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

To all -

I was asked by Ringtone at IYT for something that should have been obvious from the beginning of all of this discussion.

That is, where is there a site where the 'official' rules of Pente and Keryo Pente can be found. If anyone is still interested, there are at least 3 sites where the official rules are located. They are as follows:

www.pente.org - Dweebo's Stone Games where real-time Pente and Keryo Pente are played with ratings and real-time tournaments. Go to the bottom left of the home page and click on the FAQ link. (I am a tournament director there.)

www.gamerz.net - Richard's play by Email server where many Email world championships are played for MANY different games. Toward the bottom of the home page, there is a link to the rules for both Pente and Keryo Pente.

users.erols.com/msmammel/marksfiv.html - Mark Mammel's Pente site with MANY good links including one for the proof of the forced win in 24 moves in Gomoku for player 1. Towards the bottom of the home page is a link where you can download his program. In his program's help file, you will see the official rules for Pente, D-pente, G-pente, and S-pente. It's also GREAT for storing your games.


In restrospect, I should have posted this 3-4 days ago, but I didn't think of it then. Many thanks to Ringtone for requesting the official rules and making me think a little more about it.


Gary Barnes

To all -

I was asked by Ringtone at IYT for something that should have been obvious from the beginning of all of this discussion.

That is, where is there a site where the 'official' rules of Pente and Keryo Pente can be found. If anyone is still interested, there are at least 3 sites where the official rules are located. They are as follows:

www.pente.org - Dweebo's Stone Games where real-time Pente and Keryo Pente are played with ratings and real-time tournaments. Go to the bottom left of the home page and click on the FAQ link. (I am a tournament director there.)

www.gamerz.net - Richard's play by Email server where many Email world championships are played for MANY different games. Toward the bottom of the home page, there is a link to the rules for both Pente and Keryo Pente.

users.erols.com/msmammel/marksfiv.html - Mark Mammel's Pente site with MANY good links including one for the proof of the forced win in 24 moves in Gomoku for player 1. Towards the bottom of the home page is a link where you can download his program. In his program's help file, you will see the official rules for Pente, D-pente, G-pente, and S-pente. It's also GREAT for storing your games.


In restrospect, I should have posted this 3-4 days ago, but I didn't think of it then. Many thanks to Ringtone for requesting the official rules and making me think a little more about it.


Gary Barnes

To all -

Without addressing anyone's specific comments here, I would like to make a couple of more general statements that MAY pertain to some things in the discussion, but may not, but all of which will pertain to Pente and Keryo Pente.

1. I would like to refer everyone to my original post. I know that most of you have probably read it by now, but I want to reiterate that the case IN FAVOR of the restriction is a LONG-term one. That is that the game CAN become as popular as a mainstream game like Chess, but ONLY if 100's and 1000's of master-level players play it so that strategy guides and large databases of moves are created and that the game is promoted to large companies.

2. Unfortunately, there was a small mis-communication between us and Fencer when we stated the LONG-term case for having the opening restriction on both board sizes so that the game can get the sponsorship that it needs. When doing so, we stated something like it would be 'very difficult' or 'extremely difficult' for player 2 to win without the restriction. We did not SPECIFICALLY state 'virtually impossible'. I do NOT fault Fencer for this ONE BIT!! He has MANY things to look after and things to do and in many languages 'very difficult' and 'virtually impossible' could be interpreted in an identical fashion. Unfortunately, I think that that choice of words has given many of you the impression that we are somehow trying to 'pull the wool over your eyes'. We will see if he will consider changing that wording to 'very difficult' on the main page.

3. I'm afraid that I misinformed Walter at an IYT game that Pente/Keryo Pente was bought by Milton Bradley in the mid-80's. It was actually bought by Parker Brothers. I frequently get these two gaming companies confused. I apologize for any confusion that I caused there.

4. Parker Brothers no longer owns the rights to Pente/Keryo Pente. We (at least myself) are not EXACTLY clear on who owns it. We know that the rights were sold to a company named Decipher sometime in the '90's and that they have since sold ALL or PART of the rights, but that is what I'm not clear on.

5. As everyone should be aware of by now, Dmitri King and I are currently playing 6 games as player 1 against Pioneer54, Walter, and Dangerous Mind, 4 at IYT and 2 here, without the opening restriction. All 3 of these players have won titles at IYT and Pioneer54 has won NUMEROUS titles, so we think this will be a good test. We are doing this to prove that player 2 cannot win without the restriction. In 2 of the games that are around move 7-8, we now have overwhelming advantages. In the other 4, they are still pretty much in the opening stages. (Moves 3-5) One of the players has stated that they will have to 'change' or 'adjust' their strategy as player 2 in order to beat us. We have replied that it will make no difference what strategy they use because they cannot win as player 2. Also one of the players has stated that they aren't comfortable with 'throwing out bait' meaning that they aren't comfortable making pairs or split-3's when attacking because they might be captured. This is unfortunate because these things are VERY necessary to PROVE that player 1 has an overwhelming advantage and to further the development of the player. This occurs to MANY players who play without the restriction for an extended period of time. It has become so common that I can almost immediately tell if someone was introduced to Pente or Keryo Pente correctly or without the restriction. Invariably if they have played it incorrectly, they will try to avoid a pair or split-3 at almost any cost. This is what is hurting the game.

6. It is our objective to win the six 'demonstration' games in #5 and then play whomever wants to or whatever # of games of more games is necessary (within reason) to prove that player 2 cannot win without the restriction. If by chance we do lose ONE game, we will be able to point to the EXACT move where we made a grave error.

