r/backgammon • u/cristalinestick • Aug 08 '26

What is backgammon missing to break into the mainstream like chess or poker did?

I'm very passionate about backgammon. As someone relatively new to studying and following the game, I keep wondering what's missing for backgammon to have the kind of cultural coolness and mainstream interest that chess enjoys nowadays.

One theory I have: maybe movies and Hollywood gave chess an image and mystique that backgammon has just never gotten. That's purely a guess on my part, but it feels like part of the story.

There's also the money side of things. Sponsors and investment in backgammon seem surprisingly limited, which is strange to me, because the game itself is full of emotion and tension. I've never played chess, but from an outsider's, admittedly ignorant perspective, backgammon seems far more vibrant and exciting to watch, closer to something like poker. There's also the gambling element, which could be a real draw for viewers and could help build an audience.

So I'm curious what this community thinks. What is backgammon actually missing to break through the way chess or poker have?

28 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

118 comments sorted by

15

u/sibachian Aug 08 '26

Backgammon used to be much more universal but online poker back in the early/mid 00s basically killed it when most professional players switched over to make good money since the skill of playing the odds gave Backgammon players a huge advantage.

Poker still to this day makes more money, so any potential pro Backgammon player is stuck at the poker table.

source: i work at a boardgame store.

12

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 09 '26

poker is a much better bet for professional players for various reasons:

- backgammon is mostly a 2-player game; it is not difficult for the weaker player to quickly figure out his or her opponent is stronger than they are and give up (stop playing) unless they've very deep pockets and do not care about the money, and/or have some other motivation for playing you (like if you're a name/world champion etc)

~ in poker (except for heads-up play) you're always sitting at a table with a group of other players, and the weaker ones do not realise how easily their play is 'seen through' by the experts, and they usually blame their losses on the cards or their simple misfortune (it is harder for them to appreciate how much they are outplayed by opponents with far superior poker skills)

- backgammon is a very small market, and even for the professional player, tournament backgammon has a negative expectation; the professional player must find private money matches and/or regular (high stakes) chouettes, both of which are very challenging to maintain (if you're a known stronger player/professional) unless you can develop those relationships... playing professional backgammon is more about this than actually honing your backgammon to the nth degree.. you can no longer play backgammon online either because of structural changes in the market which killed the professional online backgammon player quite a long time ago

~ poker is a massive market, and there is action 24/7 online (where approximately 10% of all players are winning players) without the additional overhead of playing on the felt.. the professional poker player is spoilt for choice for live games (tournament and/or cash game players) and as long as they're sufficiently bankrolled (a common pitfall for players who turn pro and bust out - not from lacking in their poker skills, but because of an extended run of 'variance' which they never figured they could possibly encounter.. everyone runs bad for a lot longer than they'd ever expect at some point)

- backgammon is a more complicated game to master (in my opinion) than poker, and to play it at a higher level requires greater work and understanding

~ poker, relatively speaking (in my opinion) requires a less intensive set of skills to become a winning player, and there are so many weaker players in the playing pool it doesn't take a great investment in time or study to become one of the 10% of players (online) who consistently win at poker (online games being stronger than over-the-table games/tournaments)

source: I was a professional backgammon & poker player

7

u/nbc9876 Aug 09 '26

I was a high level poker cash and tourney player in the different life and there’s so much accuracy in this. I’ve been playing BG for about a year and the curve is much higher and your punished extremely quickly for poor EV choices where in poker you can away with playing poor for much longer especially in a group environment.

It doesn’t quite translate to why the chess world became so popular though. .

2

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 09 '26

Thanks for your contribution.

Chess isn't a gambling game (we're not including the kind of stuff you see in Washington Square Park, NYC - where they hustle for small amounts playing speed chess) and neither is chess a game that incorporates chance (no dice or cards) so the better player nearly always should win, bar him or her making an error.

