January All Games over 1600

Starts Wednesday
Single game round robin. Maximum 5 per section so the most games you can add is four. 3 day time limit.

You put your money where your mouth was and settled up. Right admirable of you. Congratulations on solving it Mark Mammel.

Such self-righteousness! If I was in that organization, I'd do what I could to get you out of it!

Just because Thad didn't see it as a new group, you got no business acting so high faluting about it. Perhaps after the meeting and the organizing and things are up and running, you'll have some firm ground to look down from and talk like that. All the same your very attitude and presumption of holding back or bestowing of favor upon those you deem worthy is a major turn off to most people. Isn't that called being pompous? I'm not the first to level that word in your direction. You are so zealous in your cause that you are hampering its developement. Least ways, that's how you I see it.

In the month since I've posted to this board you've become quite a bit more strident. Perhaps I should look through all the posts that I've missed. I remember that Thad would generally ignore me and was quite nice and pleasant towards you. What possibly could've happened in that short amount of time between the two of you? Seems to me you should cultivate people like him. Any group should be happy have him around. Your buds and you don't need nobody, right? Form your group and have at it. Kicking people out of it before the Federation is formed. Yeah, that's a real good outreach method. Shouldn't you atleast wait until officers are elected and a motion is put up to kick Thad out first?

You mention Mark Mammel in your list of Federation founders. He seemd quite cordial to Thad just now when answering things in his post. Perhaps it is you that should step back and cool down? As for the others in your list, why don't you direct them over here and let 'em speak for themselves about kicking Thad out or even who's going to be determining who can be a member or not? Can I join?

Gary, as you once pointed out how I debate, I'm pointing out one you've done often. Lots and lots of posting after someone puts up a disagreeable post directed towards you.
Yeah, I have long posts too, but not in this manner or pattern.

Gary-An example of poofing one's own pieces.
In Ultima you are allowed to suicide a piece if your opponent has him immobilized. An efective plan at times when trying to attack the Immobilizer or open up a line to pass the Immobilizer. It counts as your turn, but not as a move as a stalemate in Ultima is a win for the player that moves last. It was my search to play this game that led to me finding IYT in the first place! They still don't have it, nor does any one else except the chess variant's robot. Now I can actually point to it as an example in a posting. It appears it'll be last posting, since I completed my last game on this site yesterday.

I see nothing wrong with draws. The frequency of them or how they were earned is something I can have problems with. They way that Pente is played, a draw can't happen in play. So why are the players allowed to agree to a draw? A result that can't happen in the play, should not be allowed to happen. The Poof version has a draw possiblity. Apparently it has never happened in the play of the game and is just an example in a composed problem. Why suddenly outlaw it for a game that isn't even played except by waterdancer? He made it up, let him play it his way. Just having the possibilty of a draw might induce the player who thinks he has the winning position to force a different result, whereas the his opponent has something to play for beside an outright loss.

What does communism have to do with draws? I am against the enforced equality of socialism, but if two or more sides duke it out and it ends up tied that's the way it should be. This whole culture of insisting on having a winner cheapens a lot of sporting contests. Especially in the manner that they break the ties. Soccer is the best example of this. Looks like college football has fallen into the trap too. Games that used to end in a tie are now played with some other version of football after regulation time to determine a winner.

Thad, why not go there? Gary even invited you to. Kind of like how you bowed out about the aluminum bats, eh? Your idea of allowing the player to move second to have a win in a draw position sounds like a way to help with his disadvantage of going second.

It'd be an easy thing to curtail the number of draws in chess. Just make a stalemate a win for the player to move last. The only way to have draws (aside from agreement) would be perpetual check and repetitive position. Neither of which happen much. The stalemate or threat of it happens in a lot of games. This minor change in the rules would greatly affect the play of game though. Seems like this was debated 30 or 40 years ago, and was rejected by the chess powers. Chess has stayed the same for a long time. They complained about the number of draws increasing then and haven't as yet come up with an way to change it. They have held matches where draws don't count and the game is replayed. But that's not a practical solution in a round robin or Swiss formatted tournament.

Hmmm, you got me thinking. Why not devise a version of Pente that will make draws possible and about as likely as they are in Reversi? That should level the playing field, or will it? I like the heading on some of the earlier posts in this section "Thoughts for rules changes to improve pente. Making pente with no opening move restriction a fair game.Pente for points (not exactly like the original variant)". I've got to hand it to you guys that you really are trying to come up with something that'll work.

Dmitri- A draw is possible in Checkers. If both players have one King each and one of them is in a double corner, he cannot be forced out of there and it'll be a draw.

Time for work.

New! Fencer 18. April 2003, 02:38:13
I've just decided to add an option for small pente and small keryo pente games to turn on/off the move restriction. It should be acceptable for everyone.
Otherwise, this arguing will never end.
--------------------------------------------
Well, he's probably wrong about the arguing, but I'm glad he's making the change! Yeehaw!

Where did I say I didn't want to be a part of longterm thinking? I said I didn't want to be a part of YOUR longterm scheme. I have very longterm plans. Playing Keryo Pente with you in charge isn't one of them. You realy need to step back, and look at what you think Pente can become. That posting of mine that got you to respond in anger is still the one of mine that sums up what I think is wrong with your plan. I believe the post just before it touches on it too. Ever since that time, the posts have had a personal attack to them. Too bad. As Thad just showed, you're interfering with me and I see no reason for it except that you want everyone to fall inline behind you.

Figures don't lie, but liars figure. Ain't that how it goes? I personally don't want to be a part of your grand Pente universe, now or in the far flung future. I just want to play a game with like minded individuals that couldn't care one way or the other about such things. And I don't want ot wait 20 years!

