That's super cool and all, but I'm not exactly desperate to find ways to beat O9. I'd be a lot more interested to hear if you have any P2 lines that are sure wins.
It's no use going back to yesterday, because I was a different person then.
Posts:
2,233
Registered:
Mar 4, 2007
From:
San Francisco
Age:
45 Home page
Re: O9
Posted:
Aug 20, 2020, 8:55 PM
the problem is people are using strongest P1 seconds. Which is why this game at top level is pretty dead. If players would see value in using new, more challenging to use P1 2nds, and pride them selves in that, perhaps we could get a pulse out of this game. Give P2 something to try and work with. Winning proficiently as P1 with quick kill moves regurgitated from the DB is an utter snooze fest.
just my opinion
matter of fact, if you like, we can both play this open vs each other next round, and see who plays it better.
Message was edited by: zoeyk at Aug 20, 2020, 9:11 PM
Scire hostis animum - Intelligere ludum - Nosce te ipsum - Prima moventur conciliat - Nolite errare
The main concern I have with your theory, Zoey, is that G Pente was supposed to be an attempt at something like this. It's one of the oldest variants, but one one of if not the least played.
Retired from TB Pente, but still playing live games & exploring variants like D, poof and boat
Posts:
2,233
Registered:
Mar 4, 2007
From:
San Francisco
Age:
45 Home page
Re: O9
Posted:
Aug 20, 2020, 9:30 PM
Doesnt fix the problem of N8 N12... see the difference? which is why i didnt play N12 vs Hippo. I used a move I wasnt very familiar with (K13), and I used a 3rd that R3 and BRF had defeated with a trap, so top players abandoned that 3rd (H13). I resurrected it, and did unknown territory. it was more fun. and G pente would had prevented that fun line. see the difference? At some point tho, I may look for another 3rd, find something fresh.
Message was edited by: zoeyk at Aug 20, 2020, 9:30 PM
Scire hostis animum - Intelligere ludum - Nosce te ipsum - Prima moventur conciliat - Nolite errare
Neither Pente nor G restricts your move against O9 though, so how do we enforce novelty in the openings? ETA: hypothetically, rating points gained in a set could be multiplied (up to a limit of say 20 points gained) by playing a second move with a losing record in the DB. But, then that percentage might change to a winning record, so the incentive would disappear.
Message was edited by: watsu at Aug 20, 2020, 10:30 PM
Retired from TB Pente, but still playing live games & exploring variants like D, poof and boat
Posts:
2,233
Registered:
Mar 4, 2007
From:
San Francisco
Age:
45 Home page
Re: O9
Posted:
Aug 20, 2020, 10:33 PM
excellent question. Come up with a few P1 2nd move responses to each P2 1st move. an allowed list. Then P2 decides which 2nd P1 must do from said list. If you want to further integrate in swap 2 rules, then fine i guess.
Scire hostis animum - Intelligere ludum - Nosce te ipsum - Prima moventur conciliat - Nolite errare
Posts:
2,233
Registered:
Mar 4, 2007
From:
San Francisco
Age:
45 Home page
Re: O9
Posted:
Aug 20, 2020, 10:44 PM
also, i think it would be neat to have obstacle stones. maybe 4 neutral stones, which can't be played on, with nor removed. you must work around.
or, both players possess an obstacle stone, which they can play at any point within first 5 moves each, in addition to the normal move they are making.
Scire hostis animum - Intelligere ludum - Nosce te ipsum - Prima moventur conciliat - Nolite errare
Posts:
2,233
Registered:
Mar 4, 2007
From:
San Francisco
Age:
45 Home page
Re: O9
Posted:
Aug 21, 2020, 6:29 AM
waatsu you said: ETA: hypothetically, rating points gained in a set could be multiplied (up to a limit of say 20 points gained) by playing a second move with a losing record in the DB. But, then that percentage might change to a winning record, so the incentive would disappear.
Im not sure what this means, or what its relative context is.
Scire hostis animum - Intelligere ludum - Nosce te ipsum - Prima moventur conciliat - Nolite errare
Context - "how do we enforce novelty in the openings?" If, for example, I were to get more rating points by playing a second in the database which currently has lost more games than it has won, then I might be more likely to play such a second move. I think there needs to be a limit set on how much a player stands to gain in rating points by such a strategy for each set, otherwise ratings would potentially be skewed while this incentive to attempt to gain more novelty in openings is in effect. As players successfully play openings which currently have losing records, the db percentages would change in favor of that novel opening.
Retired from TB Pente, but still playing live games & exploring variants like D, poof and boat
