How about Level Pente

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

Copy of a message from me to samwise 4-3-3
Seeing how IYT isn't too costumer orientated except as it applies to it helping their bottom line, I think they only started the 13 X 13 game board so that they could get people with WebTV connections to join their service without realizing the ramifications of what it does to the game or the people that play it at the championship level. Apparently the 19 X 19 board doesn't show on WebTV, though I haven't ever seen it. The owners of BrainKing have had to accomodate this reality too, but also some people like to play the game on the smaller board as compared to the larger one. This has infuriated some players of the standard game and that has been what has caused the postings of recent note. Now there's a different set of players because of IYT game that have never played Pente using the standard 19 X 19 board and might feel threatened about the demise of the 13 X 13 board if the others hold sway with the owners of the various web sites. Plus the move restriction being used or not seems to get everyone on edge too. Some of the better 13 X 13 players from IYT are playing Gary Barnes with him going first on the 13 X 13 board so he can demonstrate to them that the player that moves first has an overwhelming advantage when the move restriction isn't used even when the game is played on the smaller board.

Hi all,

I have conversed with Filip and we have agreed to implement a 13x19 board for Pente. This size board would have the advantage of allowing players of different levels to play each other with a sort of handicap -- only the less experienced player is allowed to extend along the 19 width while both are restricted to a height of 13. slooF lirpA.

Hi Walter,

Your messages are interesting and well constructed, and I agree with most of what you've written. However, we are all reasonable individuals here who can discuss and even disagree civilly, so let us try to limit the invective to a minimum, shall we? Nobody made Dmitri the 'Keeper' of the game rules or anything of that sort.

I've been conversing with Dmitri for better than a couple of years, and always have found him a brilliant thinker. The fact that he holds a rigid view of pente rules does not modify that attitude. We disagree with his assertion that the player 1 rule restriction should apply to the keryo13 board, and that is why we are conducting the trial games. But, Dmitri is welcome to advance his philosophies just as much as we are to argue contrarily. His typing is poor due to a wrist ailment, and his style may seem brash to those who don't know him that well, but when he makes a point he is simply doing that, and nothing more; I do not for one moment believe he intends to injure anyone's emotions.... You suggested that Dmitri has chimed down when the stronger players offered their views. Well, here is a hint: Dmitri IS one of the stronger players! He isn't to be taken lightly in any version, and we could all learn a great deal from him.

You wrote that games evolve, and that's very true indeed. I applaud your willingness to try out alternate size boards, although offhand I think the 9 and 10 boards are probably too small to produce much in the way of viable tactics. But please feel free to experiment with these ideas, and if they are found to be of interest then write about it here.

I don't favor allowing a tournament maker to choose the board size. It would be a lot of programming on the site's part for little return, and it could get out of control in a real hurry. The fact is though, you don't need any on-line program to test these ideas. You can play an opponent via private message on the site, or by e-mail. It wouldn't be as convenient, of course; you'd have to set up your own boards and record the moves, but (as you seem to like cliches) 'where there's a will, there's a way'. Perhaps you might also get some friends to try these versions over the board with you.

Pioneer54

I wonder why players who don't even play pente feel particulary
encouraged to rant around here ... - although I too already have
teased Dmitri, for his 'Holy Anger' ;) cheap attacks on top players
are just an expression of envy in my humble opinion ... ~*~

Walter, you say you are not debating with me any more and then you take several cheap shots at me in your post. The fact is, I HAVE studied the ramifications of what I am talking about, and you don't appear to have done so yourself. And you have the gall to say that you would have to drop DOWN to my level? Did you READ your childish missive that you wrote a few days back? I made them mistake of thinking you had shut up since then because you finally realized you were making no sense and acting childish. Unfortunately I was wrong.

You say I change my tune when someone I respect chimes in. Wrong. I change my tune when someone says something INTELLIGENT. try it sometime! You might be surprised by how quickly I side with you if you acutally start making sense.

Now you have this wild idea of allowing the players to decide to board size? Are you nuts? Can you name ANY other game of any kind where the players can just pick the board or field size at their whim????

