Fencer - ID No. 1
txindoki - ID No. 4011
arpa - ID No. 7859
furbster - ID No. 11146
abnznz - ID No. 11657

Pedro Martínez: I think he means this one:

http://brainking.com/en/Pond?g=820

4 players tied - Fencer just happens to be on the "top", even though I do not think it matters.

grenv: ID No.?

Nothingness: And you cant count i have won 10 ponds. Its not the amount of ponds you win its teh % you win, anyone can just enter 1000s of ponds and if i win 3% of them, i got 30 wins.. big deal

Nothingness - 176 finished ponds, 8 wins = 4.55%
Pedro Mart. - 428 finished ponds, 89 wins= 20.8%

lol yeh

furbster: I'm trying to figure out the algorithm that put Fencer at the top of the list.

http://brainking.com/en/Pond?g=820

Hrqls: So

y=xn
x=(20000 - S)/n

therefore
y=n(20000 - S)/n
y=20000 - S

?

Did you mean to lower the total to something that makes the points matter? What would that total be? 1000? Interesting thought.

grenv: or lower the total amount of points to Y where y = x * n

where n = the number of players and
x = (20000 - 'the sum of remaining points') / n

of course it would be best when x would be the average over all finished rain ponds

Rose: Bonus is meaningless in rain ponds anyway. In fact points are pretty much meaningless, may as well give everyone an infinite number of points (which never changes)

Rose: yep

http://brainking.com/en/Pond?g=940

Is this because two people both bid the highest amount.

Vikings: sssspppppppppt, please PM your formula.

Nothingness: But you don't have days to study, you have to make a move before the time runs out. Time is always a factor in game play.

Nothingness: still wouldn't work.I have changed the formula that I use 5 times, now how many times have others changed their formulas or strategies? end games have just recently had a major change by many that would completely throw away your research.

Nothingness: *nod* you wrote it would be too much trouble doing all it and you could only play 1 or 2 ponds that way ... it wouldnt be worth it :)

i only back a few rounds in the pond i am placing my bet in and see if i can make some predictions (and sometimes i remember to watch for a pawn or if the lowest one has very little points left :))

i wish i would win my first pond .... :( .... :)

perhaps you didnt read what i wrote. "i said that it would take way too much time. Days to study without sleep. or should i just keep repeating myself." That system is nto worth it here since it would be so time consuming. 1 pond would require days of study. it would take me days psosibly weeks just to study vikings and your ponds history. It would be much easier to jtu play it as is. And you cant count i have won 10 ponds. Its not the amount of ponds you win its teh % you win, anyone can just enter 1000s of ponds and if i win 3% of them, i got 30 wins.. big deal. AS for sabotage...yes i knew where they were goign to put all there pieces. I studied tons of games. As for this not being sabotage well its not any other game other than ponds so i guess that means we cant use chess or poker as examples. Not trying to be confrontational but trying to show you that with good study habits and note takeing you can enhance your game. My stats in the ponds mean very little to me. i focus 90% on espionage.

Nothingness:
1. Ponds are not sabotage.
2. You have finished 175 ponds and won only 7 of them. I don't understand how a person with SUCH a potential can have such a poor record. If I knew of something that would grant me 96% win ratio, I'd go for it!!!
3. What you're saying reminds me of Trice. He also claims to have a strategy (or whatever he calls it) with which you can win every pond you enter. But, for some reason, just like you, he has never showed us how it works.
4. You can study as many ponds as you wish, the game is so dynamic that it will never give you any significantly exceptional results.
5. Sabotage is not ponds.
6. Ponds are not sabotage.

i assume you mean you became the board, which probably means you could see all the opponents pieces?