7. Once again, I want to state that playing without the restriction is NOT a variant, it is the incorrect rules for the game. Playing on a different sized board can be considered a variant and most of are fine with that, especially since it is needed for the Web-TV users. Personally, I am looking forward to playing some games on the smaller boards with the restriction.

8. I will not apologize for any post that I have made here about this particular topic as I feel that everything that I said is justified. But I WOULD like to apologize to anyone at IYT or anyone else who feels like I have promoted this site in an incorrect manner in some way by bringing up IYT's problems. I am not attempting to offend anyone by such tactics, but to only promote what I think to be a GREAT site! I just thought that by bringing up IYT's problems, that it would allow people to see how much better this site is than IYT. I may have been mistaken in bringing up all of their problems, so I will avoid such tactics in the future.


It is my hope that we can all get past these differences and get back to enjoying the great games of Pente and Keryo Pente and what is best for the LONG-term betterment of the game.


Gary Barnes


Note: I will be on vacation this weekend so I will not be checking the message board during that time.

<Walter -

You asked the following question:

>> how come you didn't get him to add the move restriction option that you told me about that the second player places the next three moves and the first player decides if he is going to be the first to move player or make the second player be the first to move player? That version is certainly more fair than the current move restriction standard game, and would be just as much fun. And it could get some play and you'd see if it'd work well or not. The ol' data base you keep plugging would get some data put into it. Why not have it on as well?

Well, Walter, this is an EXCELLENT question! I have tried to be reasonable in the # of requests that I make of Fencer. I know that he ALWAYS has a lot on his plate.

That is next on my list of requests that I make and I DO THINK that IT IS the answer to taking Pente to the HUGELY popular ranks that we can think it can be.

But I also know that it will be an almost completely new piece of programming for Brain King. I know of no other game here or at IYT that has a swap rule.

There are several things that we have on request with Fencer. #1 was to put the opening restriction on Small Pente and Small Keryo Pente. We also have a couple of others that will attempt to reduce the possible abuse of ratings as follows:
1. Show a percentage of games played as White on the ratings page. He said he would do this, so perhaps within the next 2-3 releases.
2. Drop players off of a ratings page if they have not played a rated game in that particular game within the last 3 months. He put this on his 'to do' list, so I would not expect to see it for a while, but it is not greatly important at this point.

What we are attempting to do is make this into a site where the ratings can possibly be used for seedings in future World Championships. And THOSE World Championships could be held HERE!! That is as opposed to the Email server at www.gamerz.net which is very cryptic and hard to use.

In other words, we have been so impressed by what Fencer has done in such a short time frame that we're trying to get all of our ducks in a row so that MANY games on the site can become IMMENSELY popular.

I anticipate that within the next 2 months that we will request that both the variant that you described above, Dpente, and the one with my own simple rule change to further restrict player 1's 2nd move, Gpente. Even though Dpente should completely eliminate ANY advantage for either side and should be VERY fun to play, it may take a lot longer to catch on, because with the swap rule, it would be a MUCH bigger adjustment for most players than Gpente will be, which will probably still be found to have at least a moderate advantage for one side or the other.


Gary

<Walter -
(This is the longest one you've probably ever seen and you should probably ready EVERY bit of it and digest it ALL this time!)

Even though others may have gotten in heated debates with you in the past about this topic, as a general rule I have tried to avoid any heated discussions because, well, as a whole you usually have seemed to be a very reasonable and intelligent individual. So I have respected your right to have an opinion that is different than my own and mentally agreed to myself to just disagree with you and not really discuss the matter directly with you.

But I am seeing numerous things that you are saying in your last post that you have no business saying because well frankly, you have NO WAY to know that what you are saying is true and they are really making me mad, as follows:

>> Pente will probably never be as popular as chess, nor, I dare say, even as popular as it once was. <

You can't make a blanket statement such as this. You know VERY little about the history of the game or it's future direction. There are MANY of us that believe otherwise. Chess is a complex game and EXTREMELY difficult to learn high-level strategy. Pente is MUCH easier to learn and is only SOMEWHAT difficult to learn high-level strategy. That is why it is so popular when it is shown to kids and people who wish to play a game for 'fun'. In my opinion, you have absolutely no business making such a statement.

>> It's not as good as a game, nor as interesting. <

Now Walter, you've known me to be pretty reasonable about this whole situation. But NOW you're really starting to MAKE ME MAD!! If it's NOT as good a game nor as interesting as Chess to you, then why the H___ do you play it? Also, why do you give a ___ about what the rules are??!! My gish, play a different game!!

>> I know no one that plays Pente in any form <

Now, you're REALLY making me mad!! What does this have to do with anything? The reason why Pente and Keryo Pente aren't as popular as Chess is the REASON THAT I STATED IN MY LONG POST BEFORE!! THEY ARE NOT PROMOTED BY TOP PLAYERS BECAUSE ONE SIDE HAS TOO BIG OF AN ADVANTAGE!! They are VERY interesting games if you study them and could be hugely popular. But if you sit there and whine about how uninteresting and NEVER do what it takes to make them popular, that is by evening up the sides and promoting them to top players and then to companies, OF COURSE they WON'T be popular!! You're acting as if the game is like tic-tac-toe or tiddly-winks or WORSE a 90% LUCK game like Battleship. Can you imagine trying to get corporate sponsorship for a world-championship Battlship tournament? No, because whoever won the tournament would just be LUCKY!! THINK about what knowledge you have about something before spouting off about it!