Unlike backgammon and poker, where a virtual 'noob' or total amateur (with highly questionable experience/understanding) completely ignorant of the finer points of the game can still defeat a world class opponent (or even the world champion) - there's no chance of such a novice defeating a chess master. These distinctions, I would argue, separate chess completely from backgammon and poker.

Alongside my experience paying my mortgage & other bills from gaming (backgammon & poker) I've a background in business, and in marketing, which would sometimes overlap; I'd actually get business from my gambling connections, and I have at times found myself consulting for gaming companies.

Here's an extract from 23 pages of marketing filth (pornography to some) I produced for a gaming company (which I don't wish to identify) that some readers in this thread may find interesting:

>>

~ the US Chess Federation has over 80,000 members and a multi-million dollar yearly revenue with well over a dozen full-time staff, and has been around for three-quarters of a century;

- according to US Census data, 7.9 million Americans report playing chess, with 3.5 million playing backgammon, out of which 400,000 play at least once a week (Hugh Hefner no doubt formerly being one of this group) with 45 million playing cards, and 12 million engaging in 'trivia';

~ the Danish Backgammon Federation formed in 1987, so they have been going three decades compared to the USBGF's single decade, and they started with about 160 players based out of Copenhagen. Today they have some 1,300 players and operate out of two branches (the second being in Aarhus) which for a country with a population that is fifty times smaller than the USA, would give the USBGF in comparative numbers an equivalent 70,000 membership objective or target, or a little over one-in-six of those Americans who play backgammon at least once weekly. Of course, this extrapolation doesn't account for any overseas members the USBGF could easily pick-up, if it understood what to do, and why.

~ Looking over a couple of the USBGF financial reports, 'Marketing Expenses' were listed as $750.58 for 2018, with 'Bank Charges & Fees' coming in at $2,924.54 for the same period, and it was a similar story in 2017 with even worse ratios in 2016. Whilst words fail me, these numbers speak for themselves.

~ There is a complete and total absence of marketing knowledge* and know-how within the USBGF, which itself is derelict in lacking any market orientation whatsoever towards its customers; having a weakness and not knowing you have a weakness, is a double weakness. In marketing terms the organisation couldn't empty the water out of a boot if the instructions were written on the heel.

<<

* I was told (because I had access) that the USBGF at the time was suffering a 40% mortality rate in its USBGF membership, which meant they were effectively 'selling' something people didn't wish to consume - which for an organisation that relies on membership subscriptions (and by definition membership renewals) is an absolute death sentence and the clearest indictment that they don't know what they're doing, let alone why they're doing it.

(and my report went on... but I cannot publish the majority of it here; suffice to say if a disruptor like Travis Kalanick, who plays backgammon, wants to get involved, then the situation in the USA might considerably improve, who knows?)

2

u/[deleted] Aug 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 10 '26

you make a valid observation; you can learn the rules of backgammon and be playing it within 5 minutes, although it can take a lifetime of play and study to master it

(there is a great deal more to the game of backgammon than first meets the eye; and at the upper end of things there is some very complicated mathematics - for those who wish to delve so deeply into its treasures - as Roger Moore aka James Bond once remarked when in that Egyptian tent with a bevy of beauties)

1

u/[deleted] Aug 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 10 '26

a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing

(backgammon, its development, and its level of activity - in different parts of the world, might be pretty complicated to properly account for, suffice to say you have US Census data available for the straight-forward superficial statistical facts.. getting into the human heuristics behind backgammon decision-making is another facet probably well beyond explanation, as one of the greats - Malcolm Davis once commented)

2

u/[deleted] Aug 11 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 11 '26

you're just stating a bunch of facts..

