I was just recently invited to a new game of keryo Pente. According to the page I am the one who is supposed to make the first move, but I cannot fine any place on the board were I am allowed to make a move. (there are no places where there is a link indicated)

Never mind. I finally found out that I had to take the very center move. It was difficult to find, though.

It should be easier now, I've highlighted the center point.

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

Gary: Yes, it should be easy. I'll do it.

The first move (which must be to the board center) is done automatically when a game is started.

The first move (which must be to the board center) is done automatically when a game is started.

Couldn't you find something besides that God awful purple color. LOL

What do you suggest?

Some people are just never satisfied :(

How about Fluorescent Orange.
:)

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 -

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

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

Gary: About the background color, I was told by several IYT users that blue background would be confusing because of blue color used for Go-Moku on IYT. But I think that I could add some color schemes, similar to chess ones - see Settings / Chess page as an example.
Rotation - this feature is not supported yet but I can disable the automatic rotation for black player, no problem. Line4 is implemented in this way.

Welcome to all keryo-pente players and others that are interested!
I respect tonyh's and dream's oppinion that specific comments should be posted on the relevant messageboard and so i will. I've taken my time to print off and read all the previous messages on this messageboard, 2 hours further and calculating the percentages of my wins and losses, i come to the conclusion that in my case i have 97% chance of winning my black games and 90% of my white games. This also counts for my tourney games! This doesn't imply that black has a slight advantage however, it only means that i have to improve my white games.
Having played 258 regular games of which 114 with white and 128 with black makes 47.1% against 52.9%...not too far off i would say, probably because i posted more games than took out of the waitingroom...only 16 of this total i lost, of which 12 with white and 4 with black....yes also 75% on 25% as i saw Gary explaining to Walter, BUT looking at the total amount of my games played, its 75% of the total 6.25% loss that is with white....which makes 4.69% of the total. 25% of the 6.25% loss is 1.56%....of course...
I have not enough knowledge about regular or pro-pente, so I can't say that the one that begins placing the first stone has a big advantage, but i can say that for Keryo the chances are quite even...7% difference is not alot.
Dmitri...Official rules or not? Is Keryo supposed to be played on 19x19 board? the game is complicated enough on the 13x13 board!....the edge can be used, which has a advantage and a disadvantage.......advantage is that a stone(or stones) on the edge can't be defended from behind and the disadvantage is that you can make less possible combinations, therefore 99% of the games start in the middle and that makes perfectly sence to me... but if people perfer to play their first moves on one of the sides, than thats their own choice, but i am not giving them much chance to win...its the same as putting a knight in one of the first moves on the A or H-line in chess for instance.
I am not going into the subject of all the variations of pente....although the ideas are nice and might give an extra dimension to the game, i believe we first need to know how to play this version properly, before we start looking for alternatives.
Last but not least I will accept every challenge from either of you (i am already enjoying my games against Walter), whether its with white or black....the choice is yours....even when all my games are with white i still know i have a rather even chance....
Best Regards from the flying dutchman,
Dangerous Mind aka Mark.
And now its time to play some games....:)

Fencer-- Garey is right. In pente and Keryo pente, the coordinates are not rotated. a piece played at G5, for example, is just G5 for both players; it is not G5 for one player and then N15 for the other. This has caused some confusion, especially since players generally view trhe pente board from the same perespective (unlike chess where each player sees a different board).