ALso, you are way off target with your claims about my take on variants. I SUPPORT Keryo pente and I like the game a lot. You are pretty dense if you haven't picked up on that. I support real "variants," just not the garbage you propose.

Also, if you READ before speaking, you will see that I have accepted the 13 X 13 board since it is needed for WebTV, but that I have shifted my focus to maintaining the restriction. Whatever size the board, there is no need to eliminate the restriction.

And, I stand by my calling you arrogant, you show that with every post as you imply or directly state that you are holier than I.

Oh, and let me know if you want the information on the OKC tournament so that you can show up with your 13 X13 boards. ha ha ha.

I agree with you Kevin. I like trying other versions of the games. Since Dmitri is the self-appointed "Keeper of All That's Pure and Standard of Pente as Played on a 19 X 19 Board" you're going to get endless complaining from him about even the mention of something different. He and I have had a running discourse that has more or less ended for me as he showed to me that he doesn't care what I think or try to even see what it is that I'm talking about. Your current postings with him look like an exact rehash of the ones him and I had on the tournament board and recently on the Keryo Pente board. He types lots and doesn't say much, just fights against it. He must really pound them keys while mistyping his memos to all concerned too.
While I can attack him all I want, it is growing tedious and making me look the same. How's that saying go? If he won't come up to my level, I'll have to go down to his? As I consider myself a nonserious player of inline games and their many versions, I should according to him shut up and leave it in much more capable hands (Excuse me "samwise" for paraphrasing, but he did agree with your post quite zealously). Geeze, and can you believe he called me arrogant?

A simple thing to understand is, if the people playing a game are happy playing it, who cares what someone else thinks about the game unless they are able to prevent you from playing it? If it was in Dmitri's power there'd be no other version of Pente anywhere. Probably not even Keryo Pente, though I can't say that for sure. As you noticed, he changes his tune when some of the heavyweights of the game that he obviously respects chip in their two cents. Though I won't promise, and it would take a sizable change in how he treats me and others in his postings that disagree with him, this will probably be my last post towards him. I will however continue to post about games and variations of them and ask for ideas and help about them too. Including nonstandard Pente boards and rules. Games evolve. Pente has, it'll probably change again. I doubt if Dmitri in his admonishment of the smaller boards or the rules differences has really studied all the ramifications of changing the parameters of his beloved Pente on a 19 X 19 board with the move restriction?

Topic in the title:
Perhaps the makers of this or other sites could set up the games so that the creator of a game could control more than just the time limit and choice of colors? Boardsize and move restriction could be options for Pente. Creators of tournaments could make it standard or try something else. Since I've gotten no response about my idea for Keryo Pente on a 9 X 9 or 10 X 10 (Except Dmitri's scoffing and complaining that is) I can assume that there's quite a bit of resistance or apathy or both to it. Either way, I sure if I was able to set up such a game someone would play me a game of it. That's the point I'm making. That person and me could have fun playing it, and that's what would matter. If we didn't have fun, we wouldn't need someone telling us we are playing a wrong game. We would just not play it any more.

Sounds interesting.... I am not really keen on the purple background, but willing to give it a try, and hopefully will only have to view it when entering moves!

I am also trying to limit my involvement at IYT, but have just three slots here, so perhaps we can begin a pair of games now and a pair later. The results will be worth some consideration, although even these games combined with those against Walter and D.Mind comprise a very small sample. I appreciate that you are trying to show that a very strong player 1 (unrestricted) cannot lose; however, most players entering the field will be of differing strengths and considerably less caliber.

There is certainly a need for the restriction on the 19 boards, but I am not altogether comfortable with its application to the smaller keryo board. Anyhow, we shall embark upon these trial games and see what occurs. I shall issue a one-game challenge each to you and to Dmitri on 7-day limit, with a duplicate set pending (subject to approval from both of you).

is that it gives ppl who can't afford a puter, those who feel computer illiterate, and many elderly ppl a chance to experience the internet. For many, it is just a stepping stone to a puter. And others are content with all that webtv provides.

