tha way backgammon is configured at the moment is a joke their are an unrealistic number of doubles rolled in the game not to mention that the fact that they are rolled consectuivly quite often, compounds the problem. I understand that this is a batta version of the game so that is something you might want to address when working on a configuration of backgammon that is more suited to a realistic version of the game.

I don't get what do you want to say. That you get too much doubles or what?

Basically that the random number generator is not random enough. I honestly haven't really noticed it, but it's possible you're right I suppose. But you may actually want to base those statements on factual evidence so that they are more credible.

I agree with everyone.

Frankly, I'm guessing what happened to you was that you only had a couple of bad rolls and your opponent was at the other side. RNG and well, randomness in general can be funny sometimes. I can't imagine how and why the generator would not be random enough. It's a well common thing in casinos for example, where the slot machines tent to show you the pieces of fruit you don't wanna see together, but there it's reasonable.
However, I would like to point out a quite annoying bug regarding doubles. According to the rules of backgammon, at the beginning of each round both players roll one single die, having the one with a higher number to move first, using both numbers as his own. If the two players roll the same number they have to keep rolling till there's a difference. Hence the opening roll should never be a double as this situation will not occur in a real backgammon. Is there a way to fix this?

We are playing computer games and they can't replicate what would happen if you played with a real dice against another person as you would at home. If that is what you are looking for then you have to play real people or be very disappointed when you play here. I have played Gammon here and have had many doubles, other games I am lucky to get two or three in a round. Like everything you always need a little bit of luck and it is the same for games. I would worry if the table master was the person that won the majority of the game or the person sitting next to them. That is not the case here so there is no issue. Perhaps it could be better but I am generally happy with how it is now.

I would like to see a dice automatically rolled first in all the games so it is not nearly always the Table Master who goes first. That is the only thing that should be changed in my opinion.

Yes, but the first opening roll can't possibly be a double according to the official backgammon rules. The table master shouldn't automatically go first, it is determined by the procedure I tried to explain in my previous post.
Let's assume player number 1 plays white and player number 2 plays black. White is the table master but doesn't start the game as he would in chess. Instead, both black and white roll one die. White rolls a 1 and black rolls a 3. Black rolled a higher number, thus he begins to move his checkers and is to play 31. If both white and black roll a 1 the numbers are tied, so they must reroll their dice untill they aren't tied. It is incorrect then when the first player gets 6-6 as his first roll.

I was refering to all games here in general. Most of the time The person who is table master starts first. I will now commit the Cardinal syn by saying RS games usually start with a roll of the dice to see who goes first. I would like it to be the case here. I would say though to be fair to Aminiel he does do hhis best to stick with the Official rules whenever he can and I think that is a very good thing.

As I have said previously Aminiel does make the games as realistic as possible but sometimes it's not possible to be exact. I will give an example in Monopoly where it is not like it when you play the board game. If you land on Mayfair and it has a hotel on you have to pay £2000 immediately. If you had £1500 then you would have to mortgage your properties to the tune of £500 to get back to £0. Here you play on, if your oponent lands on old kent road and you own it you will have to mortgage your properties up to the value of £250 not the original £500 as you would have had to do on the board game. That is the Same for RS games and Jim Kitchen games.

no what i was saying is that the number of doubles for the bots when playing one on one with a bot is outlandish, and not only that but the frequency of doubles is also. Not to mention that they are frequently back to back doubles.

It says nothing about bots in your first statement. I mostly play people but do play bots from time to time. Personally I don't think the bots are too bad at this game. There are some that need to improve a bit but you can't have everything. I have not seen anything so far that would make me think there is something dodgy about the die. Do you have example of games that show that doubles are too frequent and not just the one game?

When I played against the bot I got many doubles too. During the game I just finished I rolled a double 6s, followed by another double 6s then a double 5s! And the bot rolled much fewer doubles. I scored two backgammons and won with 9-0. I was very lucky.
Overall I believe odds are even.