Mark-
A problem caused by IYT not using certain standards of the games has confused me when I read your post here. You'll do best to avoid the terms White or Black when talking about which side you played from in Pente games. Apparently almost everyone else uses the White dudes for moving first. The major exception being IYT, which has Black going first. Because of this most people say "Player 1" or "the player with the first move" instead of just saying the color of their side.
Assuming your posting is using the IYT colors, it would still seem that going second has a harder time of it than when you've been first to move. Though the difference in your stats isn't as clear cut as it is in mine. Gary didn't use my side games stats when he compiled the list from my charts. Perhaps I should do that myself and also just with the same players involved. You're a good start! We've completed 6 games. You're up 4 to 2 in them. Of the 2 games that I won, both times I had the first move. In the 4 that you've won, I was first in 1 game and second in the other 3. The two games we have going at the moment also look like first to move's game. Not enough to say it proves anything (aside from the fact that I'm one of the 3% percent who have beat you when you've gone first :) ) but it sure looks like Gary's point in the early stages if nothing else. He also argues that the stronger the play of the players the more this tends to be so! I tried to check your stats on IYT, but you've got them blocked or they do if not you.
I'm curious, did you as I did, first play Keryo Pente at IYT? It seems that players that do, learn the game with a different point of view than those that started out on a 19 X 19 board. Some of whom get quite shrill and strident in their argument about any deviation from what they consider the only way it should be played, I might add. It'd be cool to try other size boards. I think 9 X 9 would be trippy. Larger than say 25 X 25 would amount to infinity in serious play since I doubt if there'd be much reason to stray so far from the action without losing the game by doing so. I like the Knight analogy. On the 13 X 13 board, I avoid the edge unless necessity compels me to move there. I imagine on a 19 X 19 board an edge move would be even rarer. Also, the game has move restrictions as played in some places, and from what I've seen, by most of the good players. I wish they would play you on the 13 X 13 board without the move restriction. I think the smaller board cuts down on the advantage of going first in Keryo Pente, but not in regular Pente. Gary and Dmitri agrue otherwise and considering their knowledge in the matter they're probably speaking from past experience. Whether or not they accept your challenge to play them on the 13 X 13 board, we should try a few games on the 19 X 19 that is on this site. I don't know if it has the move restriction or if it does if it can be shut on or off as the players decide. Aside from it lessening the importance of the edge, I doubt if the game will change much. Though lessening the importance of the edge is a major change in a lot of ways and our play will probably reflect that. If it were possible to play on a 9 X 9 on this or another site (Since I could play it at home that way if I knew someone that played Pente, that is) I imagine edge play would would greatly dictate how the game would go from the very beginning.

I am very frustrated that we are STILL discussing a 13X13 board. There is no such game! you say

"Dmitri...Official rules or not? Is Keryo supposed to be played on 19x19 board? the game is complicated enough on the 13x13 board!....the edge can be used, which has a advantage and a disadvantage...."

The 19X19 board (the CORRECT ONE) does not make the game any more complicated, it just makes the game function better. Running out of room is NOT supposed to be part of the game, that just isn't what it is about!

As for your stats.. I had a bit of trouble following what you were saying. Were those your IYT stats? I have to disagree with your assessment that the advantage of going first is slim. It is huge! player 1 has an extra stone! it only takes three stones to take the iniattive if not defensded, whereas two stones cannot provide a serious threat. So, after 5 stones, player 2 is defending the 3 stones player 1 has, and then player 1 places a 4th stone, andp layer 2 is trying to stay alive, etc.

As for Pro pente, the advantage of player 1 is huge. at IYT, I was something like 160-6 as player 1 in my last 166 games. $ of those 6 llosses were careless screwups of the misclick variety in games where I had a winning line worked out but carelessly misplayed it. My win% as player 2 is nowhere near that 96 or 97% percent that it is wiht player 1. when top players meet, they often split, as has happened in the October Main IYT tournament. but for mid level and lower level players, the advantage is not as great.

I suggest allowing the player to pick the color that he wants. As can be done with the size of the board, it'd be nice to be able to chose the color for yourself. I know I wouldn't chose Fluorescent Orange, but someone alse might want it. :) And while we're on the subject, the color of the pieces, too!

I guess this is getting to the opint where I am being a pain in the as about this, and I don't want to become known for being difficult to get aliong with. But, I just don't uinderstand why this thread of discussion is going onas long as it has. my thoughts:

a 9 X 9 board? what is the point??? I really don't see the logic in that.

also, you say "I think the smaller board cuts down on the advantage of going first in Keryo Pente, but not in regular Pente. Gary and Dmitri agrue otherwise ..."

of course we argue otherwise, you are not presenting any reasons whatsoever for WHY this would reducep layer 1's advantage! Are you trying to say that player 1 naturally tends to "Branch out " more and neeed the extra space more than player 2? I don't understand how you came to that conclusion, and it doesn't make any sense to me. You hope that Gayr or I accpet a challenge on a 13 By 13 board without the restriction. WHy? what purpose is served by this? As it is, Player 1 wins more often than not WITH the restriction, so why would player 2 do better WITHOUT it?

In my games with the restriction, most of the time, as player 1, I am immediately in a powerful and dominating position. As player 2, I win because player 1 screws up.