Personally i'm much happier with a puter, particularly one with dsl access here.. but i won't cut down webtv, because that's what introduced me to the WWW.

I see. Web TV sounds like an inferior product. I often hear about problems that are specific to Web TV. Alas.

Dmitri.. i used to have a webtv.. the problem is with the loading.. the 19x19 boards have too many pixels to load properly on webtv.

Kevin, thep roblme is, a 13 by 13 board for pente does NOTm ake the game completely different-- it affects many games not at all, and some games it will affect dramatically. This is not how a good variant should work!

And yes, I think I haev stated, verbatim, about ah alf a dozen times that the 13 X 13 board is acceoptable for web TV users, but only for that reason. None oftheo ther reasonns have merit, and there is NO reason why the web TV users should play without the restriction!

And, although I acknolwedge that the 13 X 13 is neeeded for web TV users, that doesn't make me less fruistrated with its existence.

Again, the 13 X 13 board was cerated in error by IYT, and that is the ionlt reason anyone even knows of it. If it never had been created erroneously by IYT, and someone suggested it now (for a reason OTHER than web TV users), everyone would say "Huh?? NOw why would you want to do that? what wiould be the point?"

Well, just because people became familiar with an erroneous board doesn't mean we should continue to play with it so that those players ahve a board they are familiar with an d recognize.

But of course, we neeed it because of the Web TV users.

What is up with Web TV that it cannot support a normal game board?

I haven't claimed to present any other reasons supporting the 13x13 board. You have, however, claimed several times that the 13x13 board is WRONG and there is no reason for it. Yes, i realize this was before it was brought up that WebTV users need the smaller board to play. Are you now claiming that the 13x13 board is acceptable on this site for that reason?

I'll give you an example of the game i know - Line4. Everywhere i have played it, an 8x8 board has been used. I have become used to this size of a board, and would probably be lost with a different sized board. However, it would not bother me in the least to play it on a different sized board - 10x10, 6x6, 7x11, whatever. I would like to try these games to see how they work. If the game is completely different, what's wrong with that? It can still be a worthwhile game to play.

Kevin, I thought I gave several reasons already for why the 13 X 13 board is no good for pente. I don't wish to repeat myself. As you mentioned, few games will be affected, BUT those that ARE affected will be affected dramatically, in a way that was NOT intended! How much mroe reason do you need? So far, no one has provided ANY reason FOR the 13 X 13 board! You seem to think the fact that pente was intended for play on a large board is a trivial detail... it isn't! it is an important part of the game. Also, you say beginning playewrs would not be affected by the edge of the board at all.

1) how are you arriving at that conclusion?
2) if so, THEN WHY BOTHER?

3) Kevin, you are belaboring a DEAD ISSUE here, the 13 X 13 board has already been acknowledged to be necessary because of the WEB TV users. That said, there is NO other reson for the 13 X 13 board, and you certainly have NOt presented any. you have said there is nothing wrong with it, despite the repeated explanations of exactly what is wrong with it. By your logic, there is nothing "wrong" with a 12X12, 14X14, 15X15. AND SO ON. we would have a dozen "variants" all with different sized boards, for no discernible reason.

At this opint the debate has shifted to why the restriction was lifted for the small boards. Web TV users do not require that extra change, so I don't see the need for it. A.lso, maybe the 13X 13 game could be called "webTV pente" or beter yet, "WebTV 5inLine." Then the game currently called "5inLine" can be given itsp roper title of "Go-Moku"

samwise: I never claimed to be good at pente, no did i claim to know the game well. Even so, i agree with you in regards to the opening restriction. The advantage is quite obvious without it for the first player. But as Dmitri has confirmed, very few games would be confined by the edges if played on a 13x13 board. And especially against new players, the edge will not be a factor. So besides it not being invented that way, none of you have said why a 13x13 board is "wrong".

Dmitri: I do trust players with experience, and i believe you, samwise and Gary are all very experienced. If any of you can come up with a good reason why a 13x13 board is "wrong" (besides it not being invented that way) for casual competition, i will gladly support it. But for now, i see nothing wrong with playing on a 13x13 board.

