Let’s clear something up at this point.

People keep calling non-move-restricted pente an invalid game. I’d like a clear, concise definition of what makes a game invalid.

(From here forward, I’m going to refer to non-move-restricted pente as fun-pente, for short)

Next, the question has arisen as to WHY we want fun-pente; why we can’t just play ‘official’ pente. I can’t speak for everyone, but..

I like the concept of playing a simple game with so few rules. All the rules are basic & straightforward. None of them apply only to one player. There are no restrictions. It’s not convoluted in any way. In a word, I believe I would say one of the things I like best about fun-pente is that it’s elegant. It’s so simple to understand, yet it can be very complex and challenging.

‘Official’ pente is not that way. It has the move restriction. Yes, the game is more challenging, but the elegance of the rules is gone.

Here’s another reason I like fun-pente better. I like to play with other players who, like me, just like to play pente. There are scores of us who just want to sit down and have some fun. Yes, we want to get better. Yes, we want to improve our game. But we don’t want to read books, study charts, memorize databases, etc. in order to do it. There is nothing wrong with studying the game, in fact, I find myself doing more and more of that, because, I am starting to feel that my game has gotten about as good as it is going to just from playing. Does this mean that, as I continue to get better and better, that I will like fun-pente less and less and ‘official’ pente more and more? Possibly. Does it mean that I will ever think that anyone should avoid fun-pente? Absolutely not!!

Here’s something else. I really dislike DSG’s database. I wish Dweebo would take it down. I can compete with even the top players using it. Does that make me a great player? No, it makes me a great looker-upper. Does it improve my pente skills? No. In fact, it probably makes them worse. Now, I need a crutch to win. Thanks to the DSG database, I have learned some good moves, but I have no idea WHY they are good moves. I will never learn to extend that move to another similar situation. My game will not get better than looking up moves allows it to be. There is no fun-pente database. Playing fun-pente forces me to think up winning lines on my own. That alone makes it worth playing over ‘official’ pente for me.

The bottom line is that I like to play fun-pente because it’s, well, fun. It is more fun than ‘official’ pente to me. No one has given me a reason as to why I shouldn’t play it. Gary, you can tell me until you are blue in the face that it is detrimental to the development of ‘official’ pente, but...
(1) I am not yet convinced that it is (although I will continue to listen to those who want to attempt to convince me that it is). In my case, I probably would have quit playing pente by now if I didn’t have fun-pente to play. It has allowed me to elevate my game and still enjoy playing at the same time. So, in my case, it has been beneficial!

(2) Even if it is, so what. Not to be rude, but, aside from the small minority who are striving to make pente the next chess, who cares? Antichess certainly is detrimental to my chess game. I can’t even ‘see’ a chess board anymore. When I look and try to think what move I’d make, all I see are antichess lines and strategy. (For those you you reading this who are unfamiliar with antichess, the basic idea is to lose all your pieces. Check and checkmate don’t count and if you have a capture available you have to take it. Otherwise it’s the same as regular chess, but the strategies are completely different.) But no one is going to tell me antichess is invalid and that I shouldn’t play it because it’s detrimental to the development of chess!

And finally, in response to harley’s previous post, I am not trying to skirt the rules. I fully understand that ‘official’ pente includes the rule about player 1’s second move, but, I like playing without the restriction better. I’m sure others feel exactly as I do on this point. And besides (I hope I don’t get a lot of flack for saying this) what God came down and said, ”These are the official rules, which must be followed by all players at all times and must never be deviated from!”? Dmitri has indicated that there is consideration for modifying the ‘official’ rules to further reduce the advantage player 1 currently has. Gary has created a variation with alternate move restrictions. Others have too. Clearly there is nothing wrong with changing the rules to a game to create a variation.

Thad

PS: I didn’t learn to play the game at IYT.