See Dmitri, he argues lots better than you and I combined. I agree with him about how he used your own argument to refute what you've argued about. Exactly why would it hurt someone from becoming a good player? If they can't adapt, then they probably won't become one.
That's 2 more points for Pioneer54 in the current tallying.

You keep slamming it into a wall with these guys it's going to start hurting. I'm fading away from this site. Even if I disagreed with your last post, and believe me I quite agree with it including your reference to some of my in poor taste posts even though you didn't name names, yours was well spoken and stated in clear language exactly what it is. I especially like your argument of putting the shoe on the other foot. Very good idea. They are so sure of the righteousness of their cause, the would dismiss out of hand such a notion as changing the rules to the other Pente!
I typed to Gary in one of our "Demostration" games that I was going to stop posting here. I will try hard to do so. I am down to six games on this site. It might take a couple weeks to clear them. Dark Chess being a longer game even with opponents that move regularly. Until then I might stop here from time to time.

Gary, the time limit was set incase of an emergency or something else pressing came up, not give you extra time to check all your resources for you to win the game or read and answer posts on these boards. Especially since you said you could win so easily it wouldn't amount to much of a game or take much effort on your part. You've been on for atleast a couple of hours now and you still haven't moved! We could've played a couple games by now since we both happened to be online at the same time. I'm going to bed now, so it'll have to wait for another day.

Gary, the time limit was set incase of an emergency or something else pressing came up, not give you extra time to check all your resources for you to win the game or read and answer posts on these boards. Especially since you said you could win so easily it wouldn't amount to much of a game or take much effort on your part. You've been on for atleast a couple of hours now and you still haven't moved! We could've played a couple games by now since we both happened to be online at the same time. I'm going to bed now, so it'll have to wait for another day.

Satan, I think you should add "Censor" to your word list. Do we get to vote on who gets to be the moderator? Or what powers over the discussions he shall have?

Satan, I think you should add "Censor" to your word list. Do we get to vote on who gets to be the moderator? Or what powers over the discussions he shall have?

Thad, those are the reasons that they're not used in the Majors or I believe AAA or any of the other minor leagues. I'm not sure if any of the professional leagues affiliated with Major League Baseball use them. A wooden bat is a lot cheaper than an aluminum bat, but it has one big disadvantage. Especially over a season. They break. They had to address those issues in college baseball because them very things happened. Especially the homeruns. The aluminum bat manufacturers kept improving the bats for distance and homeruns went up a lot during the 1990's. I haven't heard if what they did to the aluminum bats has worked recently. The were going to impose some sort of way to restrict how fast a ball could come off the bat after being struck. Tests and measurements, facts and figures, then of course the contracts with the bat manufactureres. I believe some of the colleges cried foul because of all the money invested in the bats, so it was supposed to be phased in these last few years as they acquired the new bats to conform with the new rules.

I give.

Oh, could you move in our games? If you have the time to answer idiots like me on a posting board, you could surely find time to move in our games. A move a week, what a mastermind! Had I known you were going to do that under the conditions that we set forth, let alone enlist Dmitri's help, I would never have agreed to play you.

I give.

Oh, could you move in our games? If you have the time to answer idiots like me on a posting board, you could surely find time to move in our games. A move a week, what a mastermind! Had I known you were going to do that under the condition that we set forth, let alone enlist Dmitri help, I would never have agreed to play you.

No it isn't. You define the terms of the debate and then what are we supposed to do? Nope, I'm not going along with that. With them conditions it'd be almost impossible to come up with a counter example. (Risk, Short Monopoly, Black Hole Reversi, are three that come to mind though I doubt if you'll find them acceptable) So why should I bother?

The issue isn't dead, aside from the fact that you had a major hand in killing a game we like, that is. Especially Keryo Pente on a 13 X 13 board without the move restriction. Maybe Pente is as you say, but you haven't shown it in Keryo Pente on a 13 X 13 board. Even if you did, Satan's response to it is quite eloquent and covers most of the reasons that I like the game played that way.

Just how much pull do you have with Fencer? He's going to listen to you, is he? If that's the case, and it appears so in some ways, I fear for the long term viability of fun for me on this site. As a private letter sent to me(Not from Fencer) stated, "I'm thinking of giving up Pente." He wrote this not talking about the versions of Pente, but his perception of how you guys go about your business of being the Keepers of All That's Pure and Standard of Pente as Played on a 19 X 19 Board. I'm tending to argee with him.

I'm starting to wonder if your being rebuffed at IYT is why you're so down on them now? I never read the posting boards there(if they have them) so I wouldn't know if you tried without success to get them to change the way their Keryo Pente is played or not. I know they ignore most everyone, but it probably has a lot to do with how many people are members and that they're raking in the money now. Perhaps I'll give them some more time. After all, they have stated that they're going to be adding things in the near future.

May I direct everyone's attention to the Small Pente discussion post board. Satan has stepped into the middle of the running debate about the move restriction and board size without having been aware of the posts made here or at the Tournament Discussion place a month or two ago. Amazing how he sums up Dmitri!