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.

I must disagree. The opening sequences are key to pente. One who has played several hundred games or more without the opening restriction will NOT know ANY openings WITH the restriction. This is NOT an easy adaptation to make, except maybe for those who are gifted when it comes to board games. Pioneer is the first I have heard who has said the transition is easy, I have heard many complain that the transition was difficult, and that they wished they had not learned to play incorrectly (without the restriction).

There has been quite a bit of discussion about which versions to offer, and what should be included in them. This is good, at least it is covering the intended topic!

Some of the better players have contended that the '13' variants should not be offered, or if they are it should be with the movement restriction of the first player's second turn. I disagree. Pente13 and Keryo13 (unrestricted) are very playable and enjoyable game concepts, even if they are not quite what the original inventor intended or lack the professional draw of the 19 board versions.

It has also been stated (by Dmitri, I believe) that playing the 13 versions without the move restrictions spoils players who might later become serious about the 19 versions. I disagree here also. Learning the professional movement restriction is not hard at all, and any player should find this an easy adaptation. The hard part is learning to play well!

pioneer54 does have more Keryo pente experience than I do. But, some opints remain true:

The game was not intended to be played on a 13X13 board. the edges do come into play, but that is more of a nuisance than anything else, for both players, I would say.

The existence of Keryo on a 13 by 13 board is a rsult of IYT's ewrror when putting the game on their site.

Player 1 has as advantage on the 19 by 19 board and on the 13 by 13 board. The opening restriction is essential, and it should be in place REGARDLESS of the size of the board.

I hate the 13 by 13 board, but I recognize that It is needed for web TV users. But, there is no reason not to have the restriction.

GOing back to what Pioneer54 said " It was a novelty among my friends and me for quite some time, but it wore off when we discovered that the first player usually wins, barring serious error. "

Well, I (and Gary Barnes alogn with me) maintain that without the restriction, it takes a serious error for player 1 to lose in Keryo pente. Gary and I ahve thousands of pente games experience, but not nearly asm uhc Keryo pente experience. Nonetheless, now that we do have some experience under our belts, we are willing to back up this claim. We are already engaged in playing several games as P1 (without the restriction) againast Walter Montago and Dangerous Mind, and we are probably willing to accept more such challneges (I would have to check with Gary). BEtween the two of us, we believe we can avoid the "serious error" mentioned and therefore always win as P1 (wiothout the trestriction).

Sam makes a good opint. Why are the players who have little pente experience so unwilling to trust that the players with LOTS of experience might actually know what they are talking about?

I learned to play Pente about 20 years ago or so, (on the 19x19 board, of course). It was a novelty among my friends and me for quite some time, but it wore off when we discovered that the first player usually wins, barring serious error.

So, I gave away my board and set and forgot all about Pente until I started playing Keryo at IYT, as it seemed to be an improvement. (However, I wondered why they used a smaller board.)

I find the keryo13 version fascinating, and while the first player has some advantage, I do not believe it is insurmountable or anywhere near as great as in all the other Pente versions. I do not know what my won-lost stats are as to colors; I've lost from both sides, but only two players at IYT have won more Keryo titles than I have, so these stipulations should carry some weight. (In contrast, I also played some pente13, and it is enjoyable, but I believe the first player has a much more marked advantage.)

Another appealing aspect of keryo13 is the possibility of edge play, which I find makes many games quite interesting because it can cause fortunes to reverse quickly!

I have also tried Keryo(19) here, and it is an even better version, although I don't believe this would in any way undermine the charm of Keryo13.

Kevin im not trying to pick on you but you said: "what i have noticed is that no one is complaining except the serious pente players" thats because we know what the game Pente truly is..you have only played 3games here, you dont have to many running and you told me that you are new to the game... what i am trying to say is, you dont know much about the game or about the real rules...why do you care so much about what happens?? Let the people who play the game and understand it...decide what would be best.

