackle and pop to the sport, with upsets, sagas and drama a plenty.
Home Nations Report Card
Seb Wilkinson’s withdrawal in the build-up was a jarring blow for England, as losing your biggest gun always is. But what remained was a squad full of superstars, albeit with a question mark over how “matchplay fit” one or two were.
What followed was a strangely disjointed performance hindered by some wicked reversals of fate. England fought hard on Day 1 to emerge at 2-2 – not great, but not terrible. But there was something rather anodyne and skittish about their play. One player ran their clock down to 1 minute (from 22), with just 4 points on the board – too profligate. Another resigned a gammon for match at 9-8 [11] with a 15.5% chance of saving it. Another neglected to cube post-Crawford at 9-10 with a huge crowd mystified. For minutes they played before eventually the cube was fired in at about 58%. Fortunately his opponent didn’t know what he was doing and took, but the BG gods had been watching and the 97% race and match were lost, and it was defeat to Bosnia, which was a bad idea.
A magnificent Wales squad thrashed England 4-1 – more on them later – and then the death knell on a horror second morning: white-washed by Belgium. This included yet another premature resignation for match – this time in a live race. Yes, the wins were small, but 0.31% happens. The squad capriciously saved their best for last, felling Denmark in a dead rubber.
It’s a hat-trick of subpar returns for England [formerly UK]: losing in the round of 16 in ’24, round of 32 last year, and round of 32 again. What’s the problem? Multiple teams have flung in accusations that England have become PR clones who are unwilling to adjust their play to weaker opponents, and may even have half an eye on their BMAB rating, which could be an unaffordable luxury. One must only worry about the result at an event like this, there’s an awful lot of mixed quality – to hell with PR.
——————————————-
The Scots performed laudably, winning two matches including an amazing last-roll thriller at the death vs Greece. James Newman it was, grafting back from 2-10. Ireland flattered to deceive with a fairly strong squad but ended up with just the one win.
Welsh wizards
Wow! What can we say? If there’s a blueprint to what it takes to excel in team competition, this is it. Yes, some PR junkies but also several players recognized more as hardened match-players, cutting their teeth on the fairly gruelling UK tour, whether it be Tom Thorpe, or the Jones boys, Kev and Simon. A cruel spine includes Paul Lamford and Ian Gwynne, and the incomparable Dod Davies – a master-blaster from a generation-plus ago, and still firing bullets. Here they are grinding down Italy pip by pip in the last 16, with Kev and the sartorially elegant Ian in the background, and an interested Reece Hodges, who is taking a glimpse into his future if England aren’t careful!:
Fine Scots support
Scotland’s women were impeccably led by Karen Slawek and battled hard to 3 wins, but lost to England in their final match. A feature of Scotland has been the way they swamp the opposition in blue shirts with wonderful team spirit. One feels a bit for the isolated Catherine Thome here in a brutal slugfest with June Williamson, but CT scraped through:
Un chiffre inférieur à la moyenne
England had a wild ride on that scenic route. France’s Arezou Shafiei mutters something like the above line to her pals here [“below average number”] as Rachel Rhodes holds her head in hands at this catastrophic crunching 22, which kills off all her wins after a fine fightback:
More US Heartbreak
England drew the USA in that Q-F, a repeat of the 2024 final. It was a marvellous match and always seemed destined to go to the wire. It came down to Cecilia Rogers vs the outstanding new star of the women’s game Melissa Shin. This instant classic shows Ms Rogers surrounded by her entire team – and as a subtle flex that often only backgammon can bring – the reigning World Champion!:
Double Match Point arrived and one of the largest crowds of the week were spellbound. Cess climbed to 95% before unfurling this dreadful 44 to leave the double gap:
Melissa then rolled an ace and forgot to split which was a serious mistake, reducing wins from 15 to 12.5%. Cess rolled the grim 64 and of course she was hit, and then proceeded to dance through the entire Frank Sinatra back catalogue in front of her horrified teammates. The match was lost and the dream dies for another year – but no regrets – so very close. And you know what? An overall record of 5-4 says that perhaps this wasn’t the year. The match may be found here. Rogers played off 4.04 to Shin’s 5.22.
Other highlights
Gibraltar’s women have been terrific and bring such humour and friendly bants to the occasion. And I really like the pluck and never say die spirit of the newly sighted Iceland women who kept pulling surprises, or scaring the best.
