|
||||||
|
Title: Fritz's commentary Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 5:59am Congratulations, Mob! You played very solidly throughout, whereas I had one major tactical blunder on 10s. I wonder how my play would stack up to the Mob's strategically without that one mistake. Also it might have been fun to have thirty moves of a viable position followed by ten moves of tortuous despair, instead of the other way around. Still, I enjoyed the game, and I hope I at least put up enough resistance to make your side of it enjoyable as well. There were moves from the Mob that I thought were slightly inaccurate, but in retrospect this might have been sheer wishful thinking on my part. I would at times believe I was slowly making progress, only to have my hopes dashed every time when the chips were down. Playing against an opponent that never makes a tactical error is a fearsome experience. I feel totally ground down by it. I'm not sure what would give me the confidence to reprise my role as The One. Perhaps chessandgo, who has won two Arimaa World Championships since this game started, would be willing to give it another whirl? If so, I would be happy to be part of the rabble again. I was able to predict the Mob's move only nine times out of forty, or 22.5%. That's pretty low, but not as low as I expected going into the game. I am curious to see whether the moves I incorrectly predicted ever got serious attention and/or votes. Also I will enjoy examining to what extent my general perceptions of the game coincided with or diverged from the Mob's perceptions. I thought I would have a time advantage due to not having to communicate with myself like the Mob members had to communicate with each other, but it turned out to be a distraction for me to focus on the Mob's clock instead of managing my time in a vacuum. I look forward to any commentary on my commentary. I hope what I recorded of my thoughts is of at least some interest to the Mob. Thanks for the game! |
||||||
|
Title: pre-game Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:01am Publicly I have been talking smack about how I am going to destroy the Mob, but that is mostly an attempt to stir up passion and get the game started sooner rather than later, because I am eager to play. I want my shot at glory now, because in the future (a) Arimaa will hit the big time and the Mob will be too large for any one player to contend with, (b) aging will further erode my mental capacity, and (c) computer ability will increase, taking the game away from us humans. Now will be the best chance I ever have to take on the world. Privately, though, I have to admit that even if the game starts tomorrow, my chances of winning are poor. People who haven’t participated in a team strategy game like this have trouble understanding the dynamic that makes the Mob so powerful. It is easy to attribute strong team play to the domination of a few strong players, as Kasparov did during his match against the World Team in 1999. Kasparov couldn’t bring himself to believe in the power of the collective and therefore assumed that a couple of strong grandmasters were dictating to the hoi polloi. Kasparov was wrong; that was absolutely not what was happening in that game. My participation in Kasparov vs. the World taught me some valuable lessons about team analysis. First, you can’t measure how much someone is contributing by counting up the number of moves he suggests that the team eventual plays. A few World Team members squandered a great deal of effort trying to take credit for various moves, as if being first to post in some thread about the possibility of a move being played gave them ownership. This is ridiculous; all the moves are ‘out there’ a priori, and a brain-dead algorithm could list them all and suggest each of them first. Even I once managed to be the first one to suggest a World Team move, but that doesn’t mean I understood why the move was good relative to our other options. (In fact, some team members claimed that my move lost us the game.) But I didn’t do anything special for weal or woe; I merely tossed in a suggestion that happened to be played by the team after much debate. Second, you can’t measure how much someone is dominating the team by counting how often the move they recommend ends up being the move that the team votes for. The recommendation of Irina Krush was voted for by the World Team on almost every move for most of the game, but that was in no way a reflection of her imposing her will on the team. Rather it was reflection of her skills at listening to team input and integrating what she learned into her suggestion. Often the team produced analysis that changed her mind about what move was best. It would be more accurate to say that the team imposed its will on Krush than vice versa. Outsiders fail to understand the power of the team because the team’s power is in the details. How do you explain that an unexpected defensive resource in one sub-variation invalidates an entire attack? But