Kevin, you just summed up why I am so against the 13 X 13 board. As you said, most of the games are the same. Well,why bother then? That doesn't really qualify it as a variant. And the few games that are affected, well, that is a few too many! none of the games should be restricted by the board edge, that is not what the game is about.

BUT.. and I want to make this clear-- the 13 X 13 board DOES serve a purpose-- as Fencer has said (and I have agreed with), the web TV users need the 13 by 13 board to play.

But they do NOT need the restriction removed, so why do it? Why make an unneeded change on top of changing the board such that the web TV users can play?

Again, the overwhelming reason seems to be "why not."

Well, answering "why not" to a question of "why" hardly qualifies as an answer!

If the 13 X 13 game existed with the restriction, everyone would be happy. The web TV users could play, and no one would be learning the game with the wrong opening moves. IF the web TV users then got a different internet access set up and wanted to move on to the real pente game on the 19 X 19 board, they could, without the frustration of realizing that their moves that they have been making are no longer allowed.

Also, that would maintain the integrity of all the games with "pente" in their names, which I think is important.

Yes, everyone was who played at IYT was affected (especially those who were unaware of the correct rules). I am not against the opening restriction, from what i hear it at least shrinks player 1's advantage. What i don't understand is why you are so opposed to the 13x13 game. Yes, i know, you have said it was not invented that way, and was meant to be played on a 19x19 board. Of all the games of Pente ever played, what percent do you think would have been any different if played on a 13x13 board instead (like the edge would have been in the way with the smaller board)? I would guess very few, and of those games, i would guess almost all of them were 2 very experienced players.

Kevin, I'll tell you why not. Because the existence of the game you mention was due to an error by IYT as a result of their not realizing the right way to set up the game. What you are saying amounts to this: "People are used to playing it the wrong way, so we should not correct the error."

To me, I just don't think that is a good idea.

Yes, webTV users need the 13 X 13 board. But why not rectify the error IYT made by at least keeping the restriction on the 13 X 13 board?

Incidentally== non serious players are affected also, because even non serious players like to play the game with the correct rules. I have encountered non-serious players at DSG who were frustrated to have learned the game with the wrong rules as a result of what IYT did. So, it is not just the serious players who were affected.

Ok, you are right, that statement doesn't really peove anything. But what i have noticed is that no one is complaining except the serious pente players. But as Fencer said, he is trying to please everyone (or as many as possible) on this site. This site does support the classic version of Pente, as well as this other version (call it what you want). Even though it is not right, players coming from IYT may be accustomed to this 13x13 version with no restriction, and may wish to continue playing it. Why not let them?

Thanks Erika! Indeed, when people have been backed into a corner and have NO coutner to an argument whatsoever, they will usually find a typo and point it out as if that invalidates everything that a person wrote.

If Einstein showed these people his theory of relativity but one of the words had two capital LEtters, they would call his theory invalid. It is really sad. WHat is even more sad is that oftne those who criticize the typing of others fail to realize that their post, while possibly typed properly, is devoid of coherent or cogent arguments.

Criticizing someone's typing after he has made a solid argument si akin to lsitening to someone's argument and then saying "well, you're nose is ugly so you are wrong."

Obviously some posts are so error-ridden that meaning is lost.

But, in the post Walter referred to, there are manby a hald dozen insignificant errors, usually with an extra cap because I hold the shift key too long.

Sam makes a good point. The name "pente" should be removed from the 13 X 13 variants. ALso, Kevin--

"not everyone is as serious about pente as some are", said by you, is NOT a counter to any of the points that have been made. Numerous people have repeated that same remark, and it means little. We all know that players in any game will have different degrees of seriousness. THat fact does not address the issue at all, it dodges it completely.

I could say "You don't like Golf being played with a tennis ball? Then don't watch and don't play it, no one is forcing you. Some of us do not take it as seriously." ok, but as a Golf enthusiast, you would still be upset about this absurd change, and you would not be placated by my statement that no one making you play or that not everyone takes it seriously.

