I dont think there can be any fl proof way to win a pond game, no matter what any computer says. There is always a possibility that everyone will bid higher than you and knock you out.

(my bet is on Pedro)
So I have started a Pond run for champions. This game will be for people who have already won a pond run. The first 16 winners will start this game. Good luck getting into it, and may the best runner win!

Walter Montego: I am not sure if that adresses this problem.... I have 1 or 0 points left, many people will bet 2 or 1 just enough to beat me, but then I resign, and my bid doesnt count, therefore your low bid could get you kicked out of the game.

There has to be some simple way to allow a resignation without adversly affecting the game...

rod03801: Yes, I can deny that I was whinning about people taking advantage of available trends to play this game. I have stated many times that I think what BBW did was fine. ( although, truely inside information, like if I pm'd you that I was going to bet 1, that is not in the spirit of the game)

All I want is a solution so someone can resign a game without affecting the play for the rest of the players. To me it is not a strategic game strategy trend that someone is trying to resign all of their games and bidding one. That is totally different from if you find out that someone always bets 20% higher than the average of the previous round, for example.

It just doesnt seem right to me that someone resigning a game can become an advantage for a couple of players.... there has to be some solution to avoid this.

rod03801: If you read my post carefully you will notice that I did not call what BBW did as 'lame', but what Cerise is doing is what I think is 'lame'.

Maybe if anyone who resigned would actually bid all their points on the next turn and be automatically removed after that turn?
That covers your first example

But the second example I dont buy as a legit excuse/reason, that is exactly what Cerise is doing now, resigning in the middle of a game, and it is messing things up but you?rod dont seem to understand that.

It might be nice if anyone with zero points is automatically out of the game, as well as the low bidder?

Stevie: I dont think a bet of zero is a resign either. If you dont have any points left, then it is an automatic 0 bid.

I dont know why we cant just have a resign option, where a person who uses it is out of the game without any bid, plus anyone else who has the lowest bid for that round.

What nobody wants to admit is this is not a case of game strategy here. The guy is trying to resign.

I already said dont blame you BWW. It is just frustrating that a player who doesnt want to play can mess up the game for everybody else, unless you are lucky enough to be playing other games with them and know they are bidding 0 in every game.

I think also that there is always a chance of people in this game colaberating with others or for someone with multi niks to ruin the game as well.

rod03801: The difference is that he is trying to resign, it is not a strategy. If I am the only player in a game to know you are kicked off the site, for example, this is "inside information" and is totally different than if I was the only one to study your trends and knew that you always bet 12 in the first round.

I dont really blame BBW or anyone esle who took advantage of this situation, but it is an unfair advantage and not in the spirit of the game or in the spirit of studying ones trends or strategy.


How is soomeone resigning all his games part of a strategic trend?

There is no strategy in purposly losing, and you shouldnt have to scan every running game every day to see if someone is moving 0 in everygame jus to quit. I a sure this wont become a big problem, as most people who do not want to play will not enter and create as many games as he has done.

I see it more like unfair inside information when only one or two people in a game know of someones intention to bid 0.

What would be so hard to just come on here and say, I am out on all my games... no unfair advantage for anyone.

rod03801: The word 'strategy' is hardly relevant in this discussion.

He wont do it in any of my tournaments!

Is there any reason he could not atleast announce his intention on this board so that everyone would have the same advantage, instead of just a couple of people who happen to be in a lot of games with them and notice something... Lame!

He just did it again!!!!!
In a game that he created!

Thats a really lame move, IMHO.
BBW seems to have caught on (some inside info maybe?)

At least what a person should do if they want a fair way to get out of a game, is to bid their whole amount, that would keep people who know you are going out on purpose from taking advantage of this unfairly from those who dont know, by betting 2 or 3. Then after they bet their whole stack and end up with only the 500 point bonus, and EVERYONE would know this and bet over 500 next turn and you would be out of the game without having to move again.

All I know is something should be corrected as it is hardly fair that only a couple of people know when a person is going to bet zero, and it is not in the spirit of the game.

He bid one in one of my games too.
ha is he trying to get out of every game?

Thats why am for some way to resign without commiting suicide, it takes away from the game when people play based on something like he is doing. At least a notice to everyone that you are planning on doing that would be nice :)

I think these game discussion boards are in part for sharing tips and strategies. I dont think it is a bad thing, its better than playing against people who dont move correctly when they should... Not sure if I would share any of my really good strategies though (if I had any)

It was obvious from the begining that the first game was not going to represent a 'typical' game.

Thats crazy that it went to 300 from 93 the previous round.
I would have thought 300 would be plenty!

I had to open my big mouth about no one going in with a bid over ten on the first move..... I just kerplunked at 11 :)

I would love to see a statistics page that shows averages of all the games.

Like the average bet of the first person to fall in...(right now belive that 12 or higher has never gone out in the first round)
Also the average low and high bids per round ie the average low bid in round #9 is (?), the average high bid in round 11 is (?) etc... This would have to be catorgorized by how many people start the game as well.

I just saw that! VERY frustrating....

I think a lot of people were frustrated with the slow pace of the first pond run, and we were "searching" for some way to make this game interesting quicker than the current pace of that game. I think that if the ratio is lower than 40 to 1, which it is currently, it makes the game get 'interesting' much sooner.