it does. The primary strength of the Mob is in its refutations, i.e. in its ability to say that move X is bad because it can be answered with move Y. That happened several critical times in the 2007 One vs. Mob game, although a superficial observer wouldn’t see it. My main chance of winning the 2009 One vs. Mob game rests in a disheartened and/or dysfunctional Mob. If there are a dozen eager contributors working well together throughout, they will play solidly at every turn, whereas I am bound to have more holes in my analysis, due to the greater number of good ideas that never occur to me. On the other hand, if the Mob members don’t cooperate well with each other (e.g. argue rather than analyzing) or if there are too few participants, or if the participants don’t spend much time on the game, then I might not be outgunned, and my good intuitive judgment might overcome the Mob’s greater breadth and depth of analysis. Bobby Fischer once said, “I like the moment when I break a man's ego.” I don’t play games for that moment myself, but I realize that in this game ego-breaking is my best chance to win. I need to get an advantage early, keep the game under control so that it is obvious that I have the advantage, and squeeze. I need the Mobsters to believe that they can’t beat me because I am just too good for them, and I need them to spend time blaming each other for getting into a weak position. If the Mob despairs of beating me they will stop trying so hard. Demoralization will be my best weapon. If, on the other hand, the game stays close throughout the middle game, I will be in trouble. The World Team was hugely energized against Kasparov when an early novelty busted open the game and made the position totally unclear. A wild game will give comfort to my enemies. They will start to believe I am beatable. If the position remains nearly equal, or even merely double-edged, late into the game, I am doomed. Not only is the endgame my weakest phase, it is the part of the game where computers and extra eyeballs help the most, because it is so tactical and refutation-prone. I can’t afford to reach an endgame even if I enter it with a slight advantage; the endgame must be prevented by Mob resignation, or by enough mobsters giving up that it is an effective resignation although they keep producing moves. I must, must, must win the opening. |
||||||
|
Title: 1g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:02am 1g: In my recent games with Silver I have been responding to all the standard symmetrical Gold setups by decentralizing my camel and starting both of my horses on the opposite wing. Recently Omar endorsed this plan as well, and I expect many Mob members have taken note. That raises the question of whether the Mob thinks it has something to fear from an unbalanced setup. Quite possibly, the Mob does not attribute my Postal Tournament wins as Silver to my new setup, but rather to subsequent play, in which case they will gladly walk into the teeth of my new strategy and try to beat me anyway. On the other hand, if enough members are believers in the power of an unbalanced setup, the Mob might consider starting with a flank camel even as Gold. This would be bold because as Silver I could place my elephant directly opposite the decentralized gold camel while keeping my own camel away from the gold elephant. I can’t recall ever having participated in a game that started that way. All things considered, I count on the Mob to be conventional. Preferential voting guides a group toward consensus, not toward experimentation. Even if a majority of Mob members would like to try something different, they probably won’t agree with each other on which different setup is worth trying. For example, although I have opened with four forward rabbits in every game for almost a year and half now, most folks still consider it risky, unproven, and perhaps leading to disadvantage. I will therefore be shocked if the Mob sets up with any rabbit structure other than 99of9’s. Indeed, there is a fair chance the Mob will play the complete, standard 99of9 setup, with elephant and camel in the middle and with cats behind the traps. Even the slight variation of a cat behind one trap and a dog behind the other, which worked for the Mob in 2007, doesn’t seem as compelling for Gold as it was for Silver, especially if the Mob expects an unbalanced response from me. Because I will be making a lot of predictions in this game, such as the one above, I should reassure my readers that I haven't gone back to alter my predictions to appear prescient. On the other hand, I can't promise not to change anything, because it just kills me to go back and find typos I can't fix. Therefore, while I won't promise to leave previous sections entirely untouched, I do promise to edit only for style and not for content. |
||||||
|