Still getting worked up and passing moral judgments about the correctness of your position I see. Since when do you determine what we discuss? You haven't discussed anything. Just ranting and raving and complaining. You're not helping the discussion much from what I've seen. If you can't play on 13 X 13 board, it's your problem, not ours. From your stats on the IYT it appears that you're a very good Pro Pente, but just an decent player at Keryo Pente.
Have you considered that the smaller board might make Keryo a fairer game for both sides even though going first will still have an advantage? (From your tone, I doubt if you consider anything that doesn't fit in with your preconceived notions of how things should be) The larger board takes away a defense that the second to move player has which is to take back a tempo because he doesn't have to guard a two or three in a row against the edge. On a larger board he doesn't have this option, especially early in the game and the first to move player keeps the initiative fairly easily. Your stats also seem to comfirm Gary's argument about going first. 12 and 8. Of the 12 wins 8 with first move, of the 8 losses 2 with first move. Though not your side games as you've got a losing record there.
Now could you please mellow out and try to imagine a world where things aren't done as you would have them, but where we try to accomodate those who see things differently? This inventor of Pente, how does he feel about board size and how it effects the play? How far back do you go? Have you ever made up or invented a game? Get anyone to play with you? Well, I have and I'm tired of hearing the one sided approach to things that you seem to have. You're interfering with my learning and enjoying of Keryo Pente and other games with your singleminded negativity about just one aspect of a game that I've only been playing for a year and a half. I wonder just what kind of a person you are.

It's a shame some of the Keryo Posts didn't get put in this area.

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

The point is to have fun. Hmm, I guess you don't have fun in the manner that I do. Trying different games is part of my fun. I don't play certain games because they aren't fun for me. I can name lots of those games, but plenty of other people play them and have fun. Trivial Persuit comes to mind.
Why is it so hard for you to see logic in playing Kerypo Pente on a different size board? Your resistance and anger over it puzzles me to no end. The main reason it continues to go on is I like to argue. Unfortunantely this argument has turned into a fight and I don't see much logic in that. Instead of resisting, why not consider different possibilities and kick in something creative to the chat? If you're as good at Keryo as you say you are, you must have loads of experience and stories that you can share with us. Various plans, strategies, and things of that nature. Back when this started with Gary answering a question of mine about board size and player advantage and then you put your two cents in and it has gone downhill from there.
I did to put forth a reason why I thought the smaller board might help player two in Keryo Pente. As did Dangerous Mind. You have done nothing to rebut, just complain some more. Oh well, that's how it is with you. Conform and shut up is all you tell me and others.
If Pente is having a crisis because of the game being won by one player every game and word is out that something needs to be done, telling everyone to shut up isn't going to help it much, is it? You are entitled to your opinion. If you believe changing the board is not the way to fix the problem or play the game, fine. But you don't need to attack others that don't mind trying it or think it might be one way to solve the problem. It is because of you and your ilk that I doubt this site will ever set up the Pente board so the players can have control over the size of the board like they do in Othello. And you say it doesn't change the play of that game!?

Are you that unimaginitive as to why I might want to play you? Really now! I like playing good players, or players that say they're good. Even if you win every game, I still will want to play if the games are good games and fun. If I get frustrated losing or even winning a game with someone, I'll let them know. I've lost better games than some games that I've won. Come on, you can fatten up them stats of yours playing such easy competion as me. Plus you can have the satisfaction of saying I told you so. As for me, I can learn from your fountain of wisdom while getting thoroughly thrashed that you were right all along. Plus I think ol' Darngerous Mind just might be good enough to beat you in a series of games and I wouldn't mind checking in on you guy's games from time to time.

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

Fluorescent Pink and Green pieces to go with the Orange board..LOL

I'm sure when Fencer gets the time he will add different size boards, then you can pick the board you prefer to play on. Personally i think the introduction of multiplayer pente would be very interesting...
:)

I still have my Pegity board from the 60's. It is a 15 X 15 pegboard with four sets of colored pegs. The object is to be the first one to get five in a row. Just like the Line 5 game, I believe. If you play with more people it gets really hard to make a five ina row, plus the unfairness of it becomes obvious when your two opponents or three if playing four handed decide to gang up on you. We didn't play the game much except two handed on occasion. Seemed kind of dead at the time with all the other games that we could chose from (Monopoly, Chess, Battleship, Card games, tag, ditch it ....etc.) Had we thought about modifying it then I'm sure we'dve come up with something. Partners would probably work OK. You could play to help your partner get a five in a row while blocking the opponents. Pente would be an interesting game like that. You'd have to experiment with the play until you got it worked out a little. Three handed would probably be unfair as was Pegity. Three handed games of almost any kind are hard to find that are fair. 2 against 2, or 1 on 1 seem to work best.