I think another way to 'solve' this issue is to allow us to create games with fewer people, so those of us that want, can play more "end games", say start with 6 players, then it would be exciting from the very first move!!

Yes something like that bry....

The way Fencer has described it, nothing will be changed at all from the way it currently is. The reason we want the ability to make our own parameters, is to change the ratio, or percentage between the starting point and the bonus pooihnts. That is the whole idea.

That is why keeping the 500 point bonus at all times, and just letting us continue to create games that have a minimum first bid to change the ratio ourselves , is prefered over having a forced 40 to 1 ratio

rabbitoid: LOL...we shall see, but they will only do it once, I guarantee that!

i NEED 2 MORE TO START A 19000 FIRST BID GAME FOR 16 PEOPLE

OH, its 1s and 0s, right?

Is binary in 10s?

LOL, guess you know into what group I fall :)

kitti: Thats what makes every game so unique... BBW just bet a 502 in the first round and got the bonus and is in first place! The dynamics will always be in flux. Soon someone will get burned in the first round with a quite high bet and people will start to bet a lot higher on the first round....MAYBE!

furbster: Sorry...

I think she meant she still doesnt have any brains in her head, not in her account LOL

You just misunderstood her, I think, and your response to her was so serious deadpan, I thought it would have been funny, had you meant it as a joke.

Fencer.... the wizard of oz!

furbster: If it wasnt so obviously a language problem, that would be really hilarious!!! ;)

Bad Bishop: LOL, yes it was easily understood :)

There are people who routinly play games with longer limits who agree to play a "fast" game, sometime to finish the game in one sitting. Thats all I want to be able to do. People with a life would not have to participate. But as it is right now, the fastest games will still be just under half a month...

Bad Bishop: First, A "smaller starting pool" was meant to mean the number of players that start a game.

Second, yes am bored, but I am not very patient, and especially in a new game that I am learning, I want to see results straight away, I really cant wait to see how the "end game" works out in this game. I think even a game with as few as 16 people which will take half a month to complete is too long for people who prefer faster games. And since this game doesnt continue at the pace of the players moves like all other games, I would like to see shorter time limit games, or have a game continue to the next round as soon as everyone has submitted a move.

I just found that we are able to play/create more pond games! Whoooohoooo!

I would like to play faster games, and since this game is not typical, and the next turn does not advance when all players have made a move, I would like to see the ability to create a game with shorter time limits, ie 10 minute moves or 5 minute moves or something. Also the abilty for a game to start when everyone has signed up, right away. Also to play with fewer than 16 people.

I would love to try a "quick game" with other people online where we could start and finish a game right then :)

Bad Bishop: I said I hadnt really thought it through.... But it seems that since it makes no sense to go for a 500 point bonus with more than a 500 point bid, that there is really no "safe" chance to go for it now. (although it is a game of "guts") Even if you bid 300 and you have to do it twice to get the bonus it is not worth it. It does seem that there will be a better risk/reward ratio later in the game, and that if the bonus were higher, it would come into play sooner.

I guess many people are simply bored with the slow pace of the game, and are looking for ways to improve this. Most agree that a smaller starting pool would help also.

Bad Bishop: /Fencer

Maybe it could be one of the options when setting up a new game, to be able to determine the amount of starting points and the bonus desired by the game creator?

BBW, I think that if the game will eventuALLY BECOME MORE INTERESTING LATER (BASED ON THE BONUS) tHEN WHY NOT MAKE IT A HIGHER BONUS TO STYART AND MAKE THE GAME MORE INTERESTING STRAIGHT AWAY? tHATS ALL...

Fencer: I agree that the amount of points is not relevant, but that the percentage of the bonus points in relationship to the overall total is relevant. I have not thought it through completly, but I would like to see the bonas points be a higher percentage of the total starting points than the current 500 bonus with 20000 starting points.

Stevie: Now everybody can bid 11 and be gauranteed in the game, until she/he gets kicked into the pond.... I bet there are still some who will bid below 10 though.

Fencer: I thought Olddear/mauve was LJs' wife, a she, not he......

So true BBW....

I see hads point about the free pass...if everybody got one it would be fair, but it would be a completely different game, and totally change the strategy. People would try to save them for the end, and they wouldnt be used like a vacation day or whatever. I agree with Stevie that it is not needed in this game for the reason that Thad stated, as we already have the :rebet" option for those who cant get online.

Bad Bishop: Thanks for the backup :)

Summertop: I think it would be nice if you could commit suicide without effecting the rest of us playing the game. Just being able to resign would work better than you having to bid 1 to get out of it...

pauloaguia: I am not quite sure what you meant by that last comment....

Bidding a 1 one the last round.....Hmmmm, is that what you guys meant about "guts"?

I guess over time we should expect more and more of that as some people get tired of playing such a long game.

Maybe a way to allow someone to "quit" the game, without having to commit suicide, could be implimented, Fencer?

pauloaguia: Great idea!!!

well if his number actually changed, he must have hit submit...

Or you could still edit all you want, but only until the last person submitted a bid.

I dont think many people will edit their bids, as there is nothing dynamic about the game that would make anyone want to make a change. I think most people just wanted to change their bids so they can add a new message, but that doesnt work either

Thats the idea Stevie.....


Just like now, in normal games, there can be a 10 day limit, but if we want we can play it all in one night....

I was thinking of a ;ot smaller game, between friends currently online who all want to play a quick game, something like that.