Wouldn't you agree? Well, it is the same with the pente variant.

first of all welcome to our young pente-shark samwise ;)
good to see you here also. :)
what about the forgotten option that webtv players could have the
move restriction by courtesy ? as Mark pointed out, playing the
smaller board might level the advantage of having the first move ...
couldn't kpente be a proper training then ?
without offending our highly honourable stars ? :D

have a great weekend you all ... ;) ... ~*~

if the game of pente is played on a 13x13 board it changes the hole game, PENTE was invented to be played on a 19x19...if this board is changed then its a new game. mabe a new name for this new game???

samwise: First, there has been a discussion about this...Dmitri King agrees with you, and so do a few others. However, if you do not like or agree with the game, do not play it. There are many people here who do not take their games very seriously, and will play a game with "illegal moves" and "incorrect rules". Also, i heard the larger 19x19 board does not load properly on web-tv, so now they can play Pente as well.

Reversi, halma and go are all played on different sized boards (although go is not supported here as of yet). I am aware that playing pente on a different sized board does not change anything like it does in those. Was just clarifying that there are games that are played on different sized boards.

I've played pente (small board) and keryo (small board) at IYT for three years. I didn't know that pente even had move restrictions til they implemented pro-pente (which is really regular pente) at IYT.

Now that i'm giving up IYT and playing mostly over here, that i have to relearn pente all over, along with keryo.. because i wish to play the proper versions.

As i told Dmitri, it's like teaching somebody raquetball, and telling them it's tennis. Then when they go to play real tennis, they realize they're dealing with a much larger court with very different rules. Just because they're both played with raquets and balls, doesn't make them both tennis. And having learned raquetball first, it will take you some time to realize that the two games requires you to learn and adapt different skills.

Now with that being said, i don't take any game/game site too seriously. If you find yourself so frustrated that you have to pick on somebody's typing skills, it's probably best to take a break from it.

13x13 pente and kpente is wrong! its not a variation of the game but a mistake by the people from IYT... it should be removed! no one plays other games on boards of differnt sizes!

Sounds like an interesting variant Gary. And as i mentioned before how about a multi player variant?
Maybe Fencer will look into it when he has time.
:)

Why Walter? If I proofread what I wrote, and corrected every tiny typing error, then you would actually have to address my points instead of childishly criticizing something insignificant like my typing skills. Why would you want that?


This is interesting. Just to humor you, I reread my post-- There are no spelling errros, and maybe four or five careless capitalization errors. So what exactly is the problem? Are you having trouble understanding what I was saying because I incorrectly capitalized the FIrst two letters of a word somewhere? Please try to stay on topic, it really shows that you have no basis for your argument if all you can do it point out a couple of petty errors in my typing. I claim to be an expert pente player, but you'l notice I make no such claim about my typing skills. I have painful wrists from using the computer too much, so I am happy just to type the message at all without too much discomfort.

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

Perhaps you could proofread it too, Dmtitri?

DK, you are correct that the small disadvantage to white in having a 13x13 board is more than offset by not having the opening restriction. I was not arguing that the small board would compensate for no opening restriction -- the effect of the smaller board was just a side comment. I was arguing that despite the big advantage for white without the opening restriction, it is OK to have that game available to those who want to play it.

-MM

This post directed toiwards the masses, not just Mark.

Regarding the smaller board taking away some of the advantage of first player. So far, it seems this statement (made by several people) is being assumed without proof. EIther player has the possibility of being constrained by the smaller board.

I am willing to state, without proof, that the reduction in player's 1's advantage is negligible. Until someone proves otherwise, I say the burden of proof is on them to do so.

ALso, what iuf it does reducep layer 1's advantage? SO what? Does that mean it is a good idea even if it is not really Logical? No! it doesn't! THere are FAR better ways to limit player 1's advantage.

ALso, using the smaller board to LIMIT player's 1s advantage but then NOT USING the restriction is JUST ASININE! I cannot think of anything more asinine than that!!!

If we are goign to entertain this notion that the 13 X 13 board has MERIT because it reduces player 1's advantage, that reduction in advantage is MORE THAN offset by remonving the restristion!