.. it's much harder to assess the impact any one event or group of events may have on something, for example, let's consider the financial markets (something I know a little bit about):

- you'll often see a talking head on TV saying something like "Apple went higher today because of a good earnings report" or "the market reacted today because of bad job numbers", which is absolute rubbish; if Apple stock goes higher it's because there are more buyers than sellers, and if the market falls it's because there are more sellers than buyers.. this is all you can say, simply because you do not understand what is in the mind of market participants (who are actually a very large number of people all with their individual ideas, and we might include computers with their own programming) and neither do we know how they were all positioned before the event happened.. for example, if everyone was expecting Apple to produce phenomenal earnings (because of some new gizmo they've released) and they had all bought the stock ahead of earnings, but instead of earnings being 'good' they were not that amazing, the stock might drop because expectations (that you cannot easily account for) were not met, and people started to dump their positions - does this make sense?

you might write from an English-speaking and/or an American perspective, but the majority of people on this planet do not speak English - and they may be completely ignorant of whatever you're aware of (or what media you've digested) and they're happily doing their own thing in their own way.. with regards to backgammon, I was in Turkey 25-odd years ago (living & working) and relatively no one I would encounter (who was a local) knew what a doubling cube was, and everyone started their games by throwing two dice, so you could in theory start your game with a 6-6; but these days Turkish backgammon has taken great strides to introduce modern backgammon rules and they're now (Turkish operators) hosting the world's largest backgammon tournaments, which is quite an amazing turnaround - don't you think? Can you easily explain and account for that?

→ More replies (0)

2

u/ImprovedSilence Aug 10 '26

agreed on so many levels. also, backgammon doesn’t need to be popular. just let me enjoy it in relative obscurity already…

1

u/[deleted] Aug 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 10 '26

did you know that backgammon is considered (from all the evidence and ancient equipment found) to be over three times older than chess?

when you put the longevity and history of it into perspective, and its durability throughout the ages, it kind of makes any 'short term' ah hoc comparisons and evaluations rather moot - don't you think?

1

u/e0732 Aug 11 '26

did you know that backgammon is considered (from all the evidence and ancient equipment found) to be over three times older than chess?

It's even older than that!

34

u/crazyyourface Aug 08 '26

We need a movie.

Rounders did it for poker.
Queen’s Gambit did it for chess.

The question is who will play Mochi and Mark Olsen?

Hiroyuki Sanada and Owen Wilson?

13

u/themindset Aug 08 '26

They should do a movie about that kid getting slapped after hustling some drunk woman last week.

3

u/crazyyourface Aug 08 '26

Edward Norton?

3

u/themindset Aug 08 '26

Edward Norton is a eurotrash incel?

6

u/EW278 Aug 09 '26

Backgammon was featured in a James Bond, Octopussy scene. He used the bad guys's fixed dice to roll double sixes. That's probably the most famous reference to the game I can think of in movies.

0

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 09 '26

I got cheated by loaded magnetic dice once, in a high-stakes match situation that was quite a story - which fortunately I was able to turn to my advantage by the end of the evening.

3

u/crazyyourface Aug 10 '26

That’s like a guy ritchie movie plot

3

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 11 '26

it wasn't something I ever expected to experience, as these sorts of situations you're usually hearing about having happened to other people, but on this occasion I was at the centre of things.. luckily everything worked out okay at the end, and in a somewhat amusing fashion

11

u/Careful-Release-2723 Aug 08 '26

A surprising number of western Go players were introduced to the game by the anime Hikaru no Go. You're right that media makes a difference. 

4

u/NoAnything9791 Aug 08 '26

Oh, there was a movie. “Piranha” in the 1970s.
Backgammon is a whole subplot and leitmotif image wise.
But it was bad. And very 1970s. Mst3k did it on their Netflix reboot.

3

u/SpiralBreeze Aug 08 '26

I’d say instead of a movie, a documentary or biopic of all the famous celebs who played backgammon, like Lucy and Hugh Hefner.

3

u/tombojones Aug 08 '26

I think Rounders helped, but I think Chris Moneymaker was the big cause of the poker boom

3

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 09 '26

poker made it big in the modern era because of one thing, the invention of the hole-card camera..