>> If you guys haven't noticed, even chess is dying out in certain ways. <

Where the hell did this come from?? Do you have a membership list of the U.S. Chess Federation or the World Fide Chess Association and can you quote specific figures? Chess is as POPULAR or MORE so NOW than it has EVER been BECAUSE of computerized opening books, BECAUSE of outstanding training software, BECAUSE of HUGE corporate sponsership. Have you NOT seen the recent 6-game match between World Champion Gary Kasparov and Deep Fritz? What about the one from 2-3 years ago against Deep Blue? The move-by move game-scores and results of BOTH matches as they were progressing were posted on the front page of The Kansas City Star, for goodness sake and both sides took home over $250K for their efforts in the most recent match. Where do you think that money came from? It SURE didn't come from OTHER Chess players! It came from corporate sponsers!! And who do you think got those sponsers? Well it sure the heck wasn't your average Joe chessplayer! It took a large effort from FIDE that has numerous masters and higher-level Chess players high up in it's ranks! Walter, unless you have specific hard figures to quote to back up a statement, don't make blanket statements that you can't back up. The fact is that computers have made Chess MORE popular!! After all, the match was played back LIVE on the internet also!! And no, I DON'T have any specific membership figures myself, but all I have to do is look around at those activities to KNOW that it is STILL immensely popular!

>> Are you right that there's only 20 masters of Pente? I find this number quite low. As easy as it is to learn Pente, you'd think there'd be lots of real good and master players around. <

Walter, once again you are completely showing your ignorance of Pente and you also seem to VERY frequently be taking things that are said FAR too literally. Also, you are using these statements that are taken out of context as reasoning for UPCOMING statements which is VERY maddening. Here is the exact quote of what I said:

"It is THESE things that generate GREAT interest in a game! In order for ALL of these things to occur, MANY master-level players MUST play the game because MANY of these things take a HUGE amount of time and only a small percentage of even high-level players have that time. Right now in Pente, I would say that there are about 20-25 of them max."

By these statements, can you NOT see that I was using the term "master-level" as a GENERAL term? There is NO EXACT definition of a Pente 'master' like there is in Chess. To some people, there could be 200 masters, to others, there might only be 2 or 3. The fact is that up to 1-2 years ago, the game HAD started to spike up in popularity because several HIGH-level Russian, Hungarian, and Canadian players had started to play the game. Many of these players had master-level backgrounds in Chess, Gomoku, and Renju. The top Hungarian player by the name of Istvan Virag actually solved the game of Gomoku as a forced win in 24 moves for player 1 and tied me for the Email world championship, although I won on tiebreak. A top Russian player named Dmitri Krasnonosov came on to IYT 2-1/2 years ago and broke my string of 17 consecutive IYT Pro Pente titles. And THEN he proceded to make me loop like a COMPLETE pauper by beating me in 6 CONSECUTIVE TOURNIES!! I was mortified! Another top Russian player named Oleg Stepanov wrote an excellent opening database. Another top Russian player named Victor Barykin wrote a VERY good Pente-playing program. So far, it is the only one that has been able to shake a stick at Mark Mammel's excellent program. But what has happened now is that TWO of the top Russian players have quit playing the game as well as several other top players who have quit playing in the past year so the game has started to pull back in popularity because there's no new strategy guides and no one to promote it. Why? Because there's nothing left to solve! There's NO way to get any better at the game!

>> I think it should be a choice as to having a move restriction or not. Your chess analogies are quite good, but you're comparing apples to oranges. No master of chess will take me serious at regular chess just because I'm one of the best players at a variant of it. <

Now, you've got me so mad that smoke is coming out of my ears. HOW MANY TIMES TO I HAVE TO TELL YOU THAT NOT HAVING THE OPENING RESTRICTION IN PENTE IS NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT A VARIANT. YOU ARE THE ONE THAT IS COMPARING APPLES TO ORANGES!! CAN YOU NOT READ?? READ AND SOAK IN MY ENTIRE POST, NOT JUST THE PARTS THAT SUIT YOU!! PLAYING THE GAME WITHOUT THE RESTRICTION IS LIKE PLAYING CHESS WITH ONE SIDE MISSING A ROOK!! IT IS NOT A VARIANT, IT IS JUST STUPIDNESS AND THERE IS NO POINT!! If you want a 13x13 game or 9x9 game, although some top players aren't fond of it, I don't have a problem with it and it can be called a variant, just like 10x10 Reversi or whatever like that. THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A VARIANT WITH A DIFFERENT BOARD SIZE OR DIFFERENCE PIECE MOVEMENT OR DIFFERENT RULES FOR WINNING OR WHATEVER THEN ACTUALLY REMOVING ONE OF THE PIECES OR RULES SO THAT ONE SIDE HAS AN OVERWHELMING ADVANTAGE!! I will not state that again, so quit using the argument that it is SOMEHOW a variant. It damned well is NOT!!