Walter, I'll tell youwhat kind of person I am. I am a person who bases his statements on logic and reason, not random suppositions that cnanot be supported.


I take issue with your comments about my Keryo play at IYT-- that was my FIRST TOURNAMENT! I had just learned how to play Keryo pente, I had played the rand total of 4 games in my life until that point. As you can see from my stats for Keryo pente at DSG, I am more than just "so-so" at Keryo pente.

THe reason I do not see things youer way is not because I decided to shut you out for the sake of it, but because you are not providing adequate support for your argument.

Last I checked, the goal of player 1 is not to make a pente along the edge of the board, yet you keep talking about that as if it is. OK, on a 13X13 board, player 1 has less chance of making a pente on the edge. here is what I say:

1) so what? player 1 can make a pente somewhere else then!

2) PLayer 2 also has less chance of making a pente on the edge. Remember, whatever board player 1 uses, player 2 has to use also!

You say I am interfewring with your leaqrning and enjoyment? What a ludicrous comment. If you don't like strong opinions, donlt read my posts.

Walter, you say "Why is it so hard for you to see logic in playing Kerypo Pente on a different size board? Your resistance and anger over it puzzles me to no end. The main reason it continues to go on is I like to argue. "

Yes, I too like ot argue. And, the reason I cnanot see the logic in what you are saying is because I think your argument is devoid of logic. Why play a game on a different sized board without a good reason? Yousay I have doen nothing to rebut? I have done plenty to rebut, you have done little to support the case. I don't think this has turned into a fight, just a discussion hwere neither side oiis convincing the other. I very much doubt that you have any clue about my level of happinesss derived from pente or anything else, so you might want to refrain from making such com,ments. I don;t pretend to know your enjoyment level from doing anything, and I think your assessment falls into the category of the close-minded and argumentative type of posts thar you are accusding me of.

Someone should look through some IYT Keryo pente games and find examples of games that were won by player 2 as a result of player 1 not being able to use the edge due to the smaller 13X13 board.

See, it is very difficult for me to prove that there is limitation of player 1's advantage, but, it CAN be shown, by example, that it does reduce P1's advantage if some examples are found.

On a non-serious note-- how about pente on a 5X5 board? I bet that would SIGNIFICANTLY reduce the frequency of wins by player 1!

I think a light shade of gray (similar to the sidebar) or tan (very light brown) would be good; something that isn't so striking to the eyesight.

I almost dismissed that as the jest it was meant to be, but it got me thinking. Boards of 1 X 1, 2 X 2, and 3 X 3 are trivial from the start. A 4 X 4 will be too since there's only a few captures to be made and then the board is full. 5 X 5 will probably be like that, though a five in a row can be formed. 6 X 6 gets a little more interesting, but it seems to lead to a block too. I suppose if one was really going to play a game of Keryo on such small boards you could make a rule about who wins if all the spots are taken. There's also the possibilty that a position could arise that you could swap captures until 15 dudes are bagged. I'm thinking that the game would take a minimum of a 9 X 9 board to even closely resemble the play of a 19 X 19 board. Perhaps 10 x 10 would be a good minumum game as it would allow either player to form a five in row from the center four intersections. Going the other way, after the board gets to about 25 X 25 the sides no longer seem to matter.
An alternate rule for a smaller board could have the edges wrap around to touch the other side so a five in a row could have three on one side and two on the other. This would have the effect of making the board play larger than it is and would seem playable on a small board.
I would like to try some of these smaller boards just to see how it would go. If it ever comes up that it can be played here or IYT or elsewhere and anyone reading this would like to play some small board games with me, please drop a line and we'll give it a go.

Hello all. I would like to express my disappointment in the new games "small pente" and "small Keryo pente." I am going to try not to make too big of an issue out of this, because previous discussion on the matter was not very productive.

I will address some points:

1) I saw someone post that "the small pente variants should be fun." The person did not elaborate, and I cannot figure out HOW exactly the games will be more fun than the existing versions.

For starters-- Some of you might be confusing pente with Reversi or Go, two games in which the play origniates from the center and radiates ourtward, until it reaches the edges of the board, almsot filling the board.

Pente DOES NOT DO THIS. Pente does not come anywhere NEAR filling the board, so I don't see any reason for a different sized board!

In reversi and GO, the different sized board makes for a shorter or longer game. THIS IS JUST NOT THE CASE in pente. So again, why the different sized board? I don't see any reason.

