Author |
Topic: Gambits? (Read 963 times) |
|
qswanger
Forum Guru
Gender: 
Posts: 89
|
For me one of the more interesting and exciting aspects of chess when I was actively playing & studying it was openings that involved gambits. Actually, the whole concept of gambits in general, with their unbalanced positional/material attributes, uncertain compensations, and unclear lines of play is extremely intriguing to me. I think this would certainly fall under "dramatic" in the more-or-less accepted criteria of what makes for a good abstract strategy game
So, I was playing a good friend last night face-to-face on the new Z-Man set (which is crying out to have a jumbo/deluxe version by the way as we both feel this set is a little too small, but that's another topic) when I thought my friend was playing rather recklessly by sending many of his rabbits forward seemingly randomly and letting me pick them off, at least one quite effortlessly. I chided him about this but he affectionately referred to them as his "Kamikazes". Well, I ended up winning the game, but it was not without some subsequent bothersome moves from him that I needed to deal with first.
This got me thinking: Is there an equivalent concept of a "gambit" in Arimaa? What would it look like and what sort of compensation would justify the loss of say a single rabbit like sacrificing a pawn in the opening in chess would? Perhaps Arimaa opening theory hasn't quite evolved enough to say with any certainty, but frankly I'm starting to become a little leery that this "hasn't evolved enough yet" excuse could actually be a convenient, unprovable cop-out to some truth that we as fans and advocates would rather not admit to. Either way it is okay, as each game is interesting, challenging and fun in it's own way (and I understand that the answer to my question could very well lay somewhere in the fact that Arimaa does not have a standard opening setup), but it sure would be cool if something as flashy as a gambit(s) were formulated and proven tenable in Arimaa.
Thanks.
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
clojure
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #5004
Gender:
Posts: 207
|
 |
Re: Gambits?
« Reply #1 on: Sep 17th, 2010, 12:48pm » |
 Quote  Modify
|
I haven't thought this properly but how I see it, I think giving gambits has the advantage that opponent might get into position where my pieces are positioned better. This comes the possibility of tactical maneuvering of using tempo to lure opponent to take the piece and at the same time get your pieces in good position.
But I'm such a horrible player that I don't know whether this works in practice since I overvalue time and the effectiveness of pieces over their amount, simply because it's much more exciting. (Indeed, I was quite an eager to make sacrifices in chess, even though I didn't dig up into opening theories).
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: Gambits?
« Reply #3 on: Sep 17th, 2010, 1:02pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Capture is too easy to prevent in the opening of Arimaa to make gambits very plausible. Against a computer, you might purposely leave a piece behind your home trap undefended in order to trick the computer into decentralizing its elephant and launching a losing race. Deception aside, however, taking one extra step to defend a home trap in the opening is simply worth more on average than using one extra step on attack. One step of defense often saves a piece while one step of offense rarely forces capture. I don't think this has anything to do with our inexperience; I doubt it will change. Capture is harder work in Arimaa than chess.
Later in the game, however, it is a completely different story. It is routine to be able to offer material in exchange for a strong goal attack, and exciting tradeoffs like that break out on their own all the time. People who like sharp brawls will like the chess opening and the Arimaa endgame. People who like quiet strategical maneuvering will like the Arimaa opening and the chess endgame. To each his own.
I don't think Arimaa needs to apologize for not having an analogue to the King's Gambit. There are plenty of interesting strategic tradeoffs in the opening, even if the time vs. material tradeoff is usually not critical until much later.
|
| « Last Edit: Sep 17th, 2010, 1:09pm by Fritzlein » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print