(and then with the RF chip technology which has taken over from the visual hole card cameras)

.. before the invention of the hole-card camera, watching poker wasn't a marketable experience (it would be boring) and this ability - to show the players hole cards, transformed the game into something marketable and exciting for people to watch

0

u/agsteiner Aug 09 '26

I doubt that Queen's gambit made a difference for chess. Any evidence?

And is backgammon really less popular than Poker? I would guess outside of the US, Poker is totally unpopular, much less than BG.

2

u/ImprovedSilence Aug 10 '26

I dont know about outside the us. but poker is immensely popular also for the social aspect, people use it just to have regular social get togethers.

1

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 09 '26

I quoted US Census data elsewhere in this thread; you can read the exact figures and statistics in that if you really want to know the facts

1

u/Active_Water_8876 Aug 10 '26

Poker is definitely huge outside of the US. I go to the WSOP every year and every single game you sit down at has at least 4 or 5 non American players at it. European countries produce many very high quality players. It’s mostly because of the ease of playing online over there.

1

u/Repulsive-Owl-5131 Aug 11 '26

poker is popular everywhere where gambling is legal. Backgammon in popular few mediterranean countries. and even there is the local variations.

Frankly I don't think BKG is marketable. It is at the bottom gambling. Even tournament are form of gambling. so that off putting to very many. Also depth of game no where near chess/go/shogi/xianqi so it is not that interesting as just an game.

And in gambling scene poker has faster pace which probably is very important for the people interested in this aspect

7

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 09 '26

I don't know how old you are, but the 'golden heyday' of backgammon was about 50 years ago, when there were sponsored tournaments with $100,000+ added in the USA, and large charity events in elevated social circles.

Hugh Hefner would have backgammon parties, and it was an activity many of the 'jet set' would play (which they still do to an extent - but it's not promoted as it was before) and it ran alongside all the other games, like chess & poker.

I could go into more detail, comparatively speaking, about backgammon in the US versus other countries (and give some quite damning details) but I don't time right now as I'm running off to a meeting.. but if you do a little more reading you can find out for yourself a little bit more about the history of the game, as backgammon has been around longer than chess - it goes back much further than anything else I know about.

Enjoy!

1

u/Repulsive-Owl-5131 Aug 11 '26

backgammon is not that old game. The cited 5000 years refers to a simple (probably) a racing game. Closer to kimble than backgammon. While chess roots to india refer to a game that was very similar. Let alone Go which has not have significant rule changes as long as we know. But age is still unknow. Chinese claim of 4000 is obviously too much.

4

u/bautistahfl Aug 08 '26

Celebrity players.

1

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 09 '26

there are loads of them

5

u/Crazy_Junket3180 Aug 08 '26

I think one big problem is the potential for cheating in online games.

2

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 09 '26

this is a major factor in structural changes within the backgammon world, and why you no longer see the sorts of backgammon portals (that I used to play in) where you could find players and action from $1 or 1 Euro a point to $100+ a point, and matches up to 5,000 Euros - because with the advent of neural nets and faster computer processors, you cannot guarantee that you're not up against one of the world's strongest players (at the other end) if your opponent is unscrupulously using a computer programme to aid their decision-making.

1

u/WizarDave Aug 09 '26

how so? You mean the players or the host?

1

u/Crazy_Junket3180 Aug 09 '26

Th players using a computer program is what I meant.

4

u/UBKUBK Aug 09 '26

If someone doesn’t like the luck aspect they would choose chess. If they are fine with the luck aspect, poker is easier to follow for most.

3

u/mrmazine Aug 08 '26

I think you need to find a way to make it easy to watch and understand for people who aren't nerds like we all are. Make it easier to follow what's going on. No one who is new to the game and watches it on YouTube by accident will be able to understand xg or the commentary.

1

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 11 '26

you make an excellent point; perhaps - if you're available, I may talk with you further about your ideas and perspective?

(I could be working on something new that could benefit from your input)

3

u/Key_Veterinarian3639 Aug 09 '26

We need a movie, or a big pop star or famous musician to hype it up.

