 |
|
 PenteNon ti è possibile inserire messaggi in questo forum. Il livello minimo di sottoscrizione per linvio dei messaggi è {0}. Modalità: Chiunque può inviare messaggi
28. Marzo 2003, 15:35:00 Argomento: Re: small pente Dmitri makes a good point that learning to play pente without the openining restriction will leave you ill-prepared to compete in Pente WITH the opening restriction. The opening restriction is always used in serious competitions. But that is no reason to eliminate the small board without the restriction -- many people are NOT interested in serious competition and would rather play on the free board. It is good to have both available.
The size of the board is significant (besides being viewable on WebTV). A smaller board takes away some of the advantage of the first player -- white with the first move is expected to be on offense and the smaller board limits white's ability to produce a winning line. Often games do not extend beyond 13x13 but the limited size does become a factor in some games. -Mark 28. Marzo 2003, 18:45:13 Argomento: Re: small pente This post directed toiwards the masses, not just Mark.
Regarding the smaller board taking away some of the advantage of first player. So far, it seems this statement (made by several people) is being assumed without proof. EIther player has the possibility of being constrained by the smaller board. I am willing to state, without proof, that the reduction in player's 1's advantage is negligible. Until someone proves otherwise, I say the burden of proof is on them to do so. ALso, what iuf it does reducep layer 1's advantage? SO what? Does that mean it is a good idea even if it is not really Logical? No! it doesn't! THere are FAR better ways to limit player 1's advantage. ALso, using the smaller board to LIMIT player's 1s advantage but then NOT USING the restriction is JUST ASININE! I cannot think of anything more asinine than that!!! If we are goign to entertain this notion that the 13 X 13 board has MERIT because it reduces player 1's advantage, that reduction in advantage is MORE THAN offset by remonving the restristion! Think about a chess game. PLayer 1 has an advantage. I bet that a rule prohibiting white from checkmating black with a pawn would redice player 1's advantage! but does that mean it should be done? NO, because it doesn't make sense! I think that is analgous to the pente situation. a closing thought-- Pente was invented by Gary Gabrel in 1977. He chose to have the game played on a 19 X 19 bosrd. Why does anyone think he did that? Probably becasue it all but guaranteed that no one would run out of space! In other words, running out of Room is NOT supposed to be part of the game! If he wanted people to run out of room, he would have used a 13 X13 board! My guess is that he intended the board to be "infinite" in the sense that moves could extend as far outward as need be. Due to the nature of the game, this would work 28. Marzo 2003, 20:39:18 Argomento: Re: small pente DK, you are correct that the small disadvantage to white in having a 13x13 board is more than offset by not having the opening restriction. I was not arguing that the small board would compensate for no opening restriction -- the effect of the smaller board was just a side comment. I was arguing that despite the big advantage for white without the opening restriction, it is OK to have that game available to those who want to play it.
-MM |
Data e ora
Amici in linea
Forum preferiti
Gruppi
Consiglio del giorno
|
|
Copyright © 2002 - 2024 Filip Rachunek, all rights reserved. Torna all'inizio |