Thad -

Here is why I have issued that challenge and why I think that I have a right to make that declaration. It is OUR premise that if a VARIANT of a game has ALL and ONLY all of those conditions, then it is an invalid variant because it hurts the mainstream game in the LONG-run. (Notice I say LONG-run)

So if anyone can find ANY mainstream game where a variant exists that is SO similar to the original game yet has such a negative impact on the ability of one side to win, then we will admit that a game can become popular even though it has what we would consider to be a 'detrimental' variant. If not, I don't see how a case can be made otherwise.

Any other variant that doesn't negatively impact the ability of one side or the other to win in Pente or Keryo Pente is OK (and doesn't allow for many draws). Board size change within reason? No problem. No win on captures? No problem. Win on only ONE capture? BIG problem! One side or the other would EASILY be found to have a WINNING advantage. Win on 6 instead of 5 captures? No problem. Must get 2 Pente's to win? No problem (and pretty cool!). 5x5 board? BIG problem! Game is virtually always drawn.

Can you see the point here? The issue is that no-restriction Pente is NOT a variant, it is a LONG-term detrimental application of the incorrect rules of the game because one side has been proven to have a winning advantage.

The fact that player 1 ALSO has an advantage in Pente WITH the restriction does NOT make the version WITHOUT restriction valid. It only make it MORE INVALID.

There will be a meeting of the World Pente Federation at the tournament in Oklahoma City on May 17th. In that meeting, we will discuss possibilities for new opening restrictions for the game. The swap variation may turn out to be the best one.

I will let everyone know what comes out of that.


Gary