Hear! Hear, Satan! Amazing, here on the Pente board I have found someone who has missed the whole discussion about the smaller board and the move restriction that we've been having about Keryo Pente, but he comes to the same conclusion about it talking about Pente as quite a few others and I have! Satan, back about a month or two ago a discussion got started on the merits of Keryo Pente being played on the 13 X 13 board in the Tournament Discussion board. The webmaster(Fencer) then created that game on this site. It originally had no move restriction. It now does. Anyways, if you'd like to see just what a nitwit Dmitri is, you can find the posts and various other people's replies starting there(you might have to go back a page or two now) and then move to the Small Keryo Pente discussion board to find the rest of them. I've had a running thing going with him that you'll find through out it. He seems to think his postings are eloquent to no end, but they're not. Aside from his stated objection to allowing it, he never really addresses anybody's liking for the Original Pente (Hey, I like that name for it!) except in some grandiose vision of it being detrimental to their developement as Pente players. I have since dubbed him "The Keeper of All That's Pure and Standard About Pente as Played on a 19 X 19 Board". When I point out things like this he ignores them and then tells me that I haven't said anything. So I have given into attacking him or atleast just pointing out the errors in his ways. I've recently slowed this down as it isn't doing much for me. So it's with great pleasure that recent posts on the Small Keryo Pente board and here by other players have been along the lines of how I argue and feel about the game. Especially good players like you who he might listen to. I liked the way you pointed out how some games between the two of you went.
I happen to like Keryo Pente more than Pente. I've only played Keryo Pente on a 13 X 13 board without the move restriction. Keryo Pente is a newer version of Pente than Pente with the move restriction(Pro Pente). Maybe when it's played on 19 X 19 board the first player still has an advantage, I don't know. I like the 13 X 13 version without the move restriction. Regardless of how big the first to move player's advantage is. As Dmitri might tell you or you'll read in the postings, I've even argued for a smaller board to see how a game would play(10 X 10 or 9 X 9). Anyway, these guys have always played Keryo Pente on the 19 X 19 with the move restriction. Then they have it within themselves to dictate to us people that like playing on the 13 X 13 game that we have to have the move restriction. A version they don't play and are against! Now those of us that like it can't play it here. Back to ol' It's Your Turn, I suppose.

Dmitri, we all know why you're singled out!

Aluminum bats are used because the cost over the season is less than using wood bats.
Baseball doesn't make money for colleges in the way football and basketball do.

Hear! Hear, Thad! I argee with you in your last post and could not have said it better.

I did not refer to Bridge as a game of luck. I said it is a game that has luck involved in it. A lot smaller than the amount of luck in Backgammon or Cribbage, but there's still some luck involved. Perhaps you should read my posts more carefully as you criticize my reasoning and debating skills. You might be right about my ascertain that IYT did right with the game. If they never had put it on, then no one would be playing it. Isn't that what I said? You still attacked it. I notice you didn't argue with the fading away of Pente that I made up. And just how is it that you argue that Pente without the move restriction isn't variant of Pente? The original game was played that way! Surely that qualifies as a variant?! So that version has fallen from favor by the powers that be(read: you). It is still a variant, not something else. The current version was made up out of it.
I never mentioned your father, either. I was right, your mom is proud of you. And look who's nitpicking over my use of grammar. Least ways I do pretty good for a high school drop out Mr. Test Giver. I'm glad I'm not one of your students.

I'm glad you're healthy, you have me there. Perhaps I've been fooling myself and my actions on this board have just been a justification to myself to stay up late and not be able to get my lazy self up and over to the gym to work out nor ride my bicycle to work. Geez, I missed work today just so I could reply to your posts. Yep, I'm beginning to see the error in my ways and am getting soft in head and body because of it.

None other than Gary himself told me that Milton Bradley bought the rights to Pente in 1984. Why don't you ask him? Maybe he has it wrong and I shouldn't use him for information, but I've had no reason to doubt him. Perhaps the next time you attack me for saying something like Milton Bradley has the rights or anything else that I make up, it would help your side of the argument to bring the facts with you and directly refute it.

So what if you are one the best players of Pente in the country, world, universe? An achievement to be sure, but there's more to it that. You sure don't carry yourself like a champion. I am the best Building player in the world, though not the current champion. I appear to be one of the best Dark Chess players, though I think the game can be played better than I play it and I think this of Building too. The world is not black and white as you seem to draw it. Lots of grey areas.

Your proposed solution is what others and myself have said all long. Except for changing the name of the game that is. Each version could have it's own name, you act like that's a major deal. I would lump them under a Pente banner and then list the versions there. It'd be easy to find. Kind of like what Fencer did with these post boards when he put them under the Line4 and variant heading. People are way ahead of you here.

Let's play some games on the side Dmitri. Sure you'll win all the games, but atleast these rants of yours and mine can be between us and save the rest of the people from having to read it. Entertaining as they might be. Nah, perhaps we already have the right forum, never mind.

Got to go, perhaps more later though I'm getting doubtful about it.

Dmitri, you really should read your posts as you accuse me of the things you say in them. All of those things are things you do towards me. You talk in such absolutionist terms, ALL, NEVER, and a complete disdain for what I say. I spent a lot of time typing these postings. Unlike you it appears. I try to put some care into what I say so it won't be misconstrued, and yet I don't mind dishing something out to people that I think have it coming to them. Like you Dmitri! This really is a waste of my time and I think I just might completely curtail playing games on these sites. There's much better things I could be doing than sitting here typing to some nitwit whose only thing to do is tell me how stupid I am because I disagree. I bet you make your Mom right proud don't you Dmitri?

