Snutter (Satan) -

Since you are a fairly serious Pente player and a high-intermediate player, I am very surprised by your comments here. I am surprised because you were a low-intermediate player before you learned how to play the game correctly. You were losing frequently as player 1 WITHOUT the restriction. Why were you losing as player 1 without the restriction? Because you had not learned how to attack correctly. And why had you not learned to attack correctly despite your obvious talent? Because you had not played with the correct opening restriction!

I am also surprised that you did not discuss this with Dmitri King and I personally as I have ongoing games going with you personally at IYT and I'm sure you've had recently with Dmitri King. But regardless, you have chosen a public forum, so that is how the issue will get addressed.

I will address only one comment that you have made that I have not addressed before, that is the topic of the tourney rule or opening restriction as being optional in the instructions for the original Pente tube.

I will now state some information and make some quotes from the following books:
PENTE Strategy 1 copyright 1980 by Tom Braunlich and PENTE Games Inc.
PENTE Strategy 2 copyright 1982 by PENTE Games Inc.
PENTE Strategy copyright 1984 by Tom Braunlich

1. Pente was invented in 1978 by Gary Gabrel.
2. The first official World (U.S.) Championship tourney was held in 1979 and last in 1984.
3. The tournament rule (opening restriction) was created before the first tourney was played in 1979.
4. The tournament rule became a standard accepted rule for the game after 1982.
5. The rights to Pente were sold to Parker Brothers on January 1, 1984.

Parker Brothers chose to do nothing with Pente and destroyed the corporate sponsorship for the game, thereby destroying any future possibility of large national championships. Later on, they sold the rights to Decipher who also chose to do nothing with it.

Now to the instructions for the game in the original tube. I too have an original Pente tube although I have lost the instructions. BUT...I do remember exactly what you are stating, that is that the instructions said that the tournament rule is optional. What happened is that those instructions were written when the tube was originally manufactured. I can't state an EXACT starting date for when the instructions in the tube were created, but it MUST have been after the tournament rule was created before the first tournament in 1979. Anyway, no one bothered to change the instructions after the tourney rule became the standard accepted rule after 1982. Why did this happen? I do not know. But my guess is that Gary Gabrel was looking for a buyer in 1983 and found one who eventually bought the rights to it on January 1, 1984 in Parker Brothers. I'm guessing that he wasn't too concerned about tweeking anything with the tubes that were being manufactured while he was looking for a buyer.

That is the only thing that I wish to address that you specifically referred to. Everything else I have already addressed and will not continue to repeat myself except one thing.

Fencer made a business decision that is based on long-term thinking. When someone thinks long-term, people who think short-term usually do not understand them.

The long-term thinking is this:
If there is a variant of a game that has ALMOST the EXACT same rules, has the EXACT same pieces, is called by ALMOST the EXACT same name, and requires the EXACT same conditions in order to win the game, but it is a variant that allows EITHER one side a SUBSTANTIAL advantage or produces a LARGE percentage of draws, then that variation is DETRIMENTAL to the game in the long run.

Why is that variation deterimental to the game in the long run? Because people will play it as though it is the ORIGINAL game with CORRECT rules and will therefore learn the game incorrectly.

Here is what I would like to do to resolve this dilema once and for all. I would like to issue a challenge. Not a game challenge like we are doing with some other players, but a 'finding' challenge. Here is the challenge:

Find a VARIANT of ANY mainstream game at IYT or Brain King (I'll consider other sites also) OTHER THAN Pente or Keryo Pente that has the following conditions:
1. The variant must have a name that contains the name of the regular version of the game.
2. Only one SINGLE rule is changed. (I'll even consider 2 or 3 rules based on the situation.)
3. NONE of the pieces, stones, men or whatever is used for moves and/or movement is changed from the mainstream game.
4. The method of winning the game must still be the same. (i.e. no anti-variants which are obviously substaintally different from the original games)
5. The change in the rule(s) DRASTICALLY affects the chances of one side or the other so that one side now wins a substaintal percentage of the time or the game now results in a large % of draws.

In making these requirements, keep in mind that even in GoMoku without the restriction, player 1 has MUCH less of an advantage then in Pente without the restriction, so that cannot compare either.

If ANYONE can come up with ANY variant in ANY game at ANY of these sites that meets all of the above requirements, then I will personally recommend that Fencer create a variant called no-restriction 13x13 Pente and if necessary, I will enlist the help of Dmitri King to do so.

But if people CANNOT come up with a variant of ANY game that is so similar to it's original so that it misleads MANY new players into playing the ACTUAL game incorrectly, then this should be considered a dead issue and should not be brought up again.

The ball is now in everyone else's court. I look forward to hearing about such a variant.


Gary Barnes