|
||||
|
Title: Move 41 Post by The_Jeh on Oct 5th, 2008, 12:18pm Chessandgo chooses 41g Ed3e Da3n Da4n Da5n. This is a move we had mentioned. The move I had in mind at the conclusion of the last thread was 41s ef4w Hg4w dg3n ce6w. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by warren on Oct 5th, 2008, 9:14pm Bomb suggests 41b Hg4n ef4e rb5e rc8w threatening to capture his horse in 1 move and delaying the capture of our northwest cat. That 41b seems to lead to us getting his horse for our dog, leaving us with two extra rabbit but with two cats instead of his dog and cat. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by UruramTururam on Oct 6th, 2008, 12:02am My initial thought was 41b Hg4n ef4e rb5e rc8e - which turned out to be quite similar to the Bomb's proposal. For the last step I assumed we can make a better use of this rabbit in the center, far from the gold dog. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by warren on Oct 6th, 2008, 6:55am on 10/06/08 at 00:02:24, UruramTururam wrote:
An annoying counter to your "initial thought" is 42g Rd4wwn Da6n threatening goal. Isn't it better to send our c8 rabbit west as in Bomb's suggestion to keep him from threatening goal? |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by warren on Oct 6th, 2008, 7:07am on 10/05/08 at 12:18:42, The_Jeh wrote:
Bomb suggests a rather unhuman tactical counter to your 41s: 42g Ch3w Ee3e dg4nn Hf4e That 42g seems to allow gold to escape without further loss of material despite leaving gold's elephant on the trap protected only by a cat. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by Fritzlein on Oct 6th, 2008, 7:22am on 10/05/08 at 12:18:42, The_Jeh wrote:
On a first pass this move looks strong. I don't want to trade our dog for his horse. Yes, CRR for D is a material advantage for us, but less than I was hoping for, and with a tense endgame to be played thereafter. I would not have advocated playing safe last move if I had thought we would have to trade horse for dog. If we eventually decide we have nothing better than this trade, we'll have to look back and wonder where we went wrong. Therefore I approve of the step dg3n so that we win the horse without losing our dog. Note that 42g Ee3e Ef3e xxxx xxxx does not get chessandgo our dog for his horse, because we can answer with 42s Hf4n ee4e xxxx xxxx and get the free horse on 43s. The down side of the dog retreat is that chessandgo's elephant is less firmly tied to the defense of the f3-trap. Supposing that he leaves his elephant on e3 in response to our move (as I expect he would), then we can't split our capture of his horse into two moves with 42s Hf4n ee4e xxxx xxxx, because his elephant can advance up the e-file to save his horse, and we don't have the immediate counter of capturing his cat with our dog to create a huge goal threat. In other words, this move is great for the control game because it is a serious threat to win a free horse, but bad for the racing game, as it may create situations where chessandgo can bail out with his elephant and win a goal race. I would look first at 42g Ra2n Ra3n Ra4n Da6e. The goal-in-one threat means that we can't take the horse, which means that we can't get halfway there either. But using all four steps in the west with 42s rc8w rd5w rb5s rb4w might be adequate to insure that we can take his horse on 43s no matter what he tried to do in the west on 43g. If instead chessandgo tries 42g Da6e Db6n cc7s Db7e, I am not sure that we can afford a defensive move. His dog would be eyeing f7, from where it would nullify our threat to his horse. Therefore I think we would have to take his horse on 42s in exchange for our cat, with the idea of using our elephant to put out the fire in the west on 43s. We would be ahead by two clear rabbits with, I think, as nice an endgame as we can hope for. Chessandgo may have other, stronger tries, but at the moment I think The_Jeh's move wins us H for C, resolving the mess of the last many moves into a fluid position where it is (finally) quite clear that we stand better. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by Fritzlein on Oct 6th, 2008, 7:23am on 10/06/08 at 07:07:23, warren wrote:
Oh, dear. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by Janzert on Oct 6th, 2008, 9:00am OpFor likes the same move as Bomb from depth 9 on till at least 15: depth 15 time 39163 nodes 4558496223 qnodes 61287500 losing_moves 90 score 256 pv rc8w Hg4n ef4e rb5e w Rg1w Ee3n Ee4e Rh1w b rd5e re5s ce6s re4s w Ef4w re3w Janzert |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by The_Jeh on Oct 6th, 2008, 9:03am on 10/06/08 at 07:07:23, warren wrote:
That is indeed unhuman. I had completely overlooked that possibility. However, it does not necessarily make me want to reject the move out of hand. For example: 42s ee4s ee3w rb5s rb4s To lose material near c3 verges on fatal for c&g. Some choices he has are: 43g Hg4w Hf4w Rd4w Ef3w, to which we respond 43s ed3n He4n ed4e rb3s, and we win his horse after all, because responses to save it result in a forced goal for us, if I'm not mistaken. (Or if somehow it doesn't, we could just play dg5w instead of rb3s.) 43g Ef3n Ef4w Rd4w Da6s is easily thwarted by 43s rb3s ed3s Rc2n ed2w, 44g Rg1w Rf1w Re1w Rd1w, 44s Rc1e ec2s rd5e leads to a forced goal. I'm shaken by my own lack of perception compared to Bomb in this instance, but Bomb could still be misevaluating a move that is actually good if we look a few moves deeper. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by camelback on Oct 6th, 2008, 9:11am How about this one. A possible goal threat. 41b rf7s rf6s rd5e ce6w |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by RonWeasley on Oct 6th, 2008, 10:00am I'm looking at 41b Hg4n ef4e rb5s ce6w Gold must leave something to block our r on d5 so the gold E won't be too aggressive to save the H or advance the R on d4. Gold is trying to create a west side goal threat. Moving our r to b4 slows this down by creating our own additional goal threat. Moving our c to d6 makes the f6 trap defensable. The lack of mobility of the gold E keeps it from taking our dog while we secure the H. If the gold E gets blockers by threatening a d-H exchange (and move the dog to evade), the E can defend the H but now we have a dog around either c3 or f3 with threatening rabbits and a better goal race. For some of the other suggestions, I'm not seeing the advantage of the rc8e step. It doesn't figure into any of my variations. If anything, rc8w is more useful in the future to defend a west side goal threat. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by Fritzlein on Oct 6th, 2008, 10:23am I'm not sure The_Jeh's line refutes warren's (Bomb's) refutation of The_Jeh's move. 42g Ch3w Ee3e dg4n Hf4e 42s ee4s ee3w rb5s rb4s 43g Da6s Da5s Da4s Ef3w and we get a free rabbit, but it isn't immediately fatal to chessandgo because our attacking rabbit can be pushed back to b4 with a dog in front. The question is how good for us strategically that position with CRRR for H is. When using Bomb in the endgame, we should be aware that it overvalues the horse. Right now, with H for CRR, Bomb thinks