I didnt say "if you research 2 games only, it will not work because the game is always evolving and by the time you have the statistics...." this what i wrote " ....You must do this for every rd and must research every pond they (opponents) have EVER Been in. Not just study 2 ponds Study ALL ponds which alone would take you all day perhaps a week 24 hours a day straight at your computer. THIS is 100% guaranteed to work. Nonsense people say lol rookies!ive done it, trust me it works. i had a 96% win ration in sabotage aka espionage on iyt with that stragedy [until i became board]. I had every opponents piece setups written down. Of course there predictability sped thigns up a bit so it took only a few hours a day. Believe me study works in all games. "Knowledge is Power!" How do you think that phrase came to be. For fun?! NO! Regardless its not worth it unless you have no life. s for that % thign poeple werer tyring to do...umm math dont work like that... "So if 2 people apply the same tactic, you're saying that they won't win 180% of the ponds?" you dont just add the % together.

pauloaguia: i think 77.1 would be a good bet in this situation.

Silly game of luck.

I don't think that I will ever play one

pauloaguia: Rain ponds suck

This rain pond is just getting more and more interesting...

Now what to do?

(edited link)

Pedro Martínez: You don't need the help

Vikings: So you will help me get to lead instead of him I take it...:)

I'll have to make sure that it doesn't last too long

lol, can hear you giggling away now bbw

Vikings: SHHHH!!! If you say it outloud it will not come true!

BIG BAD WOLF: prediction: you will become #1 when "The Very First Run" finishes.

Vikings: I had moved up into the 40's also not too long ago. I have not started anything new for awhile, so hopefully I will not be caught off-guard when I do start some new ponds!

Vikings: I'm moving up from my 42 also...

by the way, 35 is no longer a safe opening bid, I found that out the hard way, twice

Nothingness: if you research 2 games only, it will not work because the game is always evolving and by the time you have the statistics that you need, strategies and tendencies for many have changed, not to mention that some people bid depending on the situation or the people involved, it would take you years to gain helpfull research. Why not play for the fun and challenge.

Andre Faria: I was subtracting the 10% of ponds where they tied!

grenv: eheh, 190%, not 180%

grenv:

Pedro Martínez: So if 2 people apply the same tactic, you're saying that they won't win 180% of the ponds?

Ponds can become a science if you let it and if you put in the time you could win 95 % everytime

Nonsense

But it WILL work and i guarantee you will be a top 3 player

Nonsense No.2

it would be pointless to do any research of the first few rounds

I agree. First rounds are not important at all, the goal is to survive, just like in the rain ponds.

Nothingness: What would be more useful is to monitor the endgame tendencies of the players. Who goes for the bonus and how often, who never does, etc...

Nothingness: But at the same time, when there are 15+ players left, someone with 19,500 and another with 20,000 are basicly tied. I guess it would be good if you can gain a good amount of points any time you can, but at least in my eyes, it is not even worth it in the early rounds.

But I've also noticed that if someone does "steal" a bonus with a low bid like 50, the next round many will go after the bonus since everyone seen how easy it was the round before I use to get caught up with that, but it's pointless in the early rounds.

BIG BAD WOLF: I agree, the early rounds are pretty meaningless. More can be gained in those middle rounds when you can either get a good lead, or drop to the bottom and struggle at the end.

yes i agree about the 1st few rds. BUT if you can steal an early bonus with a 50 bid in rd 1 you will be up an almost insurmountable lead. Ive noticed in may ponds no one will bet over 100 in rd1 BUT in rd 2 at least 4 poeple will try a 400 bid to steal a bonus, this is where research comes in handy. now your set up for rd2 and know not to bet high in that rd. keep it low. The starting bids are always lower the more players in the pond. If the Pond has 60 people in it the opening bids will be in the low 20s or even in the high teens. whereas in a pond of 16 the opening bid will be in the 40s or 50s perhaps in the 30s. but ive been seen ejections in the high 20s in those ponds. So early rd research is vital if you plan on sticking around to rd 2. There is the unpredictability factor that can come into play, which is why you have to not always go by what "BOOK" tells you.

Nothingness: I would disagree - that is I think it would be pointless to do any research of the first few rounds.

That is if everyone else bids in the 20's and you bid in the 50's - you lose 30 points. 30 points almost makes no difference in the game, and it still amusing to watch people try to get low first bids in the 20's when the points saved are basicly pointless that early in the game.

3 things would need to be researched.

1) The end game of players - about last 5-6 rounds of a game.

2) When they go for the bonus. For example: 6 people left. 5 people have 2,000+ points, 6th person has 0 points left. Who will just maintain and bid 1, and who will go for the bonus - and how high will the bid for the 500 point bonus.