>> If you're right about Pente being no good even with the move restriction, why are you foisting it upon us? Now we have to play with your guys' imposed version on the 13 X 13 board that neither of you want to play on. Seems unfair and hypocritical to me. I agree with ellieoop, if you don't like the game, don't play the game. If you say the current way is flawed, why force us to play it. <

I actually had to get up and walk around when I read this I was so friggin mad. I'M JUST GOING TO LEAVE THE CAPS LOCK ON NOW. ARE YOU CHOOSING TO IGNORE ALL OF MY PAST POSTS? HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO SAY THAT WE ARE WORKING ON DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WILL IMPROVE THE OPENING RESTRICTION AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS IN REGULAR PENTE? I NEVER SAID IT WAS NO GOOD WITH THE CURRENT RESTRICTION NOR DID I PERSONALLY SAY THAT THE 13X13 BOARD IS BAD. SOME OTHERS DON'T LIKE THE SMALLER BOARD, BUT AS LONG AS IT HAS THE RESTRICTION, IT IS FINE WITH ME. I ONLY SAID THAT IT WAS NO GOOD WITHOUT THE RESTRICTION. I STATED THAT PLAYER 1 STILL WINS A HIGH PERCENTAGE AT THE VERY TOP RANKS IN PENTE WITH THE RESTRICTION, BUT NOT THAT IT WAS NO GOOD. THE RESTRICTION JUST NEEDS TO BE TWEEKED A BIT. DON'T YOU REMEMBER THE DISCUSSION ABOUT G-PENTE AND D-PENTE?

BUT IF YOU REALLY BELIEVE US THAT PENTE IS NO GOOD WITH THE RESTRICTION, THEN WHY THE HELL WOULD YOU WANT TO PLAY IT WITHOUT THE RESTRICTION?? BY YOUR LOGIC THERE, IT SHOULDN'T BE WORTH PLAYING THE GAME AT ALL. AS A MATTER OF FACT, YOU SHOULD THINK THAT IT IS A LUDICROUS GAME TO PLAY. AND BY THE WAY, I WILL PLAY SOME 13X13 PENTE WITH THE RESTRICTION. I AM SOMEWHAT CURIOUS TO SEE IF THE SIDES OF THE BOARD AFFECT ANY OF THE MAINLINE VARIATIONS. WALTER, I AM MUCH MORE OPEN-MINDED THEN YOU THINK!! JUST NOT ABOUT THE LACK OF A RULE THAT CAUSES ONE SIDE TO BE AT SUCH A DISADVANTAGE.

AND I'M SO SICK AND TIRED OF HEARING THE SAME OLD ARGUMENT THAT IF I DON'T LIKE THE GAME, DON'T PLAY THE GAME. WELL IF YOU DON'T LIKE REASONABLE RULES OF A GAME, THEN YOU DON'T PLAY THE GAME!! I'LL USE A SIMILAR ANALOGY THAT DMITRI KING DID. IF YOU AND SEVERAL OTHER PEOPLE HAD GOTTEN TOGETHER AND DECIDED THAT 2 + 2 = 5 AND YOU WERE DOING WHATEVER YOU COULD TO CONVINCE OTHER PEOPLE THAT YOUR WAY WAS CORRECT INSTEAD OF WHAT WE'VE BEEN TAUGHT IN SCHOOL, THEN I WOULD WANT TO INTERVENE AND ASSIST IN HELPING YOU MAKE IT CORRECT. BUT THEN YOU WOULD TELL ME TO BUTT OUT BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE TO ACCEPT THAT 2 + 2 = 5 AND THAT YOU SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO GO AROUND PROMOTING THAT INCORRECT STATEMENT. THAT IS A GOOD COMPARISON AS TO WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE! WE WILL NO LONGER SIT IDLELY BY AND ALLOW THE GAME TO BE PLAYED WITHOUT IT'S MOST IMPORTANT RULE. THE BOARD SIZE IS SMALL POTATOES COMPARED TO THE RESTRICTION. I'D RATHER PLAY ON A 9X9 BOARD WITH A RESTRICTION THAN ON A 19X19 ONE WITHOUT IT.

>> Just imagine if a group of chess masters came to this site and convinced the owners that they shouldn't have any chess variants on it for all the reasons you've given about Pente and Fencer got rid of them. I'm sure there'd be an outpouring of complaints if that happened. I fail to see how this is any different than that. Just because you're the best player in the world at one version of a game doesn't mean I should be forced to play it.

This is hardly worth responding to but I'll continue to reiterate some points that I've made above. There is NO comparison to removing the opening restriction in Pente and removing a completely different variant in Chess. I would be amazed if you cannot see that now. I would ALSO be hopping mad if some Chess masters came in and took a TRUE variant away. But I would be JUST as mad if they put a Chess game on here, removed the Rook or Queen from one side, and still called it Chess or Small Chess. It could only serve to hurt the development of the players in the game.

Walter, unless you can somehow CONVINCE EVERYONE at this site including owners, employees, top players, intermediates players , novice players , and beginning players that Pente and Keryo Pente could aquire large sponsership in the future WITHOUT ANY KIND of an opening restriction, then I would suggest that you refrain from attempting to promote a game that has incorrect rules. It is not a variant and will continue making the game languish in mediocrity for the foreseeable future!!

If you want to do something useful, then try coming up with a reasonable TRUE variant like having to get 6-in-a-row or TWO 5-in-a-rows (like someone suggested and called Double Pente earlier) to win the game. Maybe even playing the game on a 7x9 board. But in order to convince people like Fencer to implement something like that, you will need to be ready to PROVE that there is not a great chance of a draw and that both sides have a reasonably even chance of winning.


Gary

Ellieoop -

Thanks for your comments. So can we assume that it is the lack of choice as White on your 2nd move that bothers you?

Anyway, since you're at both sites, try a couple of games of each. Better yet, try it on BOTH the 13x13 AND 19x19 boards here in addition to the 13x13 ones that you are probably playing at IYT.

You might find that on the 19x19 board here with the restriction, that the stone patterns will be REALLY cool looking compared to the smaller board and no restriction. Since there's more space and the stones must be a little more spread out to start with, I've seen BIG patterns that look like hammers, arrows, boxes, and even one or two that look like faces. See what you can come up with! The patterns are another thing that makes Pente and Keryo Pente so great.