Yep, the Money Order is in the envelope and I was going to post it first thing out of the house today. I even checked the postage and affixed 80¢ worth of stamps to it so that it'd make the trip to the Czech Republic. I think I'll hold onto it for awhile now and rethink my decision. Perhaps Fencer can help me decide what I should do. You guys convinced him to change the game. Perhaps those of us that like the other way to play can get it brought back. The programming is still there, right? If you do bring it back Fencer, I'd make all the options possible from the same Pente page. Otherwise we'll be swimming in Pente links. If you're not going to bring it back, I would like to know why. Private message or public post is fine by me. I might join your site or not irregardless of what you decide. After all, Dark Chess is game I play on your site. Though I wouldn't mind having the other Keryo game here to play so I could leave IYT and not pay for both of them.

Gary, you've been quite courteous in your demeanor towards my flights of fantasy on various subjects about Pente and other things. Our last two postings are directed mostly towards each other and have taken a sharper turn. All the same, I respect most of what you say inspite some of the way you rebutted me in your anger. Got under your skin a bit did I? Hopefully some of that will clear a little with my last long post, though I did throw some more gasoline on the fire in places.

You just refuse to see it or understand for your own personal agenda and reasons. I have given reasons, you disagree with them. Fine, but you don't have to come down on me or others like the King of the Mountain Hall and slay all us valley people to have your say. We like to play the other version, variant, nuance, or whatever you insist it is or isn't. It's a game with its own rules. Let me reiterate this one more time. If you don't like it, don't play it. Why stop me from playing it? I doesn't matter if you approve of it or not. I still want to play it. That's reason enough, let alone other reasons I've given.

<Thanks to you and your other champion friends and keepers of all that's pure and standard of Pente as played on a 19 X 19 board. Why do you and Dmitri think that what you say about Pente should be taken as gospel? Yeah, you're good players. So what? If you don't see what's happened to Pente in it's 25 year history, why are you asking me if I have? It was a fad briefly and has faded away. The internet has done more to give it a new lease on life than any of these ideas of yours have done to promote it. By design or not it's a good thing IYT made the 13 X 13 board and used the original move rules too. Had they gone and made it as you guys would have it from the start I believe a lot less people would play it, nor would there be much discussion here about it or it's future. You're too close to it. Lots of trees, where is that forest? So what if I think chess is a better game? Why should that stop me from playing any game that's not chess? You don't like playing without the move restriction, so that gives you the right to make it so I can't play without it? And you're mad? Perhaps you should have been more engaging in the earlier posts and you could have anticipated some of mine and other's reaction to what you've done. Oh well. You've won this game too.

As for games involving luck. There's plenty of big tournaments involving them. Of games most people play or have heard of. Backgammon, Cribbage, Bridge to name three. Thousands of people play them regularly and daily. So there's a Pente tournament and 20 or 30 of might show up. It's news in Missouri, but I doubt if I'll find any mention of it in the Los Angeles Times. Perhaps the fact that there isn't a sponsor should clue you in to the problem. They don't see any future in it, nor do they want to put their money into it even if there's none to be made from it. I wonder why? Like I said earlier, it's too bad I'm not rich, I'd sponsor some Pente tournaments. Not enough so you'd get a professional player living off his winnings, but enough so that it might make the paper from time to time when the tour hit town. Like Bridge and Cribbage do.

You are quite mistaken in your belief that luck is not a good selling point. When there's no luck involved, the better player wins almost every time unless the game can be played perfectly then one player or the other always wins. In a game with luck, this isn't true. It usually is, but not every time. People can root for the underdog and know he might win. Hence the popularity of Poker and the almost complete obscurity of Pente. Chess is about the only game of pure skill that has such a big following. It's history among games is quite unique in a lot of ways. Even the design of the board and men is a history lesson.

My friends will stop by and ask what I'm playing on the computer. If I say Pente, I get blank looks. If I say Chess, they know what I'm playing. Go ahead, blame it on my ignorant friends if that's what you think. I've been playing games in this neighborhood for over 40 years and that's how it is. I have to search out places to play other games.
Chess is dying in a certain way. Computers will eventually play it better than people do. It's already happened to Checkers and it's going to happen to Chess. I was happy to see Kasparov play and win a game. Oh, by the way, who won the match?

Perhaps the guy that beat you 6 times in a row was using a computer? Or he just plays better than you? That's a big problem with this internet game playing. That's one reason I like Dark Chess. No kibitzers and no computer players. Just because a game doesn't have perfect information in it doesn't mean it's not a hard or challenging game to play well. Bridge is hard game to master. Dark Chess, though new, is looking like such a game too. Obvisiously there's skill in it or I'd not have such a record at it. Even Backgammon has skill, though it definitely has a lot of luck in it. The amount of luck determines how one should play the game if he wants to be successful at it. Being able to play without perfect information requires a type of judgment that Chess and Pente do not have in them. It forces one to make assumptions and take chances at times during the game. That never happens in a well played game of Chess or Pente. It's all on the board staring you in the face. In theory, it shouldn't matter who your opponent is as long as you make the best move each time. Especially games that have perfect information like Chess or Pente or Checkers. Since I have to assume every opponent can use aids or cheat at their leisure, I can't see why you get so worked up over what version of the game two of us might be playing. The games don't count in the official standings of anything and I just want to have some fun. And you don't have to play the game if you don't like how the game is played. It bears repeating since you just don't seem to get that and keep whipping out these Chess analogies about missing Rooks and now have helped eliminate one form of a game that many people enjoy and didn't ask you if they wanted to play better or serious or become leading players and champions of. Chess starts with a supposedly equally matched sides, as does Pente. Going first creates inequalties in both games. Obviously to you it's very pronounced in Pente toward the player moving first. Lots of people can't see that, or if aware of it don't care. They just want to play with simple rules and switch sides and play another game when the one they're playing is done.