Romania in the Main have been outstanding led by the likes of UK players Radu Ciortan, Cris Cozos and the lovable Ovidiu Mihail Popa who has such a dedicated passion for the game and no-one could begrudge him this. Their celebrations of reaching the Q-Fs at the expense of the Jorgen Granstedt led Sweden saw tears shed.
One of the feel good stories of the week are Iran’s Anglophile women who have gelled magnificently to make the semi-finals. Three are regularly to be found at the local clubs and tournaments, and skipper Zhina has a smooth 7/7 return, and had a fine win at the Brighton Open last year.
They dramatically defeated England, who probably average at least 5 better on PR but it counted for naught.
Sometimes backgammon at the elite end can seem a tad joyless, and all about the dollars and cents, but many of the remaining squads here bring much mirth and great team spirit to the game. They know they’re less fancied, but they bleed for their nations and add such colour and vibrancy. It is this passion which is a key ingredient to us continuing to grow this wonderful game.
Main Quarter-finals
Austria vs Netherlands
Japan vs Romania
Germany vs Wales
Greece vs Belgium
Women’s Semi-finals:
Iran vs Gibraltar
Norway vs USA
I watched many of the England team’s matches over the first two days. My impression, from the perspective of a player of moderate ability, was that they were consistently unfortunate, or rather, that their opponents were consistently fortunate, especially in bear-offs. At the level most of the teams were playing at, I wouldn’t have thought that much if any adjustment would be required. I don’t think either the England team was unsuccessful because they were playing for PR. They simply didn’t get the dice. We’ve all been playing the game long enough to know that that can happen. I’m not sure that playing the blame game is particularly helpful, even if there is a debate to had about when to adjust and when not to adjust.
I enjoyed the rest of the article though!
Hi Simon – there will have been about 30,000 dice rolled in that time – give or take a few thousand. To blame luck is dangerous with such a huge sample pool. Obviously the last gasp Bosnia loss was tough, but it ignores the countless wonderful things that went England’s way in that match. But yes, to answer your question, the standard, by its very nature at such a tournament is mixed. It’s terribly hard for nations to raise their top sides.
This debate isn’t about making vast, swathing adjustments, it’s about making nuanced, subtle ones, and not worrying about what XG would say, but only about match situation and the player opposite. If playing England means playing a poor man’s XG with little variation of that, which we all see every day, people are far more in their comfort zones. There’s even a handle for WeeMab: “No Back Games!”? Why? Because XG doesn’t understand them and can’t see round corners, so that could mess up PRs. The aim with Bmabbing is to keep games as simple and pure as possible. But back games occur at least 20% of time, maybe 30. They are a vital and complex part of backgammon. To just avoid them at all costs and never practice playing them, defending against them, or learning how to win timing battles is a grave issue.
I’m not playing the blame game, I’m looking for answers. England are playing out of their socks and keep coming up terribly short.
“Playing out of their socks and coming short” . Could be something with luck? Its part of the game…
It’s far too easy to dismiss the last 3 years to luck. The belief is our style of pure and immaculate play is too predictable and inflexible and doesn’t adjust to opponents, who in turn have seen it all before on XG – which just does it better.
To state /indicate that some are saying (without evidence) that members of the English team were more interested in their PRs than winning is deeply insulting and malicious. I know the members of the team . They are all extremely competitive , patriotic and desperately wanted to win . To say anything else without evidence to the contrary is just wrong and should be retracted.
You completely misunderstand Emad. Of course they’re desperate to win, but a huge theme swirling around the bg community is that the obsession with PR has become almost unhealthy and that players are driven to play as technically pure as they can, and keep that PR as low as possible.
But top level matchplay is the same as in any sport – you name the sport, people are adjusting. That’s the only concern here: these guys are great, terrific players: but a gammonish cube from a weaker player that’s correct to take by 1% should be passed, period. That’s just one of hundreds of examples. I played one of our superstars who doesn’t rate me at all – thinks I have no clue, and he’s cubing me early, multiple times in a match. Who cubes weakness early? It makes no sense. But it’s because they’re trying to be precise and absolutely spot-on, and hate missing their market.
Anyway, obviously there’s a lynch mob out for me, but I can live with that because the fact is that 95% of the feedback I’ve had for my piece has been in positive, assertive agreement. Please don’t spin my words: of course they’re desperate to win and trying their hardest. But there IS Bmabbing going on – this much we all know – and that is a grave conflict of interest. You’re going to be very unwilling to adjust at an event like this if you’re Bmabbing, and let no man say otherwise.