Gary

Ellieoop -

I realize that you are here to have fun and not to win championships. We DO need a LOT of players like you. There ARE already many players of ALL levels that ARE having a LOT of fun playing WITH the restriction.

We think that many MORE players in the long run will have FUN with the game if it becomes EXTREMELY popular like Chess. We think the game is so great that it COULD become that big. We are doing this so that MORE players will fun in the LONG run.

Can you explain to us what makes the game less fun when you are restricted as White on your second move? That is what Dmitri King and I are confused about. After all, there is no further restriction on either side. We want to understand why it becomes less fun for you.


Gary

To all -

I would like to state why the opening restriction is necessary in Pente and Keryo Pente.

I know that MOST players are NOT top players and that they CAN win SOME of their games as player 2 in BOTH Pente and Keryo Pente. But, IN THE LONG RUN, that percentage will ALWAYS be less, even amongst novice players. I have already proven that to Walter and Dangerous Mind by using their own tournament stats at IYT. It could also easily be mathematically proven, but that shouldn't be necessary.

The fact that player 1 has an overwhelming advantage is only ONE of the MAIN reasons that the restriction is necessary, but NOT the MOST important one! The MOST important one is as follows:

It is the goal of MANY players for Pente to grow as large as other games like Chess. In order for a game to grow that large, MANY top MASTER-level players MUST become interested in it and promote it. Here is why that is the case:
1. Master-level players will write strategy books and guides.
2. Master-level players will create databases and software for the game.
3. Master-level players will teach other players how to improve their play.
4. MOSTLY Master-level players will promote the game, sometimes sponser tourneys, and attempt to find sponsers for national and world-championship level tournaments. (Lower-level players could do this, but getting sponsership would be FAR more difficult if you don't have an intimate grasp of strategy.)

It is THESE things that generate GREAT interest in a game! In order for ALL of these things to occur, MANY master-level players MUST play the game because MANY of these things take a HUGE amount of time and only a small percentage of even high-level players have that time. Right now in Pente, I would say that there are about 20-25 of them max. The reason that there aren't more is because high-level players keep dropping out. They keep dropping out because even in Pente WITH the restriction, player 1 has a fairly large advantage. That advantage is actually MUCH less than in KERYO pente WITHOUT the restriction, so it is a good example. The problem is, there is no more analysis and strategy that they can do to improve their chances to win as player 2. So it makes no sense for them to create strategy guides, openings books, software improvements, etc. because there is no 'strategy' for player 2 against a virtually perfect player 1. He would just be hoping to get lucky.

IN order for the above to occur, we need 100's of master-level players if not 1000's worldwide, like there are in Chess!! By master-level, I'm not referring to the elite of the elite, like full-time grand-masters in Chess. Master-level is all that is needed to accomplish what is needed to make the game become MUCH bigger and more popular.

So the point being that if we want Pente and Keryo Pente to become the EXTREMELY popular games that we think that they can become, BOTH sides MUST have a reasonable chance to win amongst ALL players, novices and masters alike.

I would also like to refer you to the regular (19x19) Pente and Keryo Pente discussion boards. On both of them, I go into GREAT detail about why NOT having the opening restriction actually HURTS the development of beginning and intermediate-level players. As a general rule, it reduces their ability to consider split-3's and pairs as attacking weapons. This occurs because player 1 frequently does not need these weapons when already starting with such a large advantage and player 2 is just hoping to 'mix up' the position enough so that player 1 gets confused.

The opening restriction was added less than 2 years after the game was invented more than 25 years ago. IYT just made a mistake when they created the game to begin with so we have intervened here to make sure that the long-term betterment of the game is not negatively impacted once again.

As far as considering it a variant. NOT having the opening restriction is NOT a variant, it is an actual error in the rules. I would compare this error to allowing White to start with 2 Rooks vs. Black's 1 Rook in Chess and not changing ANYTHING else but still calling it Chess. The advantage for player 1 in Pente WITHOUT the restriction would actually be MORE than that and in Keryo Pente, it would be comparable but probably still more. Sure, black will win a lot of games at the lower ranks, SOME games at the intermediate ranks, and VERY few at the high-intermediate ranks, but he will win virtually ZERO at the master-level ranks. If Chess were changed in this way, the top players would leave the game and only beginners and intermediates would play it, but they would stop trying to improve once they got to a certain level because there would be no point in continuing, so there would no longer be the HUGE sponsorship for the game that there is currently. THAT's a VERY good comparison as to what is happening in Pente and why Keryo Pente hasn't become more popular.

Dmitri King and I are currently playing a total of SIX games as player 1 ONLY on a 13x13 board without the restriction here and at IYT against Walter, Dangerous Mind, and Pioneer54 in order to demostrate that player 2 cannot win without it. We anticipate some follow-up games to further demonstrate the point. All of these players have won titles at IYT, one has won MANY titles, and they ALL have won 80-90%+ of their games there, so we know that this will be a good test.

One thing that I have found is that after playing Pente and Keryo Pente WITH the restriction and THEN going back to playing as player 1 without it like we are doing in the demostration above, it almost seems laughable how MANY different ways that we can CHOOSE to win, regardless of what player 2 does.

With all of this said, I would PLEASE encourage EVERYONE to play Pente and Keryo Pente WITH the restriction and correct rules instead of with the incorrect rules at IYT. It is still just as much fun, you won't care which side that you play, and you will learn some strategies for attacking as player 1 that you would have never imagined had you continued to play without the restriction. It is in trying these new positions and formations that will ALSO make the game fun, if not more so. You might even find that the stone patterns are prettier because they will be a little more spread out! :-)


Gary

It will always be in effect per the official rules of the game.