Title: 1s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:05am 1s: I was stunned to see the Mob set up as chessandgo normally does. Since he is almost the only one to use such a setup, how did it get a majority of votes over the 99of9 setup, which everyone and his dog uses? My first thought was that perhaps the Mob is indeed a bunch of sheep, and chessandgo is indeed dictating. If so, that will make the game much easier for me to win. Dissension is essential for a team to be any better than its best individual. After further consideration, however, I feel I should not be too hasty to infer the dynamics of the Mob from the setup. The only difference between chessandgo’s setup and 99of9’s is that the dog and rabbit on e1 and g1 have switched places. My limited experience against chessandgo shows that if the opening evolves into a rabbit-pulling race, Silver can’t take advantage of the back-central rabbit on e1 as a target, because Gold is ahead in tempo from the start. On the contrary, in a rabbit pulling race, chessandgo’s setup allows a more comfortable rotation of forces in the east, as the g1-dog follows the g2-horse forward, and the e1- and f1-rabbits can slide to safety if need be, without the piece on f2 needing to move. In other words, I regard chessandgo’s setup as a tiny technical improvement over 99of9’s setup. If I had been part of the Mob, I would have voted for chessandgo’s setup in preference to 99of9’s, even though I have never played chessandgo’s setup myself. Given my positive evaluation of chessandgo’s setup, it would be absurd of me to take the Mob’s choice as an indication of weakness. If anything it should, on the contrary, warn me that the Mob will play with precision when given two nearly-equal choices. For my response I am tempted to quickly play my standard response with four rabbits forward and my camel on g7. That would follow my Continuous Tournament game against chessandgo from September 20. I got quite a comfortable position in the first few moves, so that game gives me no reason to fear. The Mob would definitely deviate first, and I am not even sure how they could do so to advantage. Chessandgo’s plan to advance his horse on the wing opposite my camel appeared logical, but he got nothing out of it. He had no hope of an effective elephant-horse attack while I had both of my horses defending that wing. He could at most have pulled a rabbit, which I don’t much fear. I’m not out to pull rabbits these days unless the position gets slow. In a fluid position, I expect I can put my time to better use. Otherwise, there is no game history for me to follow. When I played Silver against chessandgo in the 2008 Postal Mixer, I set up my camel on the same wing as his elephant. I now regard that as a relative loss of time, and won’t repeat it. Why put my camel two columns away from his elephant when I can instead put it three columns away? Therefore, after my setup, we will be following at most one previous game, at least as far as I am aware. Why shouldn’t I reflexively play my pet opening? I expect it would lead to a dynamic, unbalanced game, which I would much rather have than one in which I copy the Mob with a 180-degree rotation, effectively conceding disadvantage to the initiative of the Mob’s first move. That said, though, this game is a perfect opportunity for me to question I disagree umptions. Playing automatically under time pressure is necessary, but now I have days to consider, and I should make every effort to refrain from unthinking moves. So, what about opening with a decentralized elephant? But why? One idea would be to plan an attack on the Mob’s flank rabbit, but if I did that I would only prove my hypothesis that in a fluid position there are more important things to do than pull rabbits. I am more tempted to copy blue22 and put my elephant on c7 for an immediate elephant-horse attack on c3. However, after playing a few opening lines, I find it rather awkward for me if the Mob responds with elephant to c5, when I need to move my elephant back to the center anyway to get it into the game. Furthermore, blue22's setup almost requires one to re-occupy c7 after the elephant leaves it, costing one tempo that I would by trying to save. Therefore my elephant goes on e7 as usual, facing the Mob's camel, the fattest target it can have in any case. My camel goes on g7 as explained above. A minor additional consideration is that the Mob's setup is a bit more in tune with advancing its eastern horse than its western one, and my eastern camel stops that. With my camel on g7, I quite like rabbits flanking it on h7 and f7. I am not worried about these rabbits being pulled, since I often want them advanced in any case for the safety of my camel, and/or to help a swarm if I give up my camel hostage. I realize, though, that one of my stated purposes in having rabbits behind my traps, namely that they allow me to immediately race in the opening when I am Silver, no longer applies with my camel on the flank. If the Mob takes my f7 rabbit, I take a cat, they take my camel, and I take a horse, I have lost materially. So a direct race is out. I guess I don't mind that, because the Mob can decline the