We’re looking for reasons behind England/UK’s horror win rate this past 3 years – it’s ok to be asking questions about if there’s anything that we could be doing better. All other sports journalists do it for their national teams – why can’t we?
I am not spinning your words : “ Multiple teams have flung in accusations that England have become PR clones who are unwilling to adjust their play to weaker opponents, and may even have half an eye on their BMAB rating, which could be an unaffordable luxury” …
They can still be desperate to win though. But focussing on PR whilst trying to beat someone pretty wild and much weaker is pulling the player in two polar opposite directions. Play for PR or play to win?
JB gives a good example in these comments.
Where is the consistent evidence across the matches (specific plays) that shows members of the Team choosing a “ PR” driven route (ie the correct play) and that costing them a win?
From what I saw they played hard to win every match. In some they outplayed their opponents from a PR perspective and in others they didn’t. And just because they lost to supposed “weaker” teams doesn’t mean they’re PR obsessed bots who don’t know how to win . Each member of that Team has won significant tournaments. They know how to win.
But sometimes the dice aren’t with you and you lose. That’s the game we have chosen
You do keep tweaking my narrative: “from what I saw they played hard to win every match.” You’re implying I’m saying lack of effort. I’m saying the opposite: trying TOO hard to play the best bg in the world – forgetting about the person sat in front of them. Neglecting to adjust, or not being willing to. If you can’t see that Bmabbing at an event like this is inappropriate there’s nothing more to say. It would be like playing your same golf game, whatever the course you were on. The quality of backgammon out there is incredibly mixed and varied.
Once again I ask you to provide consistent evidence across the matches to show they didn’t play the best / most appropriate way to win a match . Not only against “weaker “ opponents but also strong ones.
Without the empirical evidence you’re just speculating and sharing hackneyed opinions about “playing the opponent not the best PR
I have no wish to go through all your last comment point by point. I have mentioned Wales (who we were supporting) who are more than just hard working battlers they have truly great backgammon players in their team. As you are aware for health reasons I am now retiring from International backgammon but I cannot leave it without a fair reflection of my ten years in the UK team. Being made UK Captain was the greatest honour in my life outside family things. Magriel laughed at the ability of UK players prior to my Captaincy. In the four years I was Captain with the help of Raj we won the World team Championship in Georgia and won the Nations Cup in Copenhagen, since then I have been proud to play under the Captaincy of Martin and Chris both of whom continued with the ethos of team first self second and Captained the team deep into major tournaments. I understand that we have different opinions in how to play backgammon to maximise winning chances and I have no problem with that I will let my results speak for themselves. My strong belief is that all England 2026 players have played with a team first mentality.
Thanks, a good trip down memory lane and indeed, we were the laughing stock of world backgammon 20-25 years ago – total contempt shown by the rest of the world. We have come on a bit and are now universally admired, but have suddenly hit a road block. I’d adore for all Bmabbing at the World Teams to be banned by any future UK or England captains. It seriously fills me with trepidation. But that is indeed all a conversation for another day.
I am totally in support of Emad here. I played against the cream of South Africa, Austria, Belgium and Denmark. Where am I supposed to adjust there. My only regret is that I made mistakes and didn’t play at PR nil. I have played PR backgammon for ten years now and despite that I have the all time high UKBGF rating (Oz threatening it) and my tournament win rate speaks for itself. Sometimes at backgammon you fight your hardest and still lose and all that remains is to take defeat like a Gentleman. The subtext of this article that there were players more interested in their BMAB than trying to win one of the most important tournaments we have ever played in is not very impressive to say the least.
This is 110% the rub Tim: regretting mistakes and not playing off 0. The mood of the community is to forget all that. Just WIN! If it means passing a gammonish cube in a simple position at .85 to a lesser player and shooting your PR up to 6, do it. I would a million times prefer someone playing off 6 and winning to someone playing off 1 and losing.
These team tournaments are not full strength, nothing like it – how on earth can they be? People have to be able to afford a week off work… if you have a brother-in-law in said country it may get you in the team. South Africa selected Janette, and she was right there for them in case one of the 5 had a problem. 75% of one of the World teams finalists happened to live 3 miles from the venue.
You haven’t mentioned Bosnia or Wales. The former I was shocked with how weak some of the play was, really intermediate level [he still won though], and Wales are Wales: packed to the rafters with unglamorous, little known, purist matchplayers and grafters, who play 300 matches a year. But goodness that’s tough to beat. And none of that “happy, carefree resignation handshake when you go down to 300-1” rubbish. These guys aren’t shaking hands at 300,000-1. No way man.