Thanks Filip (Fencer) for correcting that rule!


Gary

To all -

I just wanted to let everyone know that the correct opening restriction is now on the Small Pente game, in case you missed it on the main page.

If you are White and having problems making the move that you want on your 2nd move, see the rules for regular Pente.


Gary

To all -

I just wanted to let everyone know that the correct opening restriction is now on the Small Keryo Pente game, in case you missed it on the main page.

If you are White and having problems making the move that you want on your 2nd move, see the rules for regular Keryo pente.


Gary

Pioneer54 -

See Fencer's latest reply. I completely forgot about it! You can set the DISPLAY of ALL Pente boards to be BIGGER like Walter is saying.

I just changed mine and it looks a LOT better! Just go to the 'settings' link at the bottom left. It should be self explanatory.

Fencer, is there any chance we can have the BIGGER Pente boards be the DEFAULT setting? Or would that interfere with WebTV users in some way. I think that MOST players would probably agree that the larger DISPLAY of the boards is better.


Thanks,
Gary


P.S. Pioneer54, if you want something BIGGER than the BIGGEST board, well that WOULD be a NEW request!

Fencer -

I think that Pioneer54 is saying that the DISPLAY of the 13x13 boards is somewhat small. I think that he likes the PLAYING AREA of the 13x13 board, just that the DISPLAY of it is too small.

Can you clarify that Pioneer54?

Personally, the display of the boards is of little consequence to me. I keep then stored on my computer so that I can easily 'push the stones around'. But I could see how others that just 'eye' their moves might think that the viewing of the boards is small.


Gary

To all -

HA HA HA!! Mark (mmammel) initially fooled me BIG time and I wrote him an Email asking about some of the particulars. But then right after I sent him the Email I realized just what Pioneer54 probably took less than a minute to realize. That is that 'slooF lirpA' in Mark's message is 'April Fools' spelled backwards. I had assumed that Mark had put his fingers on the wrong keys and accidently typed some nonsense.

He had me hook, line, and sinker and shaking my head for more than two hours! So I wanted to see how many others that 'we' could fool by perpectuating it.

I'm glad to see that Walter shares my viewpoint on this. I would be strongly against something like that. The unusual board size wouldn't bother me as long as the opening restriction was imposed on player 1. But the particulars of how the lesser player would be able to extend into the 'forbidden area' of the stronger player could be quite complicated to program and I think that Filip's time could be FAR better spent on improving the site in other ways. Also, there are MUCH better Pente variants that could be designed, regardless of the board size or the ability difference of the players.

Good one Mark!

One thing that I should say about Mark. He is an excellent Pente player and has his own website of which a large portion is dedicated to Pente. On the site, he has free downloads of a very good Pente-playing program, an opening book, a small database, and past Pente champions of various world-class tournaments as well as information about a few other games. I don't remember the name of his site, but you can go to a real-time Pente site at www.pente.org and there will be a link to it at the bottom-left of the home page. You could probably also message him here and he will give you the site address.

To ALL players - If you want to play some real-time Pente or Keryo Pente with ratings and the such with a lot of fun people, check out www.pente.org. Of course it will be on a 19x19 with the opening restriction. :-)


Gary

Mark -

This sounds like a VERY good variant. I'm trying to think of a good name for it. Maybe Mid-Pente or Middle-Pente or Handicap-Pente or something similar?

Walter, Kevin, and anybody else, what do you all think about this variant and what it should be called?


Gary

To all -

This is a copy of a post that I put on the Keryo Pente discussion board with a few things changed to apply to the discussion here. I'd like to state several things.

1. I agree with what Dmitri King has said about the opening advantage being EXTREMELY high for player 1 in Pente on a 13x13 board.

2. I differ with Dmitri King and agree with Pioneer 54 that the edge of the board play in a 13x13 game is somewhat interesting. BUT...I only think it is interesting when played WITH an opening restriction.

3. As Erika alluded to on the Keryo Pente board and Dmitri King has plainly stated, it impeads the growth of players to play the games without the restriction because they are like playing 2 different games.

I would now like to state what I believe to be the EXACT reason why MANY players who learn to play EITHER Pente OR Keryo Pente without the opening restriction have GREAT difficulty a player 1 in learning to attack standard defenses by player 2 WITH it, even though player 1 still has a moderate edge. The reason is that without the restriction, player 1 can easily attack and get into a winning position by using standard 'potentials' and rarely ever having to sacrifice a pair or otherwise get into a little more confusing position. A potential is defined as two stones in a straight line, vertically, horizontally, or diagonally with one blank intersection in between, so it would be like X_X. Potentials are STRONG formations in Pente and Keryo Pente because pairs (and 3's in Keryo) can be captured. As a general rule, pairs are much weaker then potentials in both games.

With the opening restriction, player 1 must now use less strong formations in the opening that usually require the sacrifice of a pair (or even a 3 in Keryo) in order to get a good attack. For that reason, if players have learned the game without it and then attempt to play with the correct opening restriction, they usually have great difficulty learning to win as player 1 even though the first player still has a moderate advantage. It is simply uncomfortable for them to learn other attacking formations besides the standard potentials described above.

