Just some thoughts...

Dmitri,

Is this debating? And I quote "Why don't you spend less time with your idiotic posts and more time making less pathetic moves in your pente games? You are a joke!!! for all your talk, your challenge is worthless and your moves are pathetic. You are pathetic. You cannnot make a single point of argument."

Wow. Looks like I'm not the only one who's showing some true colors. Nice attacking, ur umm, debating I mean.

Gary,
qoute: "Dmitri King has little tolerance for arguments as opposed to debates."

Bull****. Case in point, the above statement that I quoted. But more to the point, many posts between him and Dufus at DSG. (however, I didn't disagree with any of dmitri's arguments / statements in that case. It's just a good example)

Also, I don't hate you man. I'm just a bit irritated at what I've read here. Am I not allowed to be? Just because I state my opinion doesn't mean I hate you. Please, quit personalizing everything...

One more great one:

ellieoop: "i have a short statement, these long ones are too tiresome. if you don't like playing it the way it is now, then don't play it, but leave the option for those that do."

Dmitri: "ellieoop, you are being stubborn and argumentative. Do you really think you are making a convincing point? How can anyone take you seriously when you ackowledge that you cannot even read through a thoughtful post on the matter, and you simply repeat your unconvincing statement over and over? "I am fully awar of my option to not play the game without the restriction. You do not need to inform me of this right, amazingly enough, I was NOT under the impression that I am being forced to play that way""

That is a sarcastic attack, NOT a paragraph formed for debate. And, in reading that I'd say that you Dmitri are the one who is being stubborn and argumentative.

Just making sure you see that I am not the only one that's argumentative at times... I say this because all the sudden you guys think that I hate you from what I've wrote here. I don't. I said what I said, and stick by it. And the fact is, I really didn't mean for either of you to take me so personally. Then, when you did, I took it personally as well. Things escalated from there.

One more thing:

Gary and Dmitri. I am sorry about resigning our games. I was in a real bad mood that night, and like you two, I personalized what I was reading on this site and made a hasty decision there (I tend to take things too personally sometimes, and I also tend to act before I think things through). Those were both interesting games. Of course, I had you both whipped. (that's a joke...trying to lighten the tension here). Anyways, it looks like Fencer has made a decision. I will not be commenting on the non-restricted games any longer. In fact, I will not be commenting here at all any longer.
Regards,
-Scott

Pompous is the only word that comes to mind.

you wrote:
"BUt I stand my my definition of "pseudopente," I think it is fitting. What do you suggest calling it? Don't say "pente" because htat is already in use by the real version of the game."

I own and origianl set, WITH the original rules. They do NOT state a restriction on the first move for the game of PENTE. That makes it the REAL version of the game.

I believe that tourney rule pente came later (especially in popularity of play), and therefore should have its own name! Pro Pente is fine by me.

-Satan

Dmitri,

You're ridiculous. I find it laughable that most of the time someone disagress with you, you become VERY sarcastic.

Also, I did not realize that the chess variants had been addressed earlier. It seems there are posts that I missed. Sorry about re-hashing a point that was already made. I'm not saying that you oppose variants of any sort. But I do find it interesting that it's ok for you to pick and choose what variants of what games should be played, and why, but other people shouldn't.

And your dumb-ass tic tac toe remark is ludicrous. Regular pente offers a hell of a lot more complexity than tic tac toe.

If you remember correctly, you and I played 2 games of regular pente at IYT. I beat you with the greatest of ease as player one. Yet, conversely, you had a hell of a time winning as player one. And had I given that game a bit more thought, I may have came out victorious. If you rememeber correctly, Gary's analysis was that you only had a "slight" edge towards the end. But how can that be? Shouldn't you have had a TOTAL edge the whole game (you didnt!)? Why do you think that was? I'll tell you why. I'm a crafty regular pente player. And I'm not the only one. And for people like me, there IS exitement in trying to win a game you should lose. So please, dispense with the sarcasm (i.e. fake pente, etc).

One last thing. You didn't address my point either. In my ORIGINAL pente rule book, regular pente is listed, as well as tourney. Tom Braunlich wrote a book on REGULAR pente strategy that is still relevant today for beginners and intermediates. Therefor, there are / were official rules for this game. And it was addressed and played by one of the greatest players ever. AND, I bet back then, Tom Braunlich enjoyed playing regular pente. Why shouldn't I or anyone else?

Here's an idea. If you want a Pro pente only site, make one. Then you can make all the rules and stipulations you like / want and live in your own little world where everything comes up Dmitri King's way...Which seems to be the way that all of us MUST conform to as far as you're concerned.

-Satan

Especially you Dmitri. In my original pente set, the rules state two ways of playing the game (well, actually more, but I'll stick with what we are talking about here). With the tourney rule and without it. It is not up to you nor Gary, nor anyone for that matter to decide how people should enjoy playing this game. If they choose tourney rule, fine. If not, that's also fine. The only exception to this would be in TOURNAMENT play, where the rules are defined before sign-up and actual play. But in regular play of any game, it is not up to you or Gary to make that decision for others on how a game should be played. It is up to the individual. We all have the freedom to choose which games we like to play. Since you like to use the chess example, I'll use one of my own: At IYT they have MANY chess variations (and I believe on this site as well). You once told me that you like to play some of these diferent variations because you find them fun and challenging in a different way. But, it's not traditional chess, and these chess variations are most CERTAINLY NOT found in the "official" chess rules. But you enjoy playing them any ways. And rightly so. They're games.

You and gary both know that I take tourney rule pente fairly seriously. Yet, I still enter a regular pente tourney every now and then. Why? Because, forced win for player 1 or not, I enjoy trying to win as player 2. What I'm trying to say is I ENJOY both games. I also believe that if you take away the players' choices of games here, you will most definitely be alienating many people. Some of these people might even have considered contributing to the site. But, since the game they want to play can not be found here, they'll go somewhere else (e.g. IYT). Who's going to make up for the possible money then lost by the site owner? You two? I doubt it.

-Scott aka Snutter aka Satan