No, the only real difference between "small" pente and pente is the lack of the opening restriction in the "small" variants. I believe this to be detrimental to the game of pente. There is little reason for ANYONE to become effective at playing pente WITHOUT the opening restriction! NONE!

Some of you may be thinking that "small" pente will be good for beginners because it is simpler and easier to understand without the restriction.

To this I say:

1) The opening restriction in pente is NOT difficult to understand, and
2) "small" pente, without the restriction, IN NO WAY PREPARES PLAYERS to play real pente WITH the restriction. Players who play "small" pente without the restriction WILL GET THRASHED when they start playing real pente; thus, playing "small" pente will actually retard the growth of a pente player. To further this point: In May, a real time tournament will be held in Oklahoma City. Myself and several other top players will be there, and there will be cash prizes. The games will, of course, be played with the restriction. If someone who showed up to play had become familiar with the "small" pente variant, he would be in bad shape, because he would essentially be accustomed to playing with rules that allow illegal moves. This would be akin to allowing pawns to advance 1 or 2 spaces in chess at ANY point in the game. That is just wrong, and allowing a player to learn the game under that incorrect rule would inhibit that player's growth as a chess player. Playing pente without the restriction is equally wrong.

In summary, I would jsut like to make it crystal clear that I am thrilled with Brain King and what Filip has done in such a short time. I am here at this site to stay, and I am pleased with how receptive Filip is to new ideas.

But, with all due respect, I must say I think the creation of these new pente variants is a serious error. Just because a variant CAN be created doesn't mean it SHOULD be created. We should strive to avoid the reckless creation of variants that add little or nothing to a game while possible or likely detracting from the game.

Hello all. I would like to express my disappointment in the new games "small pente" and "small Keryo pente." I am going to try not to make too big of an issue out of this, because previous discussion on the matter was not very productive.

I will address some points:

1) I saw someone post that "the small pente variants should be fun." The person did not elaborate, and I cannot figure out HOW exactly the games will be more fun than the existing versions.

For starters-- Some of you might be confusing pente with Reversi or Go, two games in which the play origniates from the center and radiates ourtward, until it reaches the edges of the board, almsot filling the board.

Pente DOES NOT DO THIS. Pente does not come anywhere NEAR filling the board, so I don't see any reason for a different sized board!

In reversi and GO, the different sized board makes for a shorter or longer game. THIS IS JUST NOT THE CASE in pente. So again, why the different sized board? I don't see any reason.

No, the only real difference between "small" pente and pente is the lack of the opening restriction in the "small" variants. I believe this to be detrimental to the game of pente. There is little reason for ANYONE to become effective at playing pente WITHOUT the opening restriction! NONE!

Some of you may be thinking that "small" pente will be good for beginners because it is simpler and easier to understand without the restriction.

To this I say:

1) The opening restriction in pente is NOT difficult to understand, and
2) "small" pente, without the restriction, IN NO WAY PREPARES PLAYERS to play real pente WITH the restriction. Players who play "small" pente without the restriction WILL GET THRASHED when they start playing real pente; thus, playing "small" pente will actually retard the growth of a pente player. To further this point: In May, a real time tournament will be held in Oklahoma City. Myself and several other top players will be there, and there will be cash prizes. The games will, of course, be played with the restriction. If someone who showed up to play had become familiar with the "small" pente variant, he would be in bad shape, because he would essentially be accustomed to playing with rules that allow illegal moves. This would be akin to allowing pawns to advance 1 or 2 spaces in chess at ANY point in the game. That is just wrong, and allowing a player to learn the game under that incorrect rule would inhibit that player's growth as a chess player. Playing pente without the restriction is equally wrong.

In summary, I would jsut like to make it crystal clear that I am thrilled with Brain King and what Filip has done in such a short time. I am here at this site to stay, and I am pleased with how receptive Filip is to new ideas.

But, with all due respect, I must say I think the creation of these new pente variants is a serious error. Just because a variant CAN be created doesn't mean it SHOULD be created. We should strive to avoid the reckless creation of variants that add little or nothing to a game while possible or likely detracting from the game.

A while back, somebody made the suggestion that a pente game (or series of versions thereof) could be played with the goal of making TWO separate fives-in-a-row. I think this would be an interesting idea to explore.

Some special rules would need to be implemented. Once a five line is established, those stones would be invulnerable, but only one of them could be used for the intersection of the second five line. It would be protracted compared to the regular versions, but would add the tactical aspect of allowing your opponent to get a five while you build or attack elsewhere.