tension represented by a race, but they can't decline the tension represented by my flank camel. Since I am not immediately racing, I don't need a rabbit on c7. In fact, I find that I am much less likely to advance rabbits along with horses than I am to advance them along with my camel. Also a c7-rabbit sometimes makes it harder to frame a horse in the c6-trap, because I can't allow my rabbit to be pulled into the trap where it is in the way. So I think I will put a piece on c7 this game. Probably it should be a cat, because if I do get a horse frame, I don't want to waste a dog holding it in. Maybe I shouldn't even have an a7-rabbit, since I have no plans to advance rabbits on that side. I often find that when I set up my horses on b7 and d7, I'm eager to move the d7-horse to the b-file or even the a-file, so maybe I should start with horses on a7 and b7. Playing with that setup a bit, though, uncovers two reasons to be suspicious of it. First, if the Mob opens elephant forward four when I have a dog on d7, it is rather awkward because I don't want my dog flipped out. With my horse on d7 instead, I worry less because I don't mind my horse being flipped out. But the bigger reason for not having two flank horses is that it seems too committed to the single plan of getting a horse frame in c6. In some sharp opening lines my elephant doesn't quite have time to get any attack started in the west before being forced to play in the east, in which case the centralized horse can come in handy. How about a dog on a7? This would entail a rabbit on d8. I'm not so much worried about that central rabbit being pulled out in a way that endangers the rabbit itself, but again I recall horse-framing tactics where I needed to occupy d7 with a piece, not with a rabbit, because the defending elephant could flip whatever is on d7 into c6. So I guess I'll stick with an a7-rabbit in my setup, not because I have any use for the rabbit there, but because my dog in the center may have a job. One final consideration is whether to have a dog or a cat behind my camel. I am not at all eager to have my cat enter the game; cats belong at home defending against rabbits. The question, then, is whether my cat would more likely be forced into service from e8 or from g8. I don't have enough experience to know, but my hunch is that since my camel will staying at home like a coward at first, and will have friendly rabbits to help it advance when it does, my cat behind the camel will be safe and will not be called into action. Meanwhile the piece on e8 will have a lane forward immediately, because I will advance my elephant, and in some lines might need to help out at e6, so at first blush it looks more like a dog's job. I think I have decided on my setup. However, I have over four days left on this move and my reserve is full, so I don't benefit from moving now. I think I will instead try to anticipate the Mob's next move assuming I set up as planned, in case I see something that changes my mind. |
||||||
|
Title: 2g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:14am 2g: I note that the position after our two setups has never occurred in the history of Arimaa, so we are already in uncharted waters. That should remind me to stay on my toes and question my intuitions. The opening move that dominated play in 2004 was elephant forward four. Here is seems lame, as it only threatens to pull out a horse that I want to activate anyway. I could play very conservatively, answering 2g Ed2n Ed3n Ed4n Ed5n with 2s ee7s de8s hb7s ra7e, asking the Mob whether it has any plan. I expect the Mob's elephant on d6 would have to retreat with loss of time sooner or later. The favorite move of JDB, namely 2g Ed2n Ed3n Hb2n Hg2, would be solid and flexible if I had set up with a central camel, but here it seems like a waste of time for the Mob to advance the eastern horse. The horse on g3 is not likely to attack into the teeth of my waiting camel, and in some lines will actually be a target for my camel on g6. Nor does the horse on g3 make the f3 trap any safer against an elephant-horse attack from me; I have no horse on that side! More plausible is the favorite move of chessandgo (and many others), namely 2g Ed2n Ed3n Ed4n Hb2n, threatening a western elephant-horse attack. However, the Mob collectively surely knows that my general strategy with my decentralized camel is to try to take a horse hostage with my elephant on the side where I have two horses, and make credible frame threats based on having an extra horse in the region. Failing a frame, I might keep the horse threatened on b5 while my camel can play actively on the other wing because the Mob's elephant is tied to defense of its hostage horse. Given that I want to nab the Mob's western horse, will they seriously plan to advance it voluntarily? On the other hand, the Mob will eventually need a horse on b3 to defend against my elephant horse attack on the c3-trap, so the move doesn't waste time. Also it doesn't commit the Gold elephant to either flank. It seems a way to be aggressive while maintaining flexibility. I might answer 2g Ed2n Ed3n Ed4n Hb2n with 2s ee7s ee6s hb7s de8s, cutting off the option of the Mob's elephant attacking my camel while my elephant still very much faces the Mob's camel. The gold elephant could dive into e7, but the attack seems too premature to be dangerous. Basically the Mob would have to continue with western action, at which point we would just see whether I am right that I have more to gain than to lose. An idea that The_Jeh tried against my setup seems more critical. 