i invited a player to a game they accepted and moved,i cant load the game,must be to big,so neither of us can play or delete,im on NTL HELP!!

this game was over very early on, white never had a chance after move 4 or 5....

I would say a combination of move 6.G6 surrendering the initiative and move 13.K9 allowing L10 to be played were the most costly mistakes for white. But I'm no expert...

although it's an open-pente game
(again could not resist a tourney-group vegetating with 3 players only)
I'd lightly apply for a brilliancy-prize
( for that game-type after all ... ) :D

a hammer-formation won by black,
and my opponent asked me where he missed his chance ...

I had a surgery around noonish and would doubt the accuracy
of my analysis today ... maybe one of our sharks cAn spare a moment.

thanks and, have a great day yet ... ~*~

If you're interested in discussing these ideas please e-mail me: ughaibu@yahoo.com

Yes, it is interesting to know but it is far from Moscow and Pente. May be other are not interesting this theme.

I'm particularly interested in the method of capture in pente. In Japan this method is also used in (at least) hasami shogi while in the west it is used in tafl type games. I'm wondering if this similarity was the result of cultural interaction among sub-arctic tribes, so I would be very interested if you have any information about traditional/ancient Siberian boardgames especially games of the Nenets.

Really it were old Japanese games Pente name was Ninuki-Renju. Go-moku have sport variant Renju.
You can see my page at http://nosovsky.narod.ru
USA only simplified rules of Ninuki and so we have this variant of Pente.

Okay, thank you very much.

no. Go-moku with captures is what pente is. THe only other difference is htat 6 in a row or more wins in pente but does not win in go-moku.

Thanks for the reply. Does go-moku also allow captures?

Pente was invented in 1977 (approximately) by Gary Gabrel. THe game Go-Moku, which is similar to pente has ben around for a long time.

Has anybody authoritive information on the origins and antiquity of Pente? I believe it's Greek but would like to confirm that and know for how long it's been around. I apologise if this question has been asked before, this is my first visit to this board and there are 162 posts to search through for a possibly non-existent answer.

No one sent in a correct solution to arrive at the 10-10 score in six moves in my puzzle(if someone did and I accidentally missed it, please let me know the approximate date and I'll check again), so here is the solution: 1.K12 K13 2.O10 K7 3.K6 N7 4.O7 N9 5.R11 Q12 or K16 6.O8. I think the solution(s) to win in 7 moves if black has one less stone captured should be obvious from here, so I'll leave them as an exercise for the reader.
Mark has modified his program to play poof pente and it plays VERY well, so soon anyone who wants to try it will be able to play against the computer. I am thinking about trying to get a poof pente discussion board set up somewhere, so that people can post strategy tips, puzzles, etc. I am also looking forward to the time when Mark has his AI modified so that we can try out different variants on the theme of poof pente (and others also) to see what seems to be the fairest game (Gary's suggestion of playing into poofs being forbidden, only P2 can make poofs,etc.) Tom

At least I am not the only one getting that message from MSN....of course, I haven't had any problems with that since May 28....thank goodness!!

I too am on webtv, and every so often I get that message when clicking on things here. It isn't very often, and I don't know the reason why, but I just move to something else, and the next day it is fine. (Could be sooner, I don't know)
For a long time this would happen to me when clicking on the "Who is online" link. Now it never happens there and it now seems to happen in specific backgammon games when I'm trying to move. I have no idea if it is a webtv problem or a brainking problem.
Just wanted to let you know you arent alone. And again, it is fixed when you go back at a later time.

The only thing i could think of is to try and refresh it - but i really am not familiar with any form of webTV, so i can't really help ;-)

This morning I can bring it up. But last night when I tried I would get message from MSN (web-tv) that it contained information that could not be used and then the screen would go white. It was the only game I could not play last night.