It could be called "double pente" or something of that sort... While on the subject of nomenklature, "Small Pente" and "Small Keryo Pente" seem rather lengthy. How about instead "Pente13" and "Keryo13"?

THANK YOU. This is an EXCELLENT suggestion for a pente variant, it adds to the game but in no way will it be confused with the real version.

Dmitri King, I feel compelled to reply to your posting in view of the fact that you have quoted part of my previous posting (on the brainking.com board) where I stated that the smaller pente and small keyro pente should be fun.
You referred to me as "someone" and "the person".

You typed "The person did not elaborate, and I cannot figure out HOW exactly the games will be more fun than the existing versions." I have to stress that I did NOT say that the smaller versions would be MORE fun than existing versions, simply that the new versions should be fun. It was not a comparison! Neither is there anything to elaborate on here. Fun is straight forward.

Fencer is working very hard on this amazing site. Unlike you, I don't consider games that I personally don't happen to enjoy to be a disappointment, as I am fully aware that other people may enjoy those games. That's what this site is about. It's about doing what we enjoy doing, playing games.

Please don't assume that everyone on this site is here to play serious games with similar ambition to yourself. I would imagine the majority here are actually here to play casual games and are here for the enjoyment and fun, without the dedication or commitment that you yourself show to one game in particular.

Whilst I respect the fact that you take your games very seriously, I would in turn ask you to respect the fact that many of us are here for fun only, and are not as dedicated or ambitious as yourself.

Once again, I wish to thank Fencer for creating this site and for all the time and effort his puts in.

Blaze

Dmitri King, I feel compelled to reply to your posting in view of the fact that you have quoted part of my previous posting (on the brainking.com board) where I stated that the smaller pente and small keyro pente should be fun.
You referred to me as "someone" and "the person".

You typed "The person did not elaborate, and I cannot figure out HOW exactly the games will be more fun than the existing versions." I have to stress that I did NOT say that the smaller versions would be MORE fun than existing versions, simply that the new versions should be fun. It was not a comparison! Neither is there anything to elaborate on here. Fun is straight forward.

Fencer is working very hard on this amazing site. Unlike you, I don't consider games that I personally don't happen to enjoy to be a disappointment, as I am fully aware that other people may enjoy those games. That's what this site is about. It's about doing what we enjoy doing, playing games.

Please don't assume that everyone on this site is here to play serious games with similar ambition to yourself. I would imagine the majority here are actually here to play casual games and are here for the enjoyment and fun, without the dedication or commitment that you yourself show to one game in particular.

Whilst I respect the fact that you take your games very seriously, I would in turn ask you to respect the fact that many of us are here for fun only, and are not as dedicated or ambitious as yourself.

Once again, I wish to thank Fencer for creating this site and for all the time and effort his puts in.

Blaze

Blaze, I was in no way disrespectful to anyone. As for my quoting you-- I apologize for referring to you as "someone" I did not mean any disrespect, I just could not remember who said it or on which board I read it. I did not mean to say that you claimed the game would be more fun, because you are right, you did not say that. So, for that I apologize. You did, however, say that it sounds like fun, and what I SHOULD have said was that you did not elaborate. You say elaboration is not required? I disagree. I could say that pente on a 20 X 20 board would be fun, but that isn't saying anything, because I am not in any way elaborating on why the game would be any different from the original. You conveniently ignored EVERY valid point in my post, and instead you directed various personal attacks against me in a harsh and unpleasant tone. Now I will do soemthing you did NOT do. I will actually respond to your individual points, even though you ignored all of mine.

You say, "Unlike you, I don't consider games that I personally don't happen to enjoy to be a disappointment, as I am fully aware that other people may enjoy those games. That's what this site is about. It's about doing what we enjoy doing, playing games. "

Blaze, did you READ my post? Where did I say "I do not enjoy the smaller games, so therefore they are a mistake"???? NOWHERE!, because that is not what I said! I clearly explained why the variants add nothing; but rather, detract from the game! But instead of examining my points, and maybe even considering them, you outright rejected them by attacking my "serious" approach to board games! That is a terrible debating tactic. You continue by stating that the majority are not dedicated or committed to the game like I am.

Well, there I agree with you-- BUT WHY do you say that as if it INVALIDATES my argument? If anything, it strengthens my argument! As it is, people who know little abouth the game are arguing despite not really knowing what they are talking about!

So, forgive me for speaking from a position of knowledge and experience!