2g Ed2n Ed3n Ed4n Ed5e indirectly targets my camel while cutting off my elephant from going after the Mob's camel. The success of my setup is predicated on Gold not having the timing to attack my eastern flank with his elephant, not in the opening, and not later in the game. I can hardly defend the east with my own elephant and expect to gain advantage, so if at any point the Mob chooses to attack the east with its elephant, my plan is to give up only a rabbit in the east while getting something more valuable in the west or center. So I can't exactly hang back against this opening move. I might try 2s ee7s de8s hb7s hd7s, planning to answer 3g Ee5e Ef5e Eg5n xxxx with the solid 3s ee6s de7s rf7w mg7w. I don't think the Mob gets anything by jumping into f7 with its elephant in that line; I can choose to force the elephant out either to the wing or to the center, my choice, and it must come out next turn, perhaps at a loss of time to avoid being smothered. Therefore the Mob wouldn't have any better play than pulling my h2-rabbit to h3 (where I would eventually advance it voluntarily), which gives me time to get rolling in the east. Surely the Mob wouldn't move its elephant right back to the center on move 4g, for a net loss of time. Of course, the Mob wouldn't need to attack my camel on move 3g. It could instead play against my western horses with its elephant and/or shift its camel west. This type of move, however, will at least give me time to activate my elephant in the west, and will tend to make the west the focus of action, which should slightly favor me strategically if I haven't given up anything else. If play is in the west, the centralized gold camel will probably have to pick a wing and move there, whereas my camel will already be on the wing where it wants to be. Playing through a few lines is persuading me that 2g Ed2n Ed3n Ed4n Ed5e is the only move by the Mob that doesn't already concede a slight advantage to my setup, so I fully expect this move, and won't be analyzing anything else. If they play this strong move I'm not sure who is winning, as the opening can get sharp in a hurry, and many terminal positions in my analysis are unclear, but I don't feel that the Mob having the first move necessarily puts me on my heels. My setup was a latent threat, and they have to act quickly and precisely to avoid drifting onto the defense right out of the gate. … After having written the above, I played a live game as Silver against chessandgo in the middle of the Mob's deliberations. Chessandgo responded to my unbalanced setup with the expected move of elephant up three and over one, whereupon I played the highly speculative move of advancing my flank horse two squares, along with advancing my central elephant and dog one each. Chessandgo didn't take the bait of attacking my exposed horse; without hesitation he moved his elephant to attack my flank camel. I emerged from that opening slightly worse, but I was correct that Gold had nothing better to do than to pull the rabbit on my camel flank on move five. My first mistake of that game was my own fifth move: I failed to get a horse hostage with my elephant as quickly as possible. I have no need to deviate before that; in fact a superficial analysis leads me to believe I will be a tiny bit ahead if the Mob Game follows the opening of my live game up to that point. I wonder whether that one live game prolonged the deliberations of the Mob, because I noticed a flurry of posts afterwards, and the Mob has gone almost seven days without moving. I hope they dip significantly into reserve, because they can't do better than elephant up three and over one, which I know from chessandgo's play that they were already considering. At worst I have tipped my hand and given them more time to analyze my counter that they would not otherwise have considered, but I am by no means certain I will play so speculatively in a postal game anyway, so I am as likely to have sent them on a wild goose chase as to have helped them. It is too much to expect that my live play will help lead the Mob into error, but I can at least hope that the Mob will start a slow descent into time pressure. |
||||||
|
Title: 2s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:22am 2s: Immediately after having written the above, I discovered both my hope and my fear proved false. The Mob moved a couple hours shy of a week, thus preserving their full reserve, but also they didn't play what I