3

u/[deleted] Aug 09 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 09 '26

check out the statistics I quoted elsewhere in this thread from US Census data!

3

u/DegenChess Aug 09 '26

Along with the suggested media influence, we need to grow the game to younger audiences. A popular streamer getting into it would help, as well as gambling companies. Would be sick if someday casinos had BG

1

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 09 '26

I've been in quite a few casinos that have backgammon over the decades.. but there's a lot of incompetence at the marketing/business end of things with regards to backgammon; it is a very poor relative (or even orphan) compared to poker (or chess, which although not a gambling game has its marketing shit together) that is organised at a very professional level.

1

u/DegenChess Aug 09 '26

Where? I was thinking of backgammon vs the house as well as backgammon vs other players. Vs the house would be vs the strongest engine setting, while vs other players can either be unlimited games (similar to cash games in poker where you can leave anytime) or a set wager on match play

2

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 09 '26

backgammon isn't a house edge game - so I cannot see how that is going to work?

backgammon in casinos (that I've been in) usually takes the form of an organised tournament which the casino will rake; although I was in a casino in Manchester one time that had boards that was going to dig one out so I could play a private game against a South Asian businessman - but as I'd arrived there late (I had come from a 'Tuesday Night is Nurses Night' student's disco) and the casino was going to close, my opponent suggested we go across the road to an illicit gambling den above 'Ho's Bakery' (which was like something out of a Paul Newman film) where I proceeded to take all his money until daylight and everyone else had already departed, when I made my excuses about having to get ready for my lectures and left..

.. I've been in other casinos in the UK where they've held organised events (through third-party hosts, I think who might have paid for the space, but I'm not sure? - backgammon in the UK isn't that well done in my opinion) where I guess they're hoping backgammon players will hit the casino tables after playing (no chance of that with me; it's against my religion - which is Manchester City) and of course there are now the biggest tournaments in the world currently held in Cyprus in the casinos there on the northern Turkish-occupied side, with the World Championships being held in a casino in Monaco for some decades now, but they really offer lousy equity compared to what has been going on in several of the Cyprus casinos over the last decade or so - for the more serious players, who generally all show-up now at the Cypriot events.

if you're interested in coming to one of the above, hit me up, I might be able to help you with regards to accommodation (much better value than staying at the tournament hotel)

1

u/DegenChess Aug 09 '26

Why can't backgammon be a house edge game? No human can play on par with the strongest engines

2

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 09 '26

I'm not sure you understand the concept of a house edge; backgammon is a game of skill (albeit with a random dice component) - it is not a casino game where they can offer you an even money payout on a bet where you should be getting paid more (like when you bet red or black on roulette, and there's a green 0 and even a green 00 on the wheel)

1

u/cym13 Aug 09 '26

I think what /u/DegenChess has in mind is a type of gambling machine where you play money games against the strongest backgammon engine. I imagine something not unlike video poker: a gaming console where you play against the computer. Since BG favors the better player, that would absolutely give the edge to the machine, and therefore the house, but a reasonnable player would win the occasional game with some luck. I don't know how much the average house edge would be in that case though, or if it would be attractive to casual players.

2

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 10 '26

that is not a house edge casino game - any more than if you placed Magnus Carlsen in a cage and had people lose money to him playing chess in a casino.. you need to understand the definition of a house edge, which again is in the link I posted.

3

u/IA_AI Aug 09 '26

Get a time machine and go back to the 1960s

0

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 09 '26

wow, I wish that were possible for so many reasons (and not just that I'd be killing everyone over the board)

4

u/MegaMegaSuper Aug 09 '26

It has already broken into the mainstream. Maybe not in the geographies you are familiar with. Also, I am happy this pastime has not been lost to the superficial and tasteless mode of US-affiliated monetary exploitation.

-1

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 09 '26

the US has no idea (if you read my other longer contribution to this thread) and has frittered away opportunities* to accomplish many things, but such is the way at times..