Think about a chess game. PLayer 1 has an advantage. I bet that a rule prohibiting white from checkmating black with a pawn would redice player 1's advantage! but does that mean it should be done? NO, because it doesn't make sense! I think that is analgous to the pente situation.

a closing thought-- Pente was invented by Gary Gabrel in 1977. He chose to have the game played on a 19 X 19 bosrd. Why does anyone think he did that? Probably becasue it all but guaranteed that no one would run out of space! In other words, running out of Room is NOT supposed to be part of the game! If he wanted people to run out of room, he would have used a 13 X13 board!

My guess is that he intended the board to be "infinite" in the sense that moves could extend as far outward as need be. Due to the nature of the game, this would work

Thank you for your cortous reply. I will abide by your request and debate this with you no more. We both know where we stand and we have both heard each other's views. Consider it a dead issue between the two of us.

Of course if you wish to discuss any other pente related matter in the future, I am always hally to do so.

-Dmitri

the webtv restrictions, per se, are a reason to have it, no harm done by
additional games anyway (imho) I just don't play them if I have the choice.
as I learned pente by doing and being disassembled. :D - I yet gladly rely
on the deep knowledge and analysis of top players like Dmitri and Mark ...
good to have the both of you here ( not to mention Gary ) ... :) ... ~*~

Dmitri makes a good point that learning to play pente without the openining restriction will leave you ill-prepared to compete in Pente WITH the opening restriction. The opening restriction is always used in serious competitions. But that is no reason to eliminate the small board without the restriction -- many people are NOT interested in serious competition and would rather play on the free board. It is good to have both available.

The size of the board is significant (besides being viewable on WebTV). A smaller board takes away some of the advantage of the first player -- white with the first move is expected to be on offense and the smaller board limits white's ability to produce a winning line. Often games do not extend beyond 13x13 but the limited size does become a factor in some games.

-Mark

Dmitri King, please refer to my polite retort on the Keyro Pente Board as I do not wish to take up extra bandwidth by duplicating my reply.

Blaze

Dmitri King, I refer you back to your posting of 27 March if I may and begin with a quote:

"You conveniently ignored EVERY valid point in my post, and instead you directed various personal attacks against me in a harsh and unpleasant tone"

Please don't insinuate that I deliberately ignored every valid point you made as this is not the case; it was simply that I felt no need to comment upon the points I agreed with as you got those points across adequately.

My sincere apologies if you felt there was a tone to my posting. I would confirm however that I did read your posting in full. I'm sorry if I mistranslated what you said but again would wish to refer to quotes from your posting:

"I would like to express my disappointment in the new games" and
"But, with all due respect, I must say I think the creation of these new pente variants is a serious error.".

I assumed the opinion you gave there meant you didnt enjoy them, was I mistaken?

As far as disrespecting people goes, once again I refer to the above quotes which led me to believe that your opinion is that these variations shouldn't be here which I thought could be taken as disrespectful to those who may be playing and enjoying them.

Finally I refer you to your statement:

"That is a terrible debating tactic"

and would wish to say that whilst my debating techniques may or may not be as good as yours, I am still entitled to express my opinion. It would be a very sad day if we began debating debating techniques on these boards, and a waste of bandwidth I feel. I don't believe it is constructive to be criticising the way people express their opinions.

*******************************************************

Walter Montego, thank you for posting. Quote:

"You accuse him of making blanket statements and then in the very next paragraph you make one yourself!"

I just wish to point out that I am in fact a lady...lol.

*******************************************************

To conclude this posting I will just say that I am finished with this debate as the last thing I wish to do is to fight about it on these boards.

Blaze

Walter--- You told me to go away until I have soemthign nice to sya? Are you JOKING??? You wee outright nasty in your last post. You did not agree with what I wrote, so you launched into an all-out personal attack against me! What is that all about? You disagree with a statement so you verbally asube the person who made the statement? Of course I reacted angrily, what would you expect after that uncalled for nasty reply you made?

You seemed to justify your nasty post by pointing out that you thought I made a blanket statement about the game without a restriction being detrimental to the game of pente. That is not even a blanket statement! It is simply a declaration about a SPECIFIC concept that is backed up by knowledge AND personal experience!