Just how much study of our games are you doing? I'm easy pickings for a champion like yourself. You're on everyday and you can't make a move in our game? Especially a game that you are using to prove a point? I was hoping that one of the others in your demostration might win a game, but now it doesn't matter since Fencer has gone and made your change anyway.

I can too say this!
>> Pente will probably never be as popular as chess, nor, I dare say, even as popular as it once was. Do you deny that this is true? Sure I can't predict the future, but the past is there for all to see. Based on that and how things seem to be going, I might be pretty close to the short term future too. Say out to about 100,000 years?

I read all your posts in the places the I've replied. I even try to understnd where you and others are coming from when you type the things that you do. Not like it appears you or especially Dmitri have done towards ellieoops' earlier post or Kevin's. I may not be the best communicator of my ideas and ideals, but I don't say things I know to be false.

Chess is more popular now than ever? You are wrong about that. Maybe in shear numbers of players(U.S. population growth), but not in overall awareness or interest in the general population is that true. I have to assume that you're under thirty years old to say that. Or your memory is slipping. Bobby Fischer's match with Boris Spassky was lots bigger newswise than the Deep Blue deal is or has been. FIDE, now there's a top notch, well run organization to emulate if I ever saw one! Right. You would be better off trying the ACBL as an organization to copy. Their game is fading away, but they are taking steps to keep it going for the while and even reverse the trend. Most games need younger players coming into the game to keep steady or expand. Bridge is graying daily. Why don't you and the other players of Pente form a syndicate and buy the rights from Milton Bradley? I bet it wouldn't cost too much. Under a million bucks for sure.

You didn't think much of my theory that in the early 1980's a major part of Pente's decline was caused be video games, CD's, music videos and computers. It sounds a lot more plausable than anything else I've heard. Chess weathered the storm in part because computer programmers used it to demostrate computer programming and because it really is a good game. Though it has perfect information, the number of different moves is still beyond any reckoning and it gives each game played a sense of novelty to it. I've only played a few hundred games of Pente and Keryo Pente, but there's a lot of sameness to a lot of the games. Yes it is just appearance as I've learned from playing that a slight difference of position is completely different game, but compare the first five moves in Pente to Chess's first five moves. Still, Pente has a lot of novelty for me and there are times that I'm very surprised in how a game goes. I also like patterns made while playing. I've commented on it to some of my opponents, but I've not received much response in that area. You were the first person I seen made mention of it.

The someone that suggested the game with two five in a rows or one six in a row or longer or bag twice as many dudes was me. I came up with the idea awhile back and tried to interest IYT and have mentioned it to a couple of my opponents on IYT to see what kind of response it'd get. I believe this version would be best on the 19 X 19 board and a move restriction wouldn't be nescessary, but couldn't hurt it either. Since none of my friends play Pente, I have no way to easily play such a game. As with the 10 X 10 board. When I joined this site and found the message boards I posted it again. I believe the first time was on the tournament board before we moved things over to this section of postings.

So I say things I apparently have very little knowledge or way of proving. You do the same thing. What's the difference? You can have the soapbox when I step off of it.

And back to this post's main point. I used to have a choice as to what version of Keryo Pente to play, now I don't. You get to play the version you like on both size boards now. I'm joining this site as a paying member, but I think I will stay on at IYT too. If only to play Keryo Pente on the 13 X 13 board without the move restriction. It'll be my luck though and they'll suddenly see your way and change it there too.

Pente will probably never be as popular as chess, nor, I dare say, even as popular as it once was. It's not as good as a game, nor as interesting. It's even more boring to watch than chess is! Playing them is different. I like to play them both. I know no one that plays Pente in any form. All of my friends can play chess, or atleast have heard of it. Though none of them play it. Not when there's cards to be dealt. If you guys haven't noticed, even chess is dying out in certain ways. Damn computers!
Are you right that there's only 20 masters of Pente? I find this number quite low. As easy as it is to learn Pente, you'd think there'd be lots of real good and master players around. That's one big plus in Pente's and Keryo Pente's side, easy to learn. Mastering them is a whole different thing all together. But it's just putting spots on a lined up board and there's not much excitement in that. A great intellectual challange, yes, but excitement or interest for the casual person, no. Atleast chess has different looking men and sudden movement in its favor.

I think it should be a choice as to having a move restriction or not. Your chess analogies are quite good, but you're comparing apples to oranges. No master of chess will take me serious at regular chess just because I'm one of the best players at a variant of it. So why should Pente be any different between us non-serious players and you champions irregardless of what rules we play by? You guys play and argue amongst yourselves about things that are of little concern to someone that just wants to play the game. You convinced Fencer and now we're stuck with it unless he adds or changes it again. Gary, how come you didn't get him to add the move restriction option that you told me about that the second player places the next three moves and the first player decides if he is going to be the first to move player or make the second player be the first to move player? That version is certainly more fair than the current move restriction standard game, and would be just as much fun. And it could get some play and you'd see if it'd work well or not. The ol' data base you keep plugging would get some data put into it. Why not have it on as well?

If the Official Rules Committee (whoever they happen to be) was to adopt it tomorrow, what would happen to all the players that want to play with the current move restriction? If you're right about Pente being no good even with the move restriction, why are you foisting it upon us? Now we have to play with your guys' imposed version on the 13 X 13 board that neither of you want to play on. Seems unfair and hypocritical to me. I agree with ellieoop, if you don't like the game, don't play the game. If you say the current way is flawed, why force us to play it. You guys seem to view it as an assault to the standard game and are intent on stopping anyone that tries to play a different version.
I am going to play some Keryo Pente on the 19 X 19 board and see how I like the game played that way. Even if I find it to be a better game than the Keryo Pente that I'm used to playing, I don't see why I should be prevented from playing a different way because you don't approve of it. Just imagine if a group of chess masters came to this site and convinced the owners that they shouldn't have any chess variants on it for all the reasons you've given about Pente and Fencer got rid of them. I'm sure there'd be an outpouring of complaints if that happened. I fail to see how this is any different than that. Just because you're the best player in the world at one version of a game doesn't mean I should be forced to play it.