You mention Belgium – pretty anodyne the final. That 8 cube I ran was clueless. The Dutch ran them off the park.
Sometimes in sport, and the classy thing to do here, would be to say: “you know what? We were no bloody good today.” Shooting for zero PR isn’t working: UK are practically the best team on paper, but we keep crashing in the round of 32. And it’s been going on for years. To me it’s simple:
Get more hard-bitten matchplayers in there, who may play off 5, but you have to run them over with a truck. First on the list, by some distance, is Chris Rogers. You don’t have a 70% record at Monte Carlo over 4 years without being a superb and flexible match player who ADJUSTS to opponents, and is not shooting for a zero PR.
But because his PR is deemed sub par [because he adjusts] he can’t get anywhere near the team [in his own words]. The dead rubber doesn’t count.
Nice articles on what is proving to be a hugely successful event. I have no skin in this game but i just wanted to add to the BMAB yes or no debate and adjustments. No mention of a crucial part of match play – the clock. Whilst adjustments with cube or checker play can be complex and can backfire, I think the time left for either player can often be a factor and hasn’t been mentioned.
The Cess v Melissa UK v USA Women match had a facinating position with Cess holding the cube on 2 in a 3 away 3 away score. Melissa has one checker left on the ace, with Cess having one on the 5 and one on the 2. We all know that this makes Cess a 19-17, but if you had a few minutes and your opponent had just a few seconds would you cube?
A BMABBER would have to cube but I think it is right to hold off.
Thank you Jon, a fascinating example that drives right to the very heart of the matter.
Thanks for capturing the atmosphere. It sounds like a fantastic event. The excitement yesterday (Day 3) was beyond anything I’ve known previously watching a tournament from afar. It’s been fantastic to see the guys I know on the Wales team get so far in the event, and I was on the edge of my seat cheering on the UK-based Romanians versus Japan.
I have never come across most of the England team in person, but Tim, Pete and Simon are some of the most committed and knowledgeable players I have ever met, and I’m sure they gave everything for the cause. When a national team’s results are disappointing, it’s right that there is scrutiny. But I share Tim’s confidence that the UK team will go on to achieve greater things in years to come. Maybe some members of the Welsh team have staked a claim to a place on the squad next year!
Thank you for you kind and constructive notes. I am a professional sports reporter of some 25 years standing and there are no easy answers. I am only reporting on the quasi-ubiquitous vibe around the room – that there’s more to this game than playing perfectly. There is adjustment is ALL sport, and great matchplayers often don’t have particularly great PRs, which is why I crave us to play Chris Rogers more.
If you asked Seve Ballesteros to go out and play Royal Lytham off a low PR in ’79, he’d’ve told you to get lost. The car park kid did good.
For most players, including most strong players, “don’t pay attention to your PR, just try to win” is a false dichotomy IMO. Even most players who think they can adjust vs a weaker opponent, they end up hurting their own PR with nothing to show for it.
There are some extraordinary fish out there Csaba. To not adjust and keep going with the same intricate game playing Mochy or somone off 18 is not advisable. A volatile, brilliant action recube to 4 for instance. Just ship it the same for everyone? Absolutely no chance.
Some people take everything; some pass a lot; some know how to play back games, some don’t have a clue. The list is endless.
I skimmed through the opponents England had to face and I couldn’t identify any fish. But maybe it’s better if we don’t start naming players and deciding who qualifies and who doesn’t 🙂
You were speaking generally though: don’t adjust to weakness it won’t work, and I’ve replied generally.
But yes, I assure you that England came across plenty of players at an contrasting skill level to their own. Adjustments can be minor and subtle as well as major.
Yes, believe it or not, I am aware of the fact that there are some positions where you can deviate from PR-optimal plays and gain in practical winning chances. I am just telling you that in my experience most of those adjustments are indeed minor. And backgammon grandmasters are better at spotting them than you and I put together. 🙂
You’d need to show exact positions where you (or whoever you are quoting) think GMs missed profitable adjustments and they were playing as “PR clones”, otherwise this is just going to be very abstract, we can debate terminology and modifiers (I will say “occasionally”, you will reply “somewhat frequent”, I will say “from time to time”, etc). 🙂
Hi, there will of course be many hundreds of positions were slight alterations can be made for opponents, but the rub of this is that you think adjusting doesn’t work. I assure you that you’re in the minority on this and I had a long chat with the World Champion about it yesterday. He says he adjusts regularly and often plays from the heart as well. I reminded him of his horror cubing blunder right at the very end of the Miami final, and he said, “I just felt it.” The history books report it was a great cube.