That would be Game number 108316. Even if you can't access the page, you can find the game number: if you look at the address that appears at the bottom of the window when you hold your mouse over the link, it will say "http://www.brainking.com/showgame?g=#####" Where the numbers represent the game number. If you are on webTV and do not have anything like that, i'm sorry :-)
I can access it fine - what does it do when you click on it...anything?

I have a game I can not bring up at all, so I do not know the game number...but it is Easy Keryo Pente with player Shariann33....any suggestions??

Thanks Fencer....whatever was wrong with it yesterday, it is working today with no problem.

Please try it again, there is nothing wrong with the game. Perhaps your browser showed an old version of that page from its cache ...?

HELP!! Game 108274 will not allow me to make my move in M-11. Is there something wrong with this game board? Also this game does not have the option "play later" on the screen.

I asked Mark to check how frequently draws occur in renju for me and he said "Scanning results of renju (live) championships, I see about 1 in 10
ending in a draw." Just a little trivia for all of the opponents of draws out there. :~)

Congrats to winners Gary Barnes and Dimitri King and special thanks to Gary Gabrel for inventing Pente and allowing the tournament to be held at Hideaway Pizza, birthplace of pente.

Yes, congrats to Gary and Dmitri for playing so strongly against a tough field. And a huge thanks to pyloric valve (and others) for putting it together. It was great to meet all of you who were able to make it.

btw congratulations to DK and GB on OKC-fantastic!!!

thanks : ) it certainly fits most of the argruments and discussions i've been reading by everyone; if I may I'll use it in the future. Life would be so much easier if everyone had my opinion.

By the way Congrats to Gary Barnes and Dimitri King, again they demonstrated to be sportsman to the declared tie.

CaoZ

Thanks!.. going there now. :)

Try here http://www.playpente.com/2003_OKC.php

CaoZ

Who were the winners? Is there a place online where we can see the tourny results?

hmm.. Good eye Jim.. my exact quote was "Of course, we are all entirled to my opinion. I will continue to state my opinion and support it with examples, as I have done."

Of course this makes me look like a real jackass. I definitely did not mean to say that. I don;t remember if I was trying to say "of course I am entitled to my opinion" or "of course we are all entitled to our opinions," but I definitely did NOT mean to write "of course we are all entitled to my opinion."

"Of course, we are all entitled to 'my' opinion."
DK post 16 April, 2003

Mark's solution is actually better than mine, so I'll post it here as the best one I've seen (yet) to the puzzle. It enables the puzzle to have up to 3 stones captured by black, which mine does not. So here it is. 1. G10 forces ...1.L10 or else white plays 2.L10 and 3.L10 winning in three moves. 2.L10 ...2.L10. Here is where Mark's solution comes in: 3. N6! forces 3.K9. 4. J11 and black can't capture without losing, so ...4.M14 5. G9. My solution was the more direct, but costly 3. J11. Again, well done Mark!

Did anyone check out my example of the potential difference in the outcome of a game played with poofs as forbidden to play into vs. not? Any comments?

I don't seems to be able to convince you with this example. Since I have chosen not to go back to the move restriction discussion for more examples, I am left without 'ammo', so I will concede the point to you. I will even go so far as to no longer claim anything about the logic of Gary's statements. Hope that helps.

Thad

Thad, I had to GO WAY back to find this:

Here is what Gary said that you are taking issue with:

Gary said

"Draws should not occur. Yes they would be quite rare in Poof Pente, but the fact that they WOULD be rare is a good reason to not have them at all."

You are not reading the entire quote there - he prefaced it by saying "DRAWS SHOULD NOT OCCUR."

His point was not that draws should be eliminated BECAUSE they are rare, BUT that draws should not occur, PERIOD, and since they are already rare, they can be gotten rid of WITHOUT having a great impact on the game. Now, maybe you will reply that I am putting words in his mouth - but that is not so, because IN THE VERY SAME POST of his from which you are taking his statement out of context, he CLOSED HIS POST BY SAYING:

"So if a draw can be easily eliminated without affecting the inherent rules of the game, then I think that it should be done."