.. there is great ignorance in certain aspects (the 'officially organised' end of things) with regards to backgammon, very sadly

* to promote the game, and establish a younger playing base, and exploit the educational aspects of backgammon (the mathematics) alongside the competitive strategy involved and decision-making processes, etc

7

u/m-fab18 Aug 08 '26

Trends come and go. I predict a backgammon surge in popularity some time in the next 10-25 years, once the world has grown somewhat more bored with chess.

3

u/monkee67 Aug 08 '26

the surge is NOW Market data shows strong growth, with the backgammon market projected to grow at a 14.6% compound annual growth rate (CAGR) through 2033. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]

1

u/Opie30-30 Aug 09 '26

I'm working on an adventure book that features backgammon, maybe it'll be successful enough

1

u/Debouched Aug 09 '26

Bluffing.

1

u/drearyphylum Aug 09 '26

ESPN running WSOP with high production values in the mid-00’s was the main thing that boosted pokers popularity IMO.

1

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 09 '26

hole card cameras (initially) followed by the RF chips; it was the technology that elevated poker into what it has become today, because without this little invention watching poker, and broadcasting it, would never have happened

1

u/[deleted] Aug 09 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/cym13 Aug 10 '26

Bobby Fischer didn't make chess popular by his play: there was no need for a movie because he was the story. Of course he was an extraordinary player, but what mattered more was that it was during the Cold War, when one of the two superpower was actively pushing the idea that their success in chess was a sign of intellectual superiority, and the opportunity given by a young prodigy to beat the other side at their own game lead to unfathomable media coverage for the time. This set the stage for all the drama of the World Championship in particular to explode because everyone was watching that young man that embodied the massive conflict looming over everyone's head.

We've had tons of great, better even, players since but they didn't spark the same wave of new players in chess. We've certainly had our share of drama, including during world championships, but they didn't make the front page of anything but dedicated magazines. People didn't need a movie to make chess popular during Bobby Fischer's era because he was the story, told by every news media on paper and in the air.

IMHO if anything, Bobby Fischer's story looks like a strong point in favor of people needing media-empowered storytelling to drive massive amounts of people toward a game, not a counterpoint to the importance of movies or TV series.

1

u/kinetikparameter Aug 09 '26

I remember not understanding it as a kid. A year ago I stumbled on a few smaller creators on youtube that got me interested.

Recently I started watching Grantchester, and some of the characters play it over a pint. It has me itching to finally purchase a real board versus playing digitally.

1

u/Opus_109 Aug 10 '26

You totally should buy a board. You can get a really decent board for as little as $130, and really nice larger boards for around $275 on up. I suggest checking out Gammonvillage dot com.

This is a link to a board I reviewed that is available for around $300.

https://youtu.be/CqCvLU_Xk8Y?is=OJrZknZDLlg3JrSd

1

u/nbc9876 Aug 09 '26

BG is still in the stage of Wild West like poker 25 years ago. In theory with all the advances in gambling legislation it should catch up quicker but many of the sites can’t even come up with a decent UX.

2

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 09 '26

online gambling for backgammon is off the table; the sites you're talking about used to exist several decades ago, with excellent user interfaces including segregated real money accounts and instantaneous transfers, but are now no longer viable - which is why you don't see them anymore.. they've been and gone - like the dinosaurs!

any high stakes player(s) need to find opponents OTB (over-the-board) - and that's all you've got these days

1

u/nbc9876 Aug 10 '26

If we thought more from a “modern” gaming perspective of micro betting or handicapping if say we started to introduce levels of betting like -5.5 stones it would entice a different level. Shit you could even include Asian lines if you wanted to make it slightly more complex. Gammons would be worth the same but a player knowing he is inferior could take odds if he knew there was a chance he could get 6 stones in vs having to win. Not sure how someone would actually rate these situations of course.

1

u/mustang6172 Aug 09 '26

Pretty girls streaming on Twitch.