Vitally also I strongly believe that Bmabbing in an event like this should be banned by captains. The conflict of interest is off the scale. Do you play the opponent, or play PR?
One of the biggest adjusters I’ve ever seen is also significantly the most successful UK player of the last dozen years on the Chicago point results. I am quite sure he has a somewhat higher PR because of all his adjusting and the way he reads opponents. He admits he can’t get near the UK team, but I have been campaigning for years for him to play more for UK/England – and he easily won his dead rubber yesterday – I speak of course about Chris Rogers.
Ran out of nested replies 🙂
Okay I see you prefer to quibble about modifiers:
I wrote
*For most players, including most strong players*, “don’t pay attention to your PR, just try to win” is a false dichotomy IMO.
I didn’t say “don’t adjust, it won’t work”. Please do not misquote me. I said that in my opinion most people overrate how important those adjustments are and also most people overrate how good they are at them.
And, believe it or not, I have also talked to many strong players. They have told me that they struggle to find a good balance between adjusting for their opponent and hurting their winning chances. Where do we go from here? 🙂
Yes, I brought up the Petko example of a tremendous player going on gut, feel, vibe and inspiration. He saw the moment and he grabbed it – and maybe he did feel slightly all played out and David is a top notch legend of the game – his PR is a fair whack lower.
Someone said to me today that he often sees the UK greats – who may or may no be Bmabbing – taking marginally correct, volatile cubes to much weaker players; which will have Bmab purring. Dangerous business though.
Glad you actually brought a backgammon position to the table. I don’t believe you are suggesting Petko is adjusting to David Wells there, right (recubing when the underdog means you think you are the weaker player and you think you will win)? Then what exactly are you suggesting? I don’t think Petko can feel the future dice rolls, so if Petko recubed because even though he knew it’s a 50/50 ish position but he felt he will roll well, then he just made a mistake. If he recubed because he felt David Wells was going to pass then he was wrong.
How else would you describe this? And which history books record this as a great recube?
PS: I am sorry about some of my wording in this thread, I am not great at writing politely. I am genuinely curious about what you mean by “felt it” or how you see this redouble.
The way I see it, for myself, (at the much lower level than Petko’s): sometimes I do deviate from what I think XG would recommend just because I kinda feel like it. I imagine I have a small budget for this sort of flurries of creativity. For example a large cube, or a banana split, if it’s marginal, I’ll err on the side of doing it.
I consider both Petko and David W legends of the game. If Petko felt outplayed by David, then he was a bit off; his PR was 4.0 (including the recube at the end) and David’s was 4.3. I am still unclear on what exactly you mean by “doubling from the heart” and whether you think it’s a desirable attribute for “match players”.
Taking a gammonish 4-cube versus a beginner, yeah I agree that’s probably not a good idea. Although there must be a limit to that too, suppose you are not playing vs a beginner but a PR-7 player and suppose it is a 400 take? Now suddenly who is outplaying whom if the GM passes?
At any rate I believe we both understand each other (at least a bit better) and I’m happy to give this a rest. 🙂
I feel I must defend our team of so called ‘ PR superstars’ and there is no question from me whether every player was or wasn’t match fit. El Capitano (Chris Rogers) put a great deal of effort into this and as always was an inspiring Captain. One look at the UK ratings list which while not perfect reflects to some extent current form has all the England team in the top 25 so they back it up usually with results as well as PR. I am so proud that the PR superstars took defeat as gentleman backgammon players and were totally sporting to their opponents. At the time of writing this Wales are in the semi final and as far as I am aware every one of the England team are wishing them the best. Backgammon is painful sometimes, I will be retiring from the International team but I back my teammates to turn this around in the next couple of years, they are made of tough stuff.
Hi Tim, was great to finally to meet you. On the subject of match fitness it’s the same in all sport. A cauldron like that takes a lot a getting used to and adjustment. Cricket, golf, tennis you name it.
Hundreds of players all over the land have played hundreds of matches this year alone. I’ve played about 270. Not too much action on UKBGF for one or two this year, or even last. It’s a subtle point because obviously the guys are enormously experienced.
Excellent report Will , as usual . Almost felt like I was there .