3) mid-game could use a little research also. For example, last low bid was 2,000. Everyone still has over 10,000 points - what will people bid. Who will bid about 1,000 over the low 2,000, and who will bid double the last low bid (4,000). If I see a good mix of these 2 types of people, my bid is 3,500.

Nothingness: Unless you used a computer to analyze it, then there's just the initial programming time. I wonder if anyone actually did that.

Here is step 1. in researching your opp in ponds. 1 see how many players are in the pond.
2 See who is in the pond.
3 Next check there opening bids. there will be a range between 20-40 depending upon the amount of players and who they are. you must take and average, and bet somewhere between, and not always go for best bid or trying to be in first.
4 Next go to the 2nd rd bids look at everyones average bid again. You must do this for everyrd and must research every pond they have EVER Been in.
5 repeat for every rd of the pond

Now tell me is it worth the research? NO! But it WILL work and i guarantee you will be a top 3 player. But again it will take way to much time. and instead of spending about 1 minute making your move itll now take 2-3 hours per move. not a great trade.

Ponds i can see are going to get much like espionage was. I had books and books of notes i used to make up on opp. strategies and tendencies i got so good at it i knew what there setups were before they moved a piece. Much is the smae with ponds its all about tendencies and memorizing them. Ponds can become a science if you let it and if you put in the time you could win 95 % everytime. but you will have to do so much research on your opp that you would only be able to play 1-2 ponds at a time. And that is without playing any other games! Not worth it considering only paid members can play the game. I got so many espionage(sabotage[it was actually on IYT the other version of the game i did that on]) wins via researching my opp it almost felt like cheating! It just made the game unfun. Eventually I stopped doing it after I found a glitch in the game and everyone stopped playing that version.

grenv: i forgot to add .. i dont play chess .. i know too little of it to make any master plans ... so i wont be losing a game and hope to win another one because of that .. i will just try to stay in the game as long as possible ;)

now lets change this to froglet .. when i would be losing a game in froglet .. and know i cant win it anymore ... and i have another game with the same opponent .. i might capture all the blues ones at once .. and hope he will think i will always go for the highest frogs and base his strategy on that

i know i do something like that in froglet ... i dont look at other games my opponent plays .. but i try to find out if he is an offensive or defensive player .. and base my moves on that .. i try to build a position which i hope he will grab .. but which will leave me with an advantage after some more moves .. this can be done even better in anti froglet as most players feel themselves more forced in that game

so if i would be sure i would lose a game .. i might try to make the best of it .. and give myself a slightly higher chance in another game .. i have nothing to lose .. but might have something to gain (although the chance might be very little .. its still there :))

grenv: when you play ponds to win instead of for the bkr ... then you wouldnt care much about being 3rd in this game and bet 1 .... this might help you to actually win a pond in the future ... suppose you get in the 3rd place 10 times ... the first 9 times you bet 1 ... and you make sure everyone knows (as they now do because its discussed here ;)) .. then the 10th time you bet 20 and will probably be in 2nd place .. or maybe even get the bonus and have a net game of 480 points .. which might even win you the total pond

in this example betting 1 is a winning strategy ... when you look at the bigger picture of more than 1 pond .. of course this will give him 9 times a 3rd place and only 1 first place ... while betting a high amount .. he might have had 3 second places and 7 times a 3rd place .. i would chose the single first place over the 3 second places .. although the latter might be better for my bkr

betting 1 is ones own choice ... as long as he doesnt inform anyone else ... its just a different strategy than the strategy which most top players use right now ...
it might change the strategy of some top players .. which i would like ..

but then again ... its us discussing why someone else made a certain move .. we can never be sure why he did it .. as he never told us .. and this is a mental game for a big part ;)

get a pond together of the top 20 players and have a 5 pond match. 1 pond at a time. not all 5 at the same time. This should be done by people who want "in" this experiment. we can watch 1st hand tendencies of our opp.

not 5-10 players... you have to play a series of 5-10 ponds. but it has to be the same people in each of the ponds. There can be no people in those ponds that do not enter all of them.