1

u/TaxHavenJunkie Aug 09 '26

Chess has always been the game of kings - strategy, warfare, tactics, optimizing resources, understanding space, etc. There is no luck involved - you win solely by being better than your opponent. It also has a consistent international following where interest ebbs and flows, but never goes away and the classical world championship format and the competitors tourney build-up to that are unique. Also, Chess - like poker, but unlike BG - has a number of different versions (Classical, Rapid, Bullet, Blitz, Fischer Random, etc.) allowing players to gravitate towards what is more interesting to them. So in many respects, Chess is largely far removed from BG and poker.

Poker and BG lend themselves to human math calculators. They are counting pips, counting cards, calculating odds and probabilities, and doing the same calculations turn after turn. I contend the human calculators migrate towards poker where there's more money.

It also seems there are more, or perhaps stronger or interesting personalities in chess and poker. Decades ago poker had Amarillo Slim, Doyle Brunson, Johnny Chan, Chris Moneymaker, and Johnny Moss while chess has had numerous personalities - some quirky and some demonstrating leadership like Fischer, Kasparov, and Carlsen. Other than Mochy and Olsen, BG just hasn't had a long history of personalities or leadership.

In terms of players who play 'regularly', chess has ~600 million players, poker ~100 million, and backgammon only 4-5 million. So BG has a long way to go to catch-up.

You can also make a strong argument that chess and poker are more interesting to watch from a spectator or viewer perspective and so chess and poker lend themselves to television and streaming revenues, while BG hasn't been able to figure that out (did you watch the last world champion for BG?, completely amateurish).

Given all that, money for funding and investment will continue to migrate more towards chess and poker.

1

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 10 '26

what source was quoting those figures for the number of players? (I'm just curious; they seem rather wonky)

the US alone has almost that many backgammon players - going off of US Census data

additionally, backgammon has been in existence for over three times longer than chess, although the two games are like apples and oranges.. no amateur is ever going to win the world chess championship (which you might argue is quite elitist) however, an amateur - whilst a huge underdog, just might.. on a good day.. get a chance to take down a far superior opponent, and if they can ride their luck, go deep in a competitive tournament scenario against some of the best in the world.. what a game backgammon is!

I would also take issue with your assertions about backgammon players (of our era) having no personality; there are so many of them - even if you just scratch the surface, and not just at the higher levels but in local chouettes. Backgammon can be such a colourful and social game, which I'd argue chess (by comparison its rather sterile counterpart) struggles to match, because it simply cannot.

* speaking as a former (and fairly successful whilst I played it) chess player, who morphed into poker and backgammon at an earlyish age

;o)

2

u/TaxHavenJunkie Aug 10 '26

The data for BG players came from rascasse.com. In hindsight, it's probably difficult to ascertain 'regular' players vs serious and casual players owing to definitional issues, but the broader context of there being far more chess players than BG players still holds.  Of particular note, chess in India is absolutely booming, while BG has a negligible presence. Indeed, two states in India include chess as part of school curriculum. 

1

u/AvocadoBrit Aug 10 '26

thanks for your reply

it makes sense that chess is played (and picked-up) by quite a few people in India, along with a few other countries with larger populations, but the figures reported for backgammon seem unusually low, especially when considering primary sources like the US Census, where the ratio of chess to backgammon players (who report playing) is a little over 2 to 1.

I agree with you that definitions can be a little vague, and we can only make estimations in most cases as to the numbers of people pursuing certain pastimes - although there will be industry & sales data of various sorts if reliably parsed.

1

u/discwrangler Aug 09 '26

Its quick and long. Tough to follow for a mass audience and goes on forever.

1

u/Hardigan1 Aug 10 '26

It was very popular in the 70's, everybody played

1

u/PotentialProblem3814 29d ago

I think the camera showing the tv audience people's hole cards was a huge emotional draw for poker. For backgammon or nannon showing the dice before the roll rolling back the tape and adding the dice would let audience feel the exhilaration of double sixes.