(Note: most of the "you" 's in this posting are meant to be the all-encompassing second person, not to a specific individual except where explicit shown or stated.)

Since when is 13 X 13 the official rules? We haven't even finished any of our games yet. I take it you're one of the people that convinced him to make it that way? I still think it'd be nice to have the option of having the restriction or not, especially on non-official size boards. Perhaps you win every time without the move restriction when you're first to move, but someone could create a tournament that would exclude players of your caliber from playing in them as they've done to me in certain Dark Chess tournaments on this site. Oh well, atleast I can play it on It's Your Turn still, since I know they ignore everyone no matter how good the idea is. :)

Does this mean it will always be in effect, or will the game creator have the option of disabling the move restriction if he choses to?

I switched to the larger setting. It looks lots better than the smaller one. The colors are kind of bright on my screen, but I can see the game well enough. IYT uses purple for Keryo Pente also, but theirs is muted a little and seems easier to view on my screen. On this site the Keryo Pente graphics almost have an over saturated appearance on my screen.

How about Fourone or Flirpasloo?
Though a handicap system would probably not be the way to go.

Copy of a message from me to samwise 4-3-3
Seeing how IYT isn't too costumer orientated except as it applies to it helping their bottom line, I think they only started the 13 X 13 game board so that they could get people with WebTV connections to join their service without realizing the ramifications of what it does to the game or the people that play it at the championship level. Apparently the 19 X 19 board doesn't show on WebTV, though I haven't ever seen it. The owners of BrainKing have had to accomodate this reality too, but also some people like to play the game on the smaller board as compared to the larger one. This has infuriated some players of the standard game and that has been what has caused the postings of recent note. Now there's a different set of players because of IYT game that have never played Pente using the standard 19 X 19 board and might feel threatened about the demise of the 13 X 13 board if the others hold sway with the owners of the various web sites. Plus the move restriction being used or not seems to get everyone on edge too. Some of the better 13 X 13 players from IYT are playing Gary Barnes with him going first on the 13 X 13 board so he can demonstrate to them that the player that moves first has an overwhelming advantage when the move restriction isn't used even when the game is played on the smaller board.

I agree with you Kevin. I like trying other versions of the games. Since Dmitri is the self-appointed "Keeper of All That's Pure and Standard of Pente as Played on a 19 X 19 Board" you're going to get endless complaining from him about even the mention of something different. He and I have had a running discourse that has more or less ended for me as he showed to me that he doesn't care what I think or try to even see what it is that I'm talking about. Your current postings with him look like an exact rehash of the ones him and I had on the tournament board and recently on the Keryo Pente board. He types lots and doesn't say much, just fights against it. He must really pound them keys while mistyping his memos to all concerned too.
While I can attack him all I want, it is growing tedious and making me look the same. How's that saying go? If he won't come up to my level, I'll have to go down to his? As I consider myself a nonserious player of inline games and their many versions, I should according to him shut up and leave it in much more capable hands (Excuse me "samwise" for paraphrasing, but he did agree with your post quite zealously). Geeze, and can you believe he called me arrogant?

A simple thing to understand is, if the people playing a game are happy playing it, who cares what someone else thinks about the game unless they are able to prevent you from playing it? If it was in Dmitri's power there'd be no other version of Pente anywhere. Probably not even Keryo Pente, though I can't say that for sure. As you noticed, he changes his tune when some of the heavyweights of the game that he obviously respects chip in their two cents. Though I won't promise, and it would take a sizable change in how he treats me and others in his postings that disagree with him, this will probably be my last post towards him. I will however continue to post about games and variations of them and ask for ideas and help about them too. Including nonstandard Pente boards and rules. Games evolve. Pente has, it'll probably change again. I doubt if Dmitri in his admonishment of the smaller boards or the rules differences has really studied all the ramifications of changing the parameters of his beloved Pente on a 19 X 19 board with the move restriction?

Topic in the title:
Perhaps the makers of this or other sites could set up the games so that the creator of a game could control more than just the time limit and choice of colors? Boardsize and move restriction could be options for Pente. Creators of tournaments could make it standard or try something else. Since I've gotten no response about my idea for Keryo Pente on a 9 X 9 or 10 X 10 (Except Dmitri's scoffing and complaining that is) I can assume that there's quite a bit of resistance or apathy or both to it. Either way, I sure if I was able to set up such a game someone would play me a game of it. That's the point I'm making. That person and me could have fun playing it, and that's what would matter. If we didn't have fun, we wouldn't need someone telling us we are playing a wrong game. We would just not play it any more.

Perhaps you could proofread it too, Dmtitri?

Is it coming next, Fencer? :)

I'm saying this as a tease, but I'm also serious about giving a whirl if it comes about. It'd make a game simular to the Spider Line 4, but with captures and the possibilty of filling up the board. It may or may not be fun to play, I don't know. I imagine making the board size changable before play starts isn't worth the trouble it'd take to see, eh? I suppose the players themselves could agree to not use part of the board before the game starts and then they'd have to stick to it.
You must be one dedicated and smart programmer to make such major additions on such short notice. I'm rooting for your site succeed and it appears that it is. Word of mouth will bring in lots more.