And there you have it. You distorted his arugment by taking a single sentence out of context, then you defeated the distorted argument (actually, you didn't, because your analogy to lunar eclipses was terribly weak).

So you committed a fallacy and then while in the process of carrying out your fallacious reasoning you committed another fallacy.

I would say it is you who is lacking the logic here.

Thad, I am NOT missing your point. I think much of what you have said is illogical, some of it ridiculously so.

I'll take another look and reread what Gary wrote because I think you are committing the straw man fallacy (I love all this talk about fallacies, fallacies are fun!).

Of course, the straw man fallacy is when a person distorts the other person's argument, thus creating a "straw man" or "dummy argument," then thoroughly defeats the dummy argument and acts as if the original argument has been defeated.

Dmitri,

In response to your post beginning "Thad, you ahve GOT to be joking. ":

I think you're still missing my point. Walter asked why I chose not to debate Gary and I gave him several reasons. One of the reasons is because Gary uses illogical statements like saying that draws should be removed BECAUSE they're rare. That statement is illogical. Now perhaps a different analogy would have been better, but the eclipse thing was what I thought of at the time. Maybe I should have said something like, having three queens of one color in chess rarely occurs so we should get rid of that. Or since gammons and backgammons in the game backgammon are rare, we should get rid of them too.

Do you see what I mean? The fact that these things are rare is no reason to remove them from their respective games. What Gary said contradicts that. What Gary said is illogical.

Now, If you'd like, I could give you (and Walter) more examples of illogical things Gary has said, but the best examples occurred during the move restriction discussion and I REALLY don't want to open that up again.

I hope I have made myself clear and that we can put this particular issue to rest. If not, I will concede the point and only list the other reasons as to why I chose not to debate Gary.

Thad

Thad -

Hum, well obviously I'm not the only one that found your statements about the WPF insulting and your references to sporting events being the justification for draws in Poof Pente. So, Thad, could it be that you implied something that you had not intended? I don't think I'm too out of place in thinking what I did there.

As far as the hook, line, and sinker thing, well, yeah, I baited you pretty good. The intent of the original draws to communism and socialism post was two-fold. (1) To spur some light-hearted debate, hence the smiley face on the post. (2) To see if I could bait you into insulting me like you have done so eloquently in the past.

Call me arrogant, pompous, or what you will, but that's what I did and have already aknowledged such. At first you avoided the bait and I admit I was impressed that you did so because I didn't think you had it in you. But unfortunately for you that evaporated quickly in a series of insults on me in response to Walter and what appeared to be an attack on the WPF. I qoute:
(1) ** Gary, applies reasoning to his points in his arguments selectively, NOT in a consistent, logical manner. **
(2) ** Gary uses a lot of bad logic, but buries it in long posts so most people don't notice. **
(3) (Referring to a sarcastic comment from your wife) ** She said that if Gary doesn't want draws, then he'll be mad at you for leaving the debate where it is. Again, I said why? She said, 'Because it's a draw!' **
(4) The comments about the WPF. I know you said you meant nothing deragatory but after repeating yourself 3-4 times there, I find it hard to believe that NOTHING deragatory was intended.
(5) ** I meant no disrespect to you or anyone else involved with that organization other than Gary. **
(so you DID mean disrespect to me!)

I would have been glad to forward you the information about the WPF if you had not appeared to insult it. I didn't deem it worth the time to send the information to someone who thinks negatively of it. I also do not know why you suddenly started insulting me after I made the comparison of draws vs. communism. 4 of the 5 insults above came shortly after that initial draw debate post that I made before I had a chance to respond.

Now, the question is, why did I bait you? Because when you and Walter have had no further room to debate something, you start leveling insults at whom you are debating. It was to prove to others that you guys will time and again resort to such tactics and henceforth your points are mostly invalid. I let Walter get to me ONE time and I lashed out in a single post about 1-2 months ago and I admit that I was wrong for doing it and it won't happen again.