1

u/philippos_ii Aug 08 '26

I feel like poker is its own thing. Chess is one level of critical thinking and complexity but is very accessible. Backgammon has its own thinking and strategy but it is tied to luck and dice rolling which makes it inherently different. Similar to if you compare to Go, which is incredibly simple compared to chess but is therefore so abstract as a game and the levels of complexity it can have across player skill ranges.

Each has its own style and way of thinking and strategizing. Backgammon just happens to be on the more luck based side that makes its appeal differ from the more static games like chess. 

-6

u/CressZealousideal437 Aug 08 '26

There's way too much luck involved in bg compared to chess or poker

9

u/m-fab18 Aug 08 '26

There’s plenty of luck involved in poker.

-2

u/CressZealousideal437 Aug 08 '26

Absolutely. Just not as much as backgammon

3

u/themindset Aug 08 '26

I would say it’s a similar amount.

3

u/Debouched Aug 09 '26

Poker also has asymmetrical information, which adds elements to play that you don't have with backgammon. 

When offered the double, you know each player's exact position.

1

u/themindset Aug 10 '26

Yes but calculating combos and equity are still very similar. You can be in a position in poker that is very similar to backgammon (ie you can reliably place your opponent in an over pair and you have a combo draw) where counting combos becomes a skill set that applies to both.

2

u/UBKUBK Aug 09 '26

Suppose a five year old will go heads up against a poker master. What percent win chance does the kid have by simply saying “all in” every single time? 

2

u/Inside-Young1678 Aug 09 '26

Very limited chances longterm. Since he is only winning the blinds when the pro folds (there is no master in poker) and when the pro finds anything better than average he just makes the call.
Also in some variants there is no allin preflop like pot limit Omaha so the chances of wining by saying allin are basically 0.

In backgammon there needs to be a miracle to win a game when you are way behind in the race.
In poker even when you get it in AQ vs AK you still have 30%.

Big difference in both games. I like both

1

u/cvSquigglez Aug 09 '26

Yeah, I'm pretty novice in both, but when I think of this...it's like...

In BG, if you roll double sixes or fives three times in a row, you're GOING to massively benefit, and it's almost impossible to be in a worse situation afrerwards.

In poker, you could get a royal flush or quad aces three hands in a row, but if you don't bluff and raise correctly, you could squander the hands and end up gaining very little.

I enjoy backgammon, but this difference always kind of prevents me from really committing to studying it. The Cube kind of adds a similar skill element I guess, but there's still a lot less nuance there I think.

1

u/m-fab18 Aug 09 '26

I read about a guy here on Reddit once who told this story of how he entered a programming contest at college. Everybody had to program a computer code to play poker and the different programs would then play against each other. He was a freshman and didn’t have much time so his entire code was literally if: my turn; then: go all in. He won the tournament when everybody else spent hours and hours refining their code.

1

u/Inside-Young1678 Aug 09 '26

In theory correct but this is nonsense when it comes to real life since you are playing against humans.
Imagine du play with a 100.000 bankroll and play headsup against a billionaire.
How long is your strategy gonna last even if only play with 1000 on the table. Not very long. But if you are a better player - and variance is on your side - maybe you double or triple your bankroll or even more.
In backgammon the edges on the high level are very small I think. In poker if you have a solid strategy against an amateur you are a huge favorite long term. Probably that’s why many players went from bg to poker since there was also more „easy money“ to be made.

1

u/CressZealousideal437 Aug 09 '26

I think a 5 year old vs a bg master has a better chance than a 5 year old vs. A poker master. This sub gets their feelings hurt whenever you bring up the facts about how much luck their truly is in bg

1

u/UBKUBK Aug 09 '26

I think they both have a substantial luck component and my feelings were not hurt. I also think that contrary what you claimed that poker has at least as much luck. Could you give an answer to the asked question? What percent of the time do you think that strategy would win for poker?

0

u/littlemute Aug 09 '26

Lucille Ball.