I DO think it was an EXCELLENT business decision by Filip to put Small Pente and Small Keryo Pente on the site. It will take MANY players away from IYT, which is what I like to see. If he places the opening restriction on both games, there WILL be a few isolated complaints while players get used to it. But I DO believe that over the next 1-5 years as the site grows that Pente will grow much larger faster and be a bigger contributor to that growth if the opening restriction is placed on ALL Pente games. This is because players will be MORE able to understand how to attack as White and will be better able to compete with intermediate and top level players.

The best way to put it would be using Erika's terms from the Keryo Pente board. New players who wished to learn tennis would just be learning to play tennis on a smaller court before graduating to a larger court as opposed to being shown how to play racquetball in order to learn tennis. There would be no comparison.


Gary

Pioneer54 -

As Dmitri King stated, we are currently playing 2 games each of Keryo Pente as player 1 against Walter Montego and Dangerous Mind at IYT.

Dmitri King and I would like to issue an even greater challenge to you. Since you have won NUMEROUS IYT Keryo Pente titles WITHOUT the opening restriction and we only have a moderate degree of experience with it, we think that this will be an excellent test of the opening advantage owned by player 1 even on the 13x13 board.

We would like to play you 4 games of Small Keryo Pente here at Brain King. If you don't have the available slots then doing it at IYT would work also.

In those 4 games, we will be player 1 in all 4 games. We will confer and analyze the positions between us. You are welcome to also have a partner assist you in analyzing the positions. If you are able to win ONE of those 4 games, we will aknowledge that player 1's advantage is not as great as we think that it is. But if you can NOT win ONE game, then I think that our point is all but proven that there should be an opening restriction because our combined experience in Keryo Pente is much less than yours. In other words, we are willing to stake all of our points in these posts on this.

We would need at least 7 days/move time controls due to upcoming vacations. If you are unable to play here at Brain King, you will need to invite me to the games at IYT (Dmitri King wants to finish up his games there). TWO games at a time would probably work best. My I.D. there is 'Pente champ' and my name is the same as here.


Gary

To all -

I'd like to state several things here.

1. I agree with what Dmitri King has said about the opening advantage being EXTREMELY high for player 1 in Keryo Pente on a 13x13 board.

2. I differ with Dmitri King and agree with Pioneer 54 that the edge of the board play in a 13x13 game is somewhat interesting. BUT...I only think it is interesting when played WITH an opening restriction.

3. As Erika has alluded to and Dmitri King has plainly stated, it impeads the growth of players to play the games without the restriction because they are like playing 2 different games.

I would now like to state what I believe to be the EXACT reason why MANY players who learn to play EITHER Pente OR Keryo Pente without the opening restriction have GREAT difficulty a player 1 in learning to attack standard defenses by player 2 WITH it, even though player 1 still has a moderate edge. The reason is that without the restriction, player 1 can easily attack and get into a winning position by using standard 'potentials' and rarely ever having to sacrifice a pair or otherwise get into a little more confusing position. A potential is defined as two stones in a straight line, vertically, horizontally, or diagonally with one blank intersection in between, so it would be like X_X. Potentials are STRONG formations in Pente and Keryo Pente because pairs (and 3's in Keryo) can be captured. As a general rule, pairs are much weaker then potentials in both games.

With the opening restriction, player 1 must now use less strong formations in the opening that usually require the sacrifice of a pair (or even a 3 in Keryo) in order to get a good attack. For that reason, if players have learned the game without it and then attempt to play with the correct opening restriction, they usually have great difficulty learning to win as player 1 even though the first player still has a moderate advantage. It is simply uncomfortable for them to learn other attacking formations besides the standard potentials described above.

I DO think it was an EXCELLENT business decision by Filip to put Small Pente and Small Keryo Pente on the site. It will take MANY players away from IYT, which is what I like to see. If he places the opening restriction on both games, there WILL be a few isolated complaints while players get used to it. But I DO believe that over the next 1-5 years as the site grows that Pente will grow much larger faster and be a bigger contributor to that growth if the opening restriction is placed on ALL Pente games. This is because players will be MORE able to understand how to attack as White and will be better able to compete with intermediate and top level players.

The best way to put it would be using Erika's terms. New players who wished to learn tennis would just be learning to play tennis on a smaller court before graduating to a larger court as opposed to being shown how to play racquetball in order to learn tennis. There would be no comparison.


Gary


P.S. Since Pioneer54 stated his credentials, I will state mine so that you know that I'm not just spewing forth rhetoric here. I am the 2-time defending world E-mail Pente champion that is played at www.gamerz.net and winner of 35 combined Pente and 'Small' Pente titles at IYT out of a total of 42 tournaments entered.

My feeling in all of this is that we should talk more about NEW rules for the opening restriction and NEW variants in Pente that even up the chances of BOTH sides as opposed to discussing something where one side has an overwhelming advantage.

Here's one that I thought of the other day. Keep the opening restriction as is, but in order to win, 6 or more stones must be placed in a row or 20 stones (10 pairs) must be captured to win.

For an even better improvement on that, instead of using the current opening restriction, 'G-Pente' rules could be used. G-pente rules are the same as Pente with the opening restriction but a further restriction is placed on player 1's move 2. In addition to the current opening restriction, he cannot play in a horizontal or vertical line 3 or 4 intersections away from his first move. So the coordinates on a 19x19 board of F10, G10, K6, K7, K13, K14, N10, and O10 would also be off limits for player 1's 2nd move.

THAT should make for some LONG and INTERESTING battles!


Gary

To all -

Here are some more thoughts on matters here:

1. It is not a good indicator to use stats obtained from playing the general public as a whole for determining the advantage of one side or the other in any game. As a general rule, the average person in the playing public has no idea about playing strategy and your stats can be very much skewed by playing one player many times. Using tournament stats is more accurate and using late round tournament stats is MOST accurate.