Then you say "Whilst I respect the fact that you take your games very seriously, I would in turn ask you to respect the fact that many of us are here for fun only, and are not as dedicated or ambitious as yourself. "

Blaze, again you are making a blanket statement that had nothing to with the specifics of my post! I raised valid points and this is the best you can do to respond, is to WRONGLY state that I am not RESPECTING people? I AGAIN ask you how I am not respecting people????

The fact is, Pente is a game I like very much. The new versions are detrimental to the game. You imply that the majority of pente players would disagree with me. I can tell you FLAT OUT that you are WRONG on that one. I have spoken with almost EVERY regular pente player about this matter before Brain King existed, and I can assure you that the MAJORITY of them agree with me 100%.

I ask that you actually examine whatI wrote in my post, because there are some legitimate points there-- you didn't say anything about my contrasting the game with GO and Reversi, or about the illegal moves. I don't understand how allowing illegal moves actually constitutes a viable variant of a game.

Now, Blaze, I really wish you would not accuse me of disrespecting people, because that is just a false claim. I am all in favor of FUN and interesting pente variants, but the new ones do not qualify as either by any reasonable criteria.

By the way--- I do NOT enjoy battleboats, it is probably my least favorite game. But, do you see me posting about my opposition to battleboats? NO! so your implication that I am railing against the new pente variants solely because I do not enjoy them is just wrong.

Please re-examine my post and consider what I wrote, I think you will find it has merit. If you are still not convinced, I wwould like you to RESPECT my right to have an opinion on the matter, as well as my right to express that opinion with RATIONAL reasons to support it. And I wish you would reconsider before calling someone disrespectful when in fact there was no such disrespect shown.

Blaze, I was in no way disrespectful to anyone. As for my quoting you-- I apologize for referring to you as "someone" I did not mean any disrespect, I just could not remember who said it or on which board I read it. I did not mean to say that you claimed the game would be more fun, because you are right, you did not say that. So, for that I apologize. You did, however, say that it sounds like fun, and what I SHOULD have said was that you did not elaborate. You say elaboration is not required? I disagree. I could say that pente on a 20 X 20 board would be fun, but that isn't saying anything, because I am not in any way elaborating on why the game would be any different from the original. You conveniently ignored EVERY valid point in my post, and instead you directed various personal attacks against me in a harsh and unpleasant tone. Now I will do soemthing you did NOT do. I will actually respond to your individual points, even though you ignored all of mine.

You say, "Unlike you, I don't consider games that I personally don't happen to enjoy to be a disappointment, as I am fully aware that other people may enjoy those games. That's what this site is about. It's about doing what we enjoy doing, playing games. "

Blaze, did you READ my post? Where did I say "I do not enjoy the smaller games, so therefore they are a mistake"???? NOWHERE!, because that is not what I said! I clearly explained why the variants add nothing; but rather, detract from the game! But instead of examining my points, and maybe even considering them, you outright rejected them by attacking my "serious" approach to board games! That is a terrible debating tactic. You continue by stating that the majority are not dedicated or committed to the game like I am.

Well, there I agree with you-- BUT WHY do you say that as if it INVALIDATES my argument? If anything, it strengthens my argument! As it is, people who know little abouth the game are arguing despite not really knowing what they are talking about!

So, forgive me for speaking from a position of knowledge and experience!

Then you say "Whilst I respect the fact that you take your games very seriously, I would in turn ask you to respect the fact that many of us are here for fun only, and are not as dedicated or ambitious as yourself. "

Blaze, again you are making a blanket statement that had nothing to with the specifics of my post! I raised valid points and this is the best you can do to respond, is to WRONGLY state that I am not RESPECTING people? I AGAIN ask you how I am not respecting people????

The fact is, Pente is a game I like very much. The new versions are detrimental to the game. You imply that the majority of pente players would disagree with me. I can tell you FLAT OUT that you are WRONG on that one. I have spoken with almost EVERY regular pente player about this matter before Brain King existed, and I can assure you that the MAJORITY of them agree with me 100%.

I ask that you actually examine whatI wrote in my post, because there are some legitimate points there-- you didn't say anything about my contrasting the game with GO and Reversi, or about the illegal moves. I don't understand how allowing illegal moves actually constitutes a viable variant of a game.

Now, Blaze, I really wish you would not accuse me of disrespecting people, because that is just a false claim. I am all in favor of FUN and interesting pente variants, but the new ones do not qualify as either by any reasonable criteria.