<Dmitri, I assume you're beside yourself now. Mr. Fencer added the smaller versions of both games to your great consternation it appears. I do take much joy in the fact, and it does seem fitting in a way. Your close minded and blinders-on way of arguing has probably alienated some of the people that took your side of the debate too. As I said in quite a few of the posts on the tournament page until we moved it over to this area, fun is the reason to play the games. I also think experimenting with different formats is fun. I agreed with you and Gary that tournaments need standards to be played, but that doesn't preclude other forms of a game from being played, tournament or no.
After reading your rebuttal to Blazes' post I'm convinced that you're completely off your rocker.
You accuse her of making blanket statements and then in the very next paragraph you make one yourself!
>> The new versions are detrimental to the game.<
No, "I think" or "I believe" just a flat out declaration of it as a fact. Yep, you really should listen to your own advice from the previous post. Which I've copied and put here next.
>> I am going to try not to make too big of an issue out of this, because previous discussion on the matter was not very productive.
Of all the people that have taken a care about this subject and posted anything related to it, yours is the only one negative and totally against it that I've read. Even Gary, though not much liking the smaller format doesn't rant and rave about them. And if you're going to claim knowledge and experience way aren't you displaying any of them? Just from the way you've been arguing I'd say you're not even coming to close to understanding my view point in this whole debate. I've got a pretty good handle on yours and have stated most of it in this post and some my recent ones that were directed toward you in the tournament board.
By the way, I have lost my respect for you. I also am going to root for your opponents in this Oklahoma tournament you've mentioned. If I had lots of money I'd even sponsor part of it and include some of the 13 X 13 boards because I had the wherewithal to do so. Fortunately for you, I drive truck for a living and don't have money to burn or I'd make it happen(Sounds like an idle threat, what was I thinking when I typed this). You need to learn something about people and games and climb down from that high horse you're sitting on.
Lighten up.
It's just a game.

<Pioneer54, it was I who posted it in the tournament discussion board. It's down a bit, but it's still on the first page. An exerp>>
A version of Pente that I thought up a few months back would be best played on the 19 X 19 board. I call it Double Pente. To win you have to get two five in a rows on the board at the same time or one six or longer in a row or you have to bag 20 dudes. For Keryo I suppose it could be 30 dudes. I think it'd be a fun game. It would take more moves to play and would certainly lessen the first player's advantage a little.
I just checked, it's the last post now. It'll probably drop to a back page soon.

I almost dismissed that as the jest it was meant to be, but it got me thinking. Boards of 1 X 1, 2 X 2, and 3 X 3 are trivial from the start. A 4 X 4 will be too since there's only a few captures to be made and then the board is full. 5 X 5 will probably be like that, though a five in a row can be formed. 6 X 6 gets a little more interesting, but it seems to lead to a block too. I suppose if one was really going to play a game of Keryo on such small boards you could make a rule about who wins if all the spots are taken. There's also the possibilty that a position could arise that you could swap captures until 15 dudes are bagged. I'm thinking that the game would take a minimum of a 9 X 9 board to even closely resemble the play of a 19 X 19 board. Perhaps 10 x 10 would be a good minumum game as it would allow either player to form a five in row from the center four intersections. Going the other way, after the board gets to about 25 X 25 the sides no longer seem to matter.
An alternate rule for a smaller board could have the edges wrap around to touch the other side so a five in a row could have three on one side and two on the other. This would have the effect of making the board play larger than it is and would seem playable on a small board.
I would like to try some of these smaller boards just to see how it would go. If it ever comes up that it can be played here or IYT or elsewhere and anyone reading this would like to play some small board games with me, please drop a line and we'll give it a go.

I still have my Pegity board from the 60's. It is a 15 X 15 pegboard with four sets of colored pegs. The object is to be the first one to get five in a row. Just like the Line 5 game, I believe. If you play with more people it gets really hard to make a five ina row, plus the unfairness of it becomes obvious when your two opponents or three if playing four handed decide to gang up on you. We didn't play the game much except two handed on occasion. Seemed kind of dead at the time with all the other games that we could chose from (Monopoly, Chess, Battleship, Card games, tag, ditch it ....etc.) Had we thought about modifying it then I'm sure we'dve come up with something. Partners would probably work OK. You could play to help your partner get a five in a row while blocking the opponents. Pente would be an interesting game like that. You'd have to experiment with the play until you got it worked out a little. Three handed would probably be unfair as was Pegity. Three handed games of almost any kind are hard to find that are fair. 2 against 2, or 1 on 1 seem to work best.

The point is to have fun. Hmm, I guess you don't have fun in the manner that I do. Trying different games is part of my fun. I don't play certain games because they aren't fun for me. I can name lots of those games, but plenty of other people play them and have fun. Trivial Persuit comes to mind.
Why is it so hard for you to see logic in playing Kerypo Pente on a different size board? Your resistance and anger over it puzzles me to no end. The main reason it continues to go on is I like to argue. Unfortunantely this argument has turned into a fight and I don't see much logic in that. Instead of resisting, why not consider different possibilities and kick in something creative to the chat? If you're as good at Keryo as you say you are, you must have loads of experience and stories that you can share with us. Various plans, strategies, and things of that nature. Back when this started with Gary answering a question of mine about board size and player advantage and then you put your two cents in and it has gone downhill from there.
I did to put forth a reason why I thought the smaller board might help player two in Keryo Pente. As did Dangerous Mind. You have done nothing to rebut, just complain some more. Oh well, that's how it is with you. Conform and shut up is all you tell me and others.
If Pente is having a crisis because of the game being won by one player every game and word is out that something needs to be done, telling everyone to shut up isn't going to help it much, is it? You are entitled to your opinion. If you believe changing the board is not the way to fix the problem or play the game, fine. But you don't need to attack others that don't mind trying it or think it might be one way to solve the problem. It is because of you and your ilk that I doubt this site will ever set up the Pente board so the players can have control over the size of the board like they do in Othello. And you say it doesn't change the play of that game!?