2. Although the games were invented on 19x19 boards, I don't think it's a big deal to play them on 13x13 boards if that is what you wish to do. I aknowledge that the side of the board CAN make for some interesting play.

3. I have a BIG problem playing Pente or Keryo Pente WITHOUT the opening restriction in any kind of serious play. But I would be willing to play them as player 1 ONLY on a 13x13 board at IYT if someone wants to invite me. (IYT I.D. Pente champ, name Gary Barnes) I don't remember if I need to do the invite or my opponent if I want to be player 1. Perhaps someone can enlighten me. The only reason that I will do this is to show the overwhelming advantage enjoyed by player 1 without the opening restriction.

4. I do agree that the advantage of player 1 in Keryo Pente is moderately reduced on a 13x13 board if the opening restriction is used. If the restriction is not used, the advantage is only SLIGHTLY reduced almost to the point of being non-existent.

5. The opening restriction IS used in BOTH Pente and Keryo Pente here at Brain King.

6. Dangerous Mind, as I stated once before, mathematically there is a HUGE difference between percentages at one end of the bell-shaped statistical curve.

I will elaborate on #6. For several hundred games played, the difference between 53.5% and 46.5% is not particularly significant, but the difference between 97% and 90% is EXTREMELY significant. If you used the full slippery-slope there, you could take it out to 100% and 93%. This would mean that out of 240 games, you would have lost ZERO games as player 1 and SEVENTEEN games as player 2. I don't need to even mention the statistical significance of that. The significance would be the equivalant of one side beating the other 17 out of 17 times!

I think Walter put it best using ratios previously so I'll use his method of explaining it using your stats:
As player 1:
97% = 97 to 3
win ratio 32.3 to 1
losses frequency 1 / 33.3

As player 2:
90% = 90 to 10
win ratio 9.0 to 1
loss frequency 1 / 10.0

So you have a 1 in 10 chance of losing as player 2 and a 1 in 33.3 chance chance of losing as player 1. That means that you are over 3 times (33.3 / 10.0 ) as likely to lose as player 2 as you are as player 1!!

And this is only from playing the non-strategy minded general public. Imagine what it would be like amongst very experienced good players. So as you can see, Dangerous, the 7% difference is actually quite HUGE!!


Gary Barnes

To all -

Once again, Fencer has come through with a VERY fast response to a SMALL thing that caused some players LOTS of confusion when storing their Pente and Keryo Pente games!

He has disabled the automatic board rotation when playing the black stones in Pente and Keryo Pente. Now you see the SAME game coordinates and position regardless of which side you are playing. This is MUCH better and easier for future reference when storing games!

3 cheers for Fencer again!


Gary

Opal Lady and Flippin Maniac -

Come on folks. If you're going to complain about something, whether it be in a joking or serious manner, at least make a serious suggestion on how to improve it instead of just spouting off.

Fencer is excellent at quickly making simple and reasonable changes, but he has to know what we want. I don't think that flourescent orange is reasonable. If you're just spouting off about stuff, he's going to be less likely to listen to you if you have a serious and good suggestion in the future.

Maybe he will consider changing it to the light blue that I suggested or something similar or perhaps he will do it at a later time because other things are a higher priority at the moment. But at least he now has something reasonable to work from.


Gary Barnes

Fencer -

I was kind of thinking the same thing that another person is here. That is the board color for Keryo Pente is a little bright. My suggestion is a neutral color such as light-blue. Althought I don't like to use this as an example, the color of the light-blue Gomoku boards at IYT would be a good color for it.

Also, there is one thing that is creating a problem for players who store their Pente and Keryo Pente games on their computers for future reference. That is in both of your Pente and Keryo Pente games, the coordinates of the board are rotated and faced the opposite direction when a player is playing the black stones like would be done when playing the black pieces in games like Chess or Checkers.

This makes sense for games where pieces are MOVED on the board like Chess and Checkers. But for games where placed pieces are not actually moved, it is not usual to have the board rotated. This is because games of that nature are generally stored in static boards and databases, regardless of which side that you are playing. So the coordinates that are shown when playing black always end up being the exact opposite of the way that we store them.

If it is not a big problem, my first suggestion would be to eliminate that rotation for Pente and Keryo Pente. Then if you feel it is necessary to be consistent, I would suggest doing the same for ALL of your games where coordinates are specified but where pieces do not move once they are placed on the board.

If you want to confirm that with a couple of other Pente players, I'm sure that Dmitri King and Erika would say the same thing.


Thanks,
Gary

Fencer -

Thanks for making the change to automatically place the stone in the middle of the board in Pente and Keryo Pente.

It's amazing how little stuff like that probably doesn't take much time means A LOT in customer service. You have done in 2 weeks what IYT couldn't do in 5 years for Pente and Keryo Pente.

I do have a couple of other thoughts about Pente and Keryo Pente. I'll make a separate post for those.


Thanks again,
Gary

Fencer (Filip) -

Here is a suggestion that I have made to www.itsyourturn.com several times but they have ignored, which is usual for them. It would be VERY easy for you to do and it IS done at www.pente.org.

The suggestion is for you to AUTOMATICALLY make the first move for white (player 1) in BOTH Pente and Keryo Pente after the game is started. That way, black (player 2) could just move anywhere he wants right away, the games would go faster, and it would prevent any kind of confusion like this.

Thanks for your great site!


Gary Barnes