So PLEASE tell me WHY you decided to insult me BEFORE I even said anything about the hook, line, and sinker! Obviously it's more than that or the draws vs. Communism post. Perhaps it was our difference of opinion on the no-restriction Pente that has you so much in arms. If so, I think we can agree to disagree on that one and leave it at that. But if it's more than that, then enlighten me.


Gary

Thad, you ahve GOT to be joking. You said :

"I wanted to show how that was an example of Gary making very illogical statements. Claiming that we should do away with something (in this case draws in poof-pente) simply because the occur infrequently, just doesn't make sense.

The context of that was in reply to Walter. I was explaining why I didn't want to engage Gary in a debate. One of my reasons is because Gary makes a lot of illogical statements. I sited that as an example. Once again, here is what he said:
"...the fact that they WOULD be rare is a good reason to not have them at all."

Eliminating something just because it is rare is a dumb idea. To illustrate that point, I selected another example of something that is rare (lunar eclipses) and indicated that, according to Gary's logic, we should rid ourselves of them. Obviously, ridding ourselves of lunar eclipses is a ridiculous idea. But it demonstrates just how illogical Gary's statements often are.
"

This is hilarious. YOUR statements are beyond illogical, there are no words do define the illogicalness of your statements (see, I just had to invent a word already!).

Gary was saying that since draws are infrequent IN POOF PENTE and easily avoidable, they should be eliminated altogether.

What does this have to do with Lunar eclipses? If you have taken a logic class you would know the fallacy of weak analogy. Pente and eclipses have NOTIHNG to do with one another!

What applies to a PENTE game need not apply to a stament about ECLIPSES!

by your logic, any eclipse that is captured 5 times would lose. But, that statement does nto make sense either, because PENTE HAS NOTIHNG TO DO WITH ECLIPSES!

Hum, Walter, can you tell me where I stated that we would kick Thad out of anything? I simply stated that his thoughts on Pente are not likely to be listened to if he calls us a 'little group' and a 'bunch of guys'. There's a pretty obvious difference between someone being ignored and someone being kicked out of something.

Also, I believe (obviously I can't speak for him), that Mark prefers not to debate such things as draws and will usually just state facts about Pente and the such. I don't think he will express an opinion one way or another unless we specifically ask him, so him not stating his opinion doesn't indicate his viewpoint on any of this.

Mark, correct me if I'm wrong.

Your witness...

Dmitri,

About my mentioning lunar eclipses,

Gary said:
'Draws should not occur. Yes they would be quite rare in Poof Pente, but the fact that they WOULD be rare is a good reason to not have them at all.'

I wanted to show how that was an example of Gary making very illogical statements. Claiming that we should do away with something (in this case draws in poof-pente) simply because the occur infrequently, just doesn't make sense.

The context of that was in reply to Walter. I was explaining why I didn't want to engage Gary in a debate. One of my reasons is because Gary makes a lot of illogical statements. I sited that as an example. Once again, here is what he said:
"...the fact that they WOULD be rare is a good reason to not have them at all."

Eliminating something just because it is rare is a dumb idea. To illustrate that point, I selected another example of something that is rare (lunar eclipses) and indicated that, according to Gary's logic, we should rid ourselves of them. Obviously, ridding ourselves of lunar eclipses is a ridiculous idea. But it demonstrates just how illogical Gary's statements often are.

Thad

Dmitri,

About my questioning if WPF was 'just a bunch of guys'.

I meant no disrespect to you or anyone else involved with that organization other than Gary. At the time, He was the only person who I knew had anything to do with it. I apologize to you if you felt insulted by my comments there. That was never my intention. Gary has made mention time and time again about the WPF and it's goals and intentions. I felt that it was time for Gary to - I'm not quite sure how to phrase this - put up or shut up about WPF. I wanted Gary to get all fired up about showing me how WPF wasn't 'just a bunch of guys'. I wanted to paint him into a corner and FORCE him to show us that WPF really was something, or back down and admit it wasn't really anything at all.