Are you that unimaginitive as to why I might want to play you? Really now! I like playing good players, or players that say they're good. Even if you win every game, I still will want to play if the games are good games and fun. If I get frustrated losing or even winning a game with someone, I'll let them know. I've lost better games than some games that I've won. Come on, you can fatten up them stats of yours playing such easy competion as me. Plus you can have the satisfaction of saying I told you so. As for me, I can learn from your fountain of wisdom while getting thoroughly thrashed that you were right all along. Plus I think ol' Darngerous Mind just might be good enough to beat you in a series of games and I wouldn't mind checking in on you guy's games from time to time.

It's a shame some of the Keryo Posts didn't get put in this area.

Still getting worked up and passing moral judgments about the correctness of your position I see. Since when do you determine what we discuss? You haven't discussed anything. Just ranting and raving and complaining. You're not helping the discussion much from what I've seen. If you can't play on 13 X 13 board, it's your problem, not ours. From your stats on the IYT it appears that you're a very good Pro Pente, but just an decent player at Keryo Pente.
Have you considered that the smaller board might make Keryo a fairer game for both sides even though going first will still have an advantage? (From your tone, I doubt if you consider anything that doesn't fit in with your preconceived notions of how things should be) The larger board takes away a defense that the second to move player has which is to take back a tempo because he doesn't have to guard a two or three in a row against the edge. On a larger board he doesn't have this option, especially early in the game and the first to move player keeps the initiative fairly easily. Your stats also seem to comfirm Gary's argument about going first. 12 and 8. Of the 12 wins 8 with first move, of the 8 losses 2 with first move. Though not your side games as you've got a losing record there.
Now could you please mellow out and try to imagine a world where things aren't done as you would have them, but where we try to accomodate those who see things differently? This inventor of Pente, how does he feel about board size and how it effects the play? How far back do you go? Have you ever made up or invented a game? Get anyone to play with you? Well, I have and I'm tired of hearing the one sided approach to things that you seem to have. You're interfering with my learning and enjoying of Keryo Pente and other games with your singleminded negativity about just one aspect of a game that I've only been playing for a year and a half. I wonder just what kind of a person you are.

I suggest allowing the player to pick the color that he wants. As can be done with the size of the board, it'd be nice to be able to chose the color for yourself. I know I wouldn't chose Fluorescent Orange, but someone alse might want it. :) And while we're on the subject, the color of the pieces, too!

Mark-
A problem caused by IYT not using certain standards of the games has confused me when I read your post here. You'll do best to avoid the terms White or Black when talking about which side you played from in Pente games. Apparently almost everyone else uses the White dudes for moving first. The major exception being IYT, which has Black going first. Because of this most people say "Player 1" or "the player with the first move" instead of just saying the color of their side.
Assuming your posting is using the IYT colors, it would still seem that going second has a harder time of it than when you've been first to move. Though the difference in your stats isn't as clear cut as it is in mine. Gary didn't use my side games stats when he compiled the list from my charts. Perhaps I should do that myself and also just with the same players involved. You're a good start! We've completed 6 games. You're up 4 to 2 in them. Of the 2 games that I won, both times I had the first move. In the 4 that you've won, I was first in 1 game and second in the other 3. The two games we have going at the moment also look like first to move's game. Not enough to say it proves anything (aside from the fact that I'm one of the 3% percent who have beat you when you've gone first :) ) but it sure looks like Gary's point in the early stages if nothing else. He also argues that the stronger the play of the players the more this tends to be so! I tried to check your stats on IYT, but you've got them blocked or they do if not you.
I'm curious, did you as I did, first play Keryo Pente at IYT? It seems that players that do, learn the game with a different point of view than those that started out on a 19 X 19 board. Some of whom get quite shrill and strident in their argument about any deviation from what they consider the only way it should be played, I might add. It'd be cool to try other size boards. I think 9 X 9 would be trippy. Larger than say 25 X 25 would amount to infinity in serious play since I doubt if there'd be much reason to stray so far from the action without losing the game by doing so. I like the Knight analogy. On the 13 X 13 board, I avoid the edge unless necessity compels me to move there. I imagine on a 19 X 19 board an edge move would be even rarer. Also, the game has move restrictions as played in some places, and from what I've seen, by most of the good players. I wish they would play you on the 13 X 13 board without the move restriction. I think the smaller board cuts down on the advantage of going first in Keryo Pente, but not in regular Pente. Gary and Dmitri agrue otherwise and considering their knowledge in the matter they're probably speaking from past experience. Whether or not they accept your challenge to play them on the 13 X 13 board, we should try a few games on the 19 X 19 that is on this site. I don't know if it has the move restriction or if it does if it can be shut on or off as the players decide. Aside from it lessening the importance of the edge, I doubt if the game will change much. Though lessening the importance of the edge is a major change in a lot of ways and our play will probably reflect that. If it were possible to play on a 9 X 9 on this or another site (Since I could play it at home that way if I knew someone that played Pente, that is) I imagine edge play would would greatly dictate how the game would go from the very beginning.