that Gold is ahead on material by +1, but if it trades horse for dog the material swings to -2, i.e. a two-rabbit advantage for Silver. This is not a typo: to Bomb's material evaluator, horse for dog is a three-rabbit swing. If instead of forcing that trade, we had the option to capture a rabbit for free, Bomb's material evaluation would swing to -1. We get one point for the rabbit per se, and one extra point for the rabbit surplus in the endgame. To my mind it's only slightly better to have CRR for D than to have CRRR for H, but in Bomb's material evaluation the former is much better. Bomb really puts a premium on that horse. Just so we are aware of the bias. That said, Bomb did find a strong move I totally overlooked, so I definitely don't want to spurn its help. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by Janzert on Oct 6th, 2008, 10:25am After 41s ef4w Hg4w dg3n ce6w 42g Ch3w Ee3e dg4nn Hf4e . 42s ee4s ee3w rb5s rb4s OpFor suggests depth 15 time 2803 score 26 pv Ef3w Da6e Ee3n Rd4w b ed3s rb3s rd5s rh7s w Db6s Db5s Ee4s Db4s b rh6s dg5w Janzert |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by The_Jeh on Oct 6th, 2008, 10:57am on 10/06/08 at 10:23:58, Fritzlein wrote:
You're right. I can't think of any other lines, either. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by Janzert on Oct 6th, 2008, 11:55am on 10/06/08 at 10:00:18, RonWeasley wrote:
OpFor continues with: depth 14 time 4361 score -271 pv Rd4e Re4n Re5e Hg5e b eg4w Rf5n Rf6x ef4n ef5e w Da6e Rg1w Db6s Rh1w b dg3n Ch3w It also considered 42w Rd4e Re4n Re5e Hg5n at depth 13. Janzert |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by Janzert on Oct 6th, 2008, 12:20pm Current tree: 41s ef4w Hg4w dg3n ce6w 42g Ch3w Ee3e dg4nn Hf4e . 42s ee4s ee3w rb5s rb4s . . 43g Da6s Da5s Da4s Ef3w . . 43g Hg4w Hf4w Rd4w Ef3w . . . 43s ed3n He4n ed4e rb3s . . 43g Ef3n Ef4w Rd4w Da6s . . . 43s rb3s ed3s Rc2n ed2w . . . . 44g Rg1w Rf1w Re1w Rd1w . . . . . 44s Rc1e ec2s rd5e . . 43g Ef3n Ef4w Rd4w Da6e . . . 43b rb3s ed3s rd5s rh7s . . . . 44w Db6s Db5s Ee4s Db4s 42g Ra2n Ra3n Ra4n Da6e . 42s rc8w rd5w rb5s rb4w 42g Da6e Db6n cc7s Db7e 41s Hg4n ef4e rb5s ce6w 42g Rd4e Re4n Re5e Hg5e . 42b eg4w Rf5n Rf6x ef4n ef5e 41s Hg4n ef4e rb5e rc8w 42g Rg1w Ee3n Ee4e Rh1w . 42s rd5e re5s ce6s re4s 41s Hg4n ef4e rb5e rc8e 42g Rd4w Rc4w Rb4n Da6n 41s rf7s rf6s rd5e ce6w Janzert |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by warren on Oct 6th, 2008, 8:28pm on 10/06/08 at 10:00:18, RonWeasley wrote:
I like the extra goal threats. That's currently my favorite 41b. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by Fritzlein on Oct 7th, 2008, 12:26am on 10/06/08 at 10:00:18, RonWeasley wrote:
After 41s Hg4n ef4e ce6w rb5s 42g Da6s Da5e Rg1w Rf1n Bomb is happy to take the horse for dog trade and declare victory, but after 42s Hg5w eg4n Hf5n Hf6x eg5w 43g Ee3e Ef3n dg3w df3x Ef4w It seems that we lose another rabbit, the indirect effect of making it vulnerable with rb5s. But I assume from the commentary Quote:
that we shouldn't accept the trade of dog for horse. So how should the dog evade? I guess something like 42s dg3s dg2e rh7s rd5e looks pretty good. So I am in favor of Ron's move so far. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by UruramTururam on Oct 7th, 2008, 4:24am on 10/06/08 at 06:55:52, warren wrote:
Really, this would force us to defend. It's better to have initiative on our side. I like the look of the Camelback's proposal. Any possible continuation? |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by warren on Oct 7th, 2008, 6:08am on 10/06/08 at 09:11:17, camelback wrote:
I think that move is too slow and therefore lets his dog rescue his horse. For example: 41b rf7s rf6s rf5w ce6w 42w Da6n Da7e cc7e Db7e 42b ef4s Hg4w Hf4n ef3n 43w cd7n Dc7e Dd7e De7s Update: oops, my above continuation is not for the 41b camelback posted. I'll have to investigate your 41b more to have an opinion. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by camelback on Oct 7th, 2008, 6:19am Hi warren, I was planning for goal threat by advancing rabbits, since there is very little defense. I have the following lines. 41b rf7s rf6s rd5e ce6w 42w Rh1n rh4n Ch3n Hg4n 42b ef4e rf5s re5s rh7s 43w re4n Ee3n rf4n Ee4e 43b re5s cd6e ce6s re4s 44w Ef4w re3w Ee4s Rg1w 44b rf5s rf4s rf3s ce5s ----- 41b rf7s rf6s rd5e ce6w 42w Da6e Db6n cc7s Db7e 42b cc6w Hg4n ef4e rf5s |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by Janzert on Oct 7th, 2008, 3:01pm I ran opfor after 41s Hg4n ef4e rb5e rc8w 42g Rg1w Ee3n Ee4e Rh1w . 42s rd5e re5s ce6s re4s to see if it could find a refutation depth 15 time 22134 nodes 2333603212 qnodes 124024877 losing_moves 3246 score -617 pv Rg1n Rh1n Da6e Db6s b eg5w Hh5w Rg2w dg3s w Db5n Db6n cc7s Db7e So it just keeps looking worse for c&g in that line the deeper opfor goes. Janzert |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by warren on Oct 7th, 2008, 8:41pm on 10/07/08 at 06:19:07, camelback wrote:
Camelback's 41s rf7s rf6s rd5e ce6w is my current favorite. It doesn't look good at first because it delays our capture of the horse for a turn, but once we follow through with the horse threat it seems to leave us in a better position than after RW's 41s Hg4n ef4e rb5s ce6w . Put another way, however C&G responds to Camelback's 41s it seems we'll be in a better position to make threats against his horse and goal than we are now. Can anyone find a good 42g to counter Camelback's 41s? |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by camelback on Oct 8th, 2008, 8:08am A good counter for c&g and the following response would be 42w Ee3n Ee4s re5s Rg1w 42b cd6s rc8e rd8s rd7s I think this could force c&g bring back dog for defense, so position needs further analysis. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by RonWeasley on Oct 8th, 2008, 8:59am Here's a full continuation for my suggested move: 41s Hg4n ef4e rb5s ce6w 42g Rg1w Da6e Db6s Rh1n 42s dg3s Hg5n eg4n rc8w 43g Rd4e Re4e Rf4n Ee3n 43s Hg6e eg5n cd6e rb8s 44g Ee4n ce6n Ee5n Db5e 44s ce7w cd7s rd5s rd4e 45g Dc5e Dd5e De5w re4n 45s dg2n Rh2w rb4s rb3s 46g Dd5s Dd4s Dd3e Rf1e 46s cc7s cc6s rb7s cc5w 47g cd6n Ee6w Ed6s Ed5w 47s eg6w ef6e Rf5n Rf6x cd7w 48g cb5s Ec5w Rg2e 48s eg6w Hh6w ef6s Hg6w Hf6x 49g cb4s Eb5s cb3e cc3x Eb4s 49s ef5s ef4s ef3s De3e Df3x 50g Eb3e rb2n Ec3e rb3e rc3x 50s dg3n Ch3w Cg3w Cf3x dg4s 51g Rc2n Rc3n Rc4e Rb1n 51s rh4s dg3s re5s re4s 52g Rd4n Rd5e Re5n Re6n 52s cc7e ef2n re3s ef3x re2s Here's one of the camelback variations: 41s rf7s rf6s rd5e ce6w 42g Ee3n Ee4s re5s Rg1w 42s rf5w Hg4n ef4e re4e 43g Ee3n rf4n Ee4e Rf1n 43s dg3s Ch3w rh4s rc8w 44g rf5n rf6x Ef4n Hg5e Hh5s 44s Cg3w eg4s rh3s eg3e 45g Rd4e Re4e Rf4e Rg4n 45s Rf2w Cf3x dg2w rh2w rg2s Here's another: 41s rf7s rf6s rd5e ce6w 42g Rh1n rh4n Ch3n Hg4n 42s ef4e rf5s rf4s rf3s 43g Ee3s rf2e Ee2e Da6e 43s cd6s Rd4w cd5s re5s 44g Rc2e Rb1n Rb2e 44s cd4s Rd2s cd3s re4s 45g Rc4e Rd4e Re4n Re5n 45s re3s re2s So I think both moves win. Camelback's appears to win quicker. While these aren't likely the best variations, they show a lot of the relevant themes. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by Fritzlein on Oct 8th, 2008, 9:59am on 10/08/08 at 08:59:15, RonWeasley wrote:
Wow you have it down for goal in five or six moves? I didn't know we were winning by that much... I can't wait to analyze our crushing attack. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by camelback on Oct 8th, 2008, 7:53pm Ron its amazing to see, you sorted out all. Certainly you mastered all the tricks from Hogwarts ;D ;D |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by warren on Oct 9th, 2008, 7:10am I'm ready to voice vote for camelback's 41s rf7s rf6s rd5e ce6w . |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by RonWeasley on Oct 9th, 2008, 7:28am Based on my posted analysis, I also support 41s f7s rf6s rd5e ce6w But please be careful. Just because I gave out lines that go to goal, doesn't mean the Slytherins are going to cooperate. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by UruramTururam on Oct 9th, 2008, 7:42am I'm for that move too. Btw I thought that C&G is from Ravenclaw... |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by Fritzlein on Oct 9th, 2008, 10:00am on 10/08/08 at 08:59:15, RonWeasley wrote:
It seems chessandgo can offer more resistance with 43g Ee3n rf4n Ee4e Da6e after which 43s dg3s Ch3w rh4s rc8w can be met by 44g Ef4s rf5s Ef3s rf4s rf3x with a few defensive resources remaining for Gold. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by Fritzlein on Oct 9th, 2008, 10:09am If chessandgo chooses a more bland defense to camelback's attack, let's say 41s rf7s rf6s rd5e ce6w 42g Rg1w Rf1n Da6e Rh1n do we still expect to force goal, or do we fall back on accepting H for d trade, or do we have a way to win the H outright? |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by camelback on Oct 9th, 2008, 11:39am Fritz, Here are my responses, at most we will trade a r for H. I think Ron can still find forced goal with his magic wand. 41b rf7s rf6s rd5e ce6w 42w Rg1w Rf1n Da6e Rh1n 42b Hg4n ef4e rf5s re5s 43w Ee3e rf4n Ef3n Rd4n 43b dg3s Ch3w rh4s rc8w 44w Ef4s rf5s Ef3w rf4s rf3x 44b Hg5w eg4n eg5s eg4w ----- 41b rf7s rf6s ce6w rd5e 42w Ee3n Ee4s re5s Rg1w 42b rf5w Hg4n ef4e re4e 43w Ee3n rf4n Ee4e Da6e 43b dg3s Ch3w rh4s rc8w 44w Ef4s rf5s Ef3s rf4s rf3x 44b Hg5w eg4n eg5s eg4w |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by RonWeasley on Oct 9th, 2008, 12:55pm on 10/09/08 at 10:09:10, Fritzlein wrote:
Here's the best I could find. Essentially, we take the horse without giving up the dog. The won endgame takes a while, like a jdb puzzle. 41s rf7s rf6s rd5e ce6w 42g Rg1w Rf1n Da6e Rh1n 42s Hg4n ef4e rf5s re5s 43g Ra2n Ra3n Ra4n Ra5n 43s rc8w dg3w df3e Rf2n 44g Db6n cc7e Db7e Rc2w 44s cd6s cd5w rb5s rb4s 45g Rb1w Dc7w Db7s Db6s 45s rb8s cd7s cd6s cc5s 46g Db5n Db6s rb7s Db5s 46s ra8s cd5n Rd4n re4w 47g cc4n Db4e Ra1n Ra2n 47s Hg5w eg4n Hf5n Hf6x eg5w 48g Dc4w rb3e rc3x Db4s Rb2e 48s dg3s Rf3e Rg3n dg2n 49g Ee3s Ee2e Db3e Dc3e 49s ef5w ee5s rd4w ee4w 50g Ef2e dg3w Eg2n Ra3e 50s rg8s df3s rc4w cc5w 51g Rc2w Rb2w rh4n Ch3n 51s Dd3s ed4s rf4w re4s 52g Rg4w Eg3w re3n Ef3w 52s rb4e cb5s Rb3e Rc3x cb4s 53g Ee3s Dd2w Dc2s Ch4w 53s ed3e ee3e ef3e Rf4s Rf3x 54g Ee2n df2w Dc1n Ra2n 54s Cg4w eg3n Cf4n eg4w 55g Rh2n de2s Ee3s Ee2e 55s re4w Cf5n Cf6x ef4n rh5s 56g Dc2e Dd2n rd4e Dd3n 56s ef5s re4s re3w de1n 57g rd3e Dd4s Dd3s 57s rc4s rc3s cb3s rc2s |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by camelback on Oct 9th, 2008, 1:29pm Ron, 50s has a goal ;) |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by Fritzlein on Oct 9th, 2008, 4:31pm on 10/09/08 at 11:39:13, camelback wrote:
That's a nice tactic to hold his horse on f5 with our elephant on f4. However, the advanced rabbit can actually get in the way of that in some lines. For example: 41s rf7s rf6s rd5e ce6w 42g Rg1w Rf1n Da6e Rh1n 42s Hg4n ef4e rf5s re5s 43g re4n Ee3n rf4n Ee4e 43s dg3s Ch3w rh4s re5s 44g Ef4s Rf2w Re2n Ef3s But then this line convinced me 41s rf7s rf6s rd5e ce6w 42g Rg1w Rf1n Da6e Rh1n 42s Hg4n ef4e rf5s re5s 43g re4n Ee3n rf4n Ee4e 43s dg3s Ch3w rh4s rc8w 44g rf5n rf6x Ef4n Ef5s re5e 44s dg2s Rh2w eg4e rh3s with goal to follow Is the Silver e-rabbit more useful on e5, to unfreeze f5, or on e4 to threaten goal? 41s rf7s rf6s rd5e ce6w 42g Rg1w Rf1n Da6e Rh1n 42s Hg4n ef4e rf5s re5s 43g Ee3e rf4n Ee4n Ra3n 43s Hg5n eg4n rf5w re4s and we do get the horse for only a rabbit. Since Ron has covered the possible Gold counter-attack, and the Gold defense looks mostly hopeless, I guess I'm finally on board for camelback's move in the continuing voice vote. I'm ready to move if everyone else is too. As if I needed another reminder that my endgame instincts are poor, I originally thought advancing the f7-rabbit to f5 would not be threatening enough, and would allow chessandgo time to consolidate, when in fact it ties him down and makes our advantage clearer. I hope this kind of analysis eventually helps me repair the big hole in my game. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by The_Jeh on Oct 9th, 2008, 7:29pm Camelback's move is sagacious. Just casually playing out follow-up moves, everything just seems to naturally and swiftly flow in our favor. I'm behind this move if for no other reason than that I want to see Chessandgo's response. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by Janzert on Oct 9th, 2008, 8:17pm I'm fine with camelback's move as well. Janzert |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by Soter on Oct 10th, 2008, 1:04am I concur. I'd like to see Camelback's move played. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by RonWeasley on Oct 10th, 2008, 3:53am TheMob has spoken. At least enough of it. I shall play: 41s rf7s rf6s rd5e ce6w |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by RonWeasley on Oct 10th, 2008, 3:59am on 10/09/08 at 07:42:54, UruramTururam wrote:
I think anybody who plays as well as chessandgo or Fritzlein is not only a wizard, but uses dark magic and illegal spells. Slytherins both. I think maybe Adanac is a Ravenclaw. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by 99of9 on Oct 10th, 2008, 4:14am Have we considered the reply: 41b rf7s rf6s rd5e ce6w 42w Rg1w Rf1n Da6e Ra2n |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by RonWeasley on Oct 10th, 2008, 5:33am on 10/10/08 at 04:14:42, 99of9 wrote:
Looks to me like this would transpose into one of the other variations we've considered, but I'm fully expecting chessandgo to pull some potion out, confuse our rabbits and get the advantage again. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by warren on Oct 10th, 2008, 6:07am on 10/10/08 at 03:59:35, RonWeasley wrote:
If I recall correctly your namesake once played a high-stakes game of chess in a dungeon that Dumbledore called "the best game of chess Hogwarts has ever seen". Your conclusion that F and C&G are necessarily Slytherins is dubious. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Move 41 Post by RonWeasley on Oct 10th, 2008, 6:52am on 10/10/08 at 06:07:55, warren wrote:
Namesake? What namesake? |
||||
|
Arimaa Forum » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.1! YaBB © 2000-2003. All Rights Reserved. |