WHen people play pente at Dweebo's stone games at www.pente.org, the most popular site for real time pente play (where MANY players play pente), the game from IYT without hte restriction casuses confusion. This is personal experience. Do you have any experience to back up your claims?

You have the audacity to say I am not diaplsying knowledge and experience!?????????????

Are you ILLITERATE?

EVERY point in my post was BACKED up by either knowledge or experience or BOTH! I wish you would read my post before replying to it!

If you remove your nasty and uncalled for post, I will remove my earlier one, but I will point out that I was polite and respectful in my post to blaze, whereas you were asusive and way out of liine in yours. NOthing I wrote warranted the personal attack you unleashed.

Fencer-- good point about the WEB TV board. I did not realize that they cannot use the large board. But may I make a suggestion? Why not kep the restriction on the small board? The restriction is an integral part of the game and is an official rule of the game. The game could be played on the 13X13 board while still maintaining the restriction, and then all users would be able ot play and everyone would be playing with the correct rules.

Note-- This message edited by myself at 12:33 PM EST 3/28/03

Wow walter, you are just plain Nasty in that post. That was a sad display of arrogance on your part. Once again, you ignored almost all of the valid points in my post. Root againt me all you want, it will make the fact that I keep on winning all the better. Why don't you actually learn some skills and BEAT me at the game if you want to see me lose so badly?

It is an acknowledged FACT that the game without the restriction is an incorrect version of the game. The Pente federation OFFICIALLY changed the rule back in 1981 (approximately), and there is just no reason to play without it.

You claim that I made a blanket statement when I said "The new variant is detrimental" and you criticize me for not saying "I think." OF COURSE IT IS WHAT I THINK!!!!!!!!! That goes without saying! Who else's THOUGHTS do you think I am posting when I post???? MINE of course! One of the techniques of good writing is NOT to append "I think" to every statement of opinion. It isn't necessary.
So tell me, if I don't like something, I am not allowed to even speak up and say so, because "negative" posts make me a wacko, as I am implying from your post? That is absurd. I presented a bunch of good reasons to back up my case. Saying "no one is forcing you to play them" or "Not everyone is as serious as you are" does not really address the issues. One could use those replies to anything at any time.

Your request for a 9X9 boards just shows how clueless you are and that you know nothing about the game.

Fencer made an excellent point-- that the 13X13 board is neeeded for web TV users. I had not thought about that. Of course, web TV users should be included, and I would not wish otherwise, so a 13X13 game should exist. But why a 9X9 board? Do you understand how the game of pente works? Apparently you do not.

But hey, go ahead and raise some money to spite me at the OKC tournament! I really wish I knew how exactly your raising any money would decrease my chances of winning. THe most likely impediments to my winning the tournament are already going to be there, namely, top players such as Gary Barnes and Tom Braunlich and Mark Mammel. I would LOVE to see you try to bring 13X13 boards to the OKC tournament, I PROMISE YOU YOU WOULD GET LAUGHED AT!!! Go ahead, talk to ANY of the peoplpe who are involved in the tournament, ANY ONE OF THEM, and talk about a 13X13 board, you will get laughed at! I guarantee it!

You say you have lost respect for me? Darn. I cannot say the same about you. I have NEVER respected you, as you have not yet made a logical or coherent argument.

What's this garbage about my "close-minded blinders-on " way of arguing? I presented MANY LOGICAL AND COHERENT POINTS to support my claim. No, close-minded is the blind support given to a new variant without any justiication whatsoever. The only legitimate reason is the one Fencer gave about Web TV users.

Gwetting back to the matter of the recreational or "non-serious" players. Maybe I am missing something here, but what is preventing these users from enjoying the existing variants of pente and Keryo pente, the ones with the correct move restrictions? Where are all the players saying, "Oh, this game is just no fun! I cannot move my second stone 2 spaces away! this has totally destroyed my enjoyment!"

I just don't hear a lot of that.

Also, even "non-serious" players that I have met DO still enjoy improving their game, learning different attacks, etcetera.