By the way--- I do NOT enjoy battleboats, it is probably my least favorite game. But, do you see me posting about my opposition to battleboats? NO! so your implication that I am railing against the new pente variants solely because I do not enjoy them is just wrong.

Please re-examine my post and consider what I wrote, I think you will find it has merit. If you are still not convinced, I wwould like you to RESPECT my right to have an opinion on the matter, as well as my right to express that opinion with RATIONAL reasons to support it. And I wish you would reconsider before calling someone disrespectful when in fact there was no such disrespect shown.

What i would like to know is why these exact same posts appear on two seperate boards? :-) Even though it does apply to both Pente and Keryo, it does not need to be on both, especially not exactly the same posts.

kevin, this is a good point. But, I can give a reason for why it should be on both boards-- The posts are about both games, and people might not visit both boards. If someone visits one board and not hte other, he will miss what I consider an important post.

I think this is an important issue. I recognize that I am a more serious gamer than most, but that fact does not automatically nullify my argument. I think the matter is important enough to be on both boards, especially since the pente board had the grand total of ONE post until now (so I doubt that these posts are taking up valuable space on the pente board).

Dmitri: My answer is that nobody forces you to play these small versions. Serious Pente players can play Pente and other users [especially WebTV owners who cannot display THAT big board - 19x19] will be happy with Small Pente.
Please don't forget that you are not the only one who asks me for new games and features. I receive tens of requests each day and I would like to make this site for everyone.

I don't want to do cross-posting, see my answer at Pente discussion board.

<Pioneer54, it was I who posted it in the tournament discussion board. It's down a bit, but it's still on the first page. An exerp>>
A version of Pente that I thought up a few months back would be best played on the 19 X 19 board. I call it Double Pente. To win you have to get two five in a rows on the board at the same time or one six or longer in a row or you have to bag 20 dudes. For Keryo I suppose it could be 30 dudes. I think it'd be a fun game. It would take more moves to play and would certainly lessen the first player's advantage a little.
I just checked, it's the last post now. It'll probably drop to a back page soon.

would anyone have the time to play and guide me through my first game of pente??

<Dmitri, I assume you're beside yourself now. Mr. Fencer added the smaller versions of both games to your great consternation it appears. I do take much joy in the fact, and it does seem fitting in a way. Your close minded and blinders-on way of arguing has probably alienated some of the people that took your side of the debate too. As I said in quite a few of the posts on the tournament page until we moved it over to this area, fun is the reason to play the games. I also think experimenting with different formats is fun. I agreed with you and Gary that tournaments need standards to be played, but that doesn't preclude other forms of a game from being played, tournament or no.
After reading your rebuttal to Blazes' post I'm convinced that you're completely off your rocker.
You accuse her of making blanket statements and then in the very next paragraph you make one yourself!
>> The new versions are detrimental to the game.<
No, "I think" or "I believe" just a flat out declaration of it as a fact. Yep, you really should listen to your own advice from the previous post. Which I've copied and put here next.
>> I am going to try not to make too big of an issue out of this, because previous discussion on the matter was not very productive.
Of all the people that have taken a care about this subject and posted anything related to it, yours is the only one negative and totally against it that I've read. Even Gary, though not much liking the smaller format doesn't rant and rave about them. And if you're going to claim knowledge and experience way aren't you displaying any of them? Just from the way you've been arguing I'd say you're not even coming to close to understanding my view point in this whole debate. I've got a pretty good handle on yours and have stated most of it in this post and some my recent ones that were directed toward you in the tournament board.
By the way, I have lost my respect for you. I also am going to root for your opponents in this Oklahoma tournament you've mentioned. If I had lots of money I'd even sponsor part of it and include some of the 13 X 13 boards because I had the wherewithal to do so. Fortunately for you, I drive truck for a living and don't have money to burn or I'd make it happen(Sounds like an idle threat, what was I thinking when I typed this). You need to learn something about people and games and climb down from that high horse you're sitting on.
Lighten up.
It's just a game.

Is it coming next, Fencer? :)

I'm saying this as a tease, but I'm also serious about giving a whirl if it comes about. It'd make a game simular to the Spider Line 4, but with captures and the possibilty of filling up the board. It may or may not be fun to play, I don't know. I imagine making the board size changable before play starts isn't worth the trouble it'd take to see, eh? I suppose the players themselves could agree to not use part of the board before the game starts and then they'd have to stick to it.
You must be one dedicated and smart programmer to make such major additions on such short notice. I'm rooting for your site succeed and it appears that it is. Word of mouth will bring in lots more.