To my surprise, he did neither. Instead He made a post with the subject, "Thad, got ya, hook, line, & sinker! :-)" in which he claimed I fell right into his trap and that he "set [me] up BIG for that one".

I still don't know what it is he 'set me up for'. But the bigger question is why would he do something like that?

Hats off to Mark for stepping up and answering my questions about WPF. Thanks again, & sorry, Mark, if you were offended by what I said or how I said it.

Why couldn't Gary have done that?

Thad

Dmitri,

I think I will try to reply to your posts one at a time rather than in one big post. Hopefully, that will be a little clearer for all.

With respect to my sports references,
I was NOT trying to use analogies to sports as a way to justify draws in pente. I was only trying to make the point, in response to what you wrote, that ties, at times, are a good thing. You had said, "Why are so many people against the idea that some people are going to win and some people are going to lose? I don't asee how breaking a tie in any way cheapens anything.", and I wanted to point out that there is no need to break EVERY tie, not EVERY game needs to have a winner and a loser. THAT was my point. I was NOT trying to draw or imply any conclusions about poof-pente.

Also, please don't accuse me of straying off topic by using sports analogies. When I posted them, I was replying to YOUR comments of:

"I suppose having the world series, NBA finals, or Super Bowl be declared a tie wuold be acceptable to you?"

And

"remember the all star game lkast year in baseball?"

Thad

Thad, you said "If you really wanted to promote the game at all levels, you'd know that you need sites of all sizes and for all skill levels. Pente.net is not perfect, but what site is? So what if there are very few (if any) top players who play there. It's still a good place to play pente, especially for casual players, and it seems to me that if you wanted to promote pente (and not just pente for the best players), you'd have better things to say about their site."

WHat are you talking about? pente.net hasl ittle or nothing to offer for pente, that is why almost no top pentep layersp lay there. you say it is necessary to support that site? WHY? what does ito ffer that theo ther GOOD pente sites do not? NOTHING!

Walter, you asked if you cna join? Absolutely! espeically since we are really jonseing for someone to bring the 13 by 13 board, and if you don' do it , no one will! DARN!

As for what you said about Gayr's response to Thad-- I as well took Thad'c comments about the Pente federation to be VERY derogatory. If that is not hwat Thad intended, then maybe hen eeds to take fewer math classes and more English classes, because he is not saying what he is trying to say at all.

Thad, you said : "Once again, I did not do what you claim I did. Reread my post. I NEVER SAID it was a just bunch of guys. I questioned if that was the case, but I also questioned if it was a bonified organization. "

PLEASE. it was clear that you were strongly implying that it is "just a bunch of guys," HENCE YOUR REPEATING IT 4 TIMEs!!!!!!!!!

Thad, you quoted and then added your thoughts:

"Then you said: (you quoting Gary)
"And then comparing a mom & pop turn-based site to a once in 5 years real-time pente championship as well as lunar ecplises to infrequent draws in Poof Pente."

(you now) While I did, in fact mention those things, again, I NEVER compared them to pente.
"

this is utter nonsense. you made these statements as a justification for not eliminating draws from pente! If youa re going to make a terrible analogy, at least stand behind it without waffling about it and then claiming you were not talking about pente! This whole discussion is about pente!

Thad-- you said "Meaning that I wasn't going to discuss the matter with you. I will however, discuss it with Dmitri, Walter, or anyone else, just not with you. "

Well, debate I shall. The top of draws came up while discussing PENTE. So unless your sports references were analogies to PENTE, WHY did you bring them up? it seems to me like you were using sports analogies to justify the ocurrence of draws in pente, on the basis that society is too hung up on declaring a winner.

This is what I have to say about your sports references. Thre is something in Logic called the fallacy of weak analogy.

but yours do not fall into that category, because they are too lousy to even qualify for that. They are a new category called "fallacy of appalingly inept analogies."

wihch is to say, your sports analogies have nothing to do with anything. We are trying to talk about draws in pente here and you are strayingf so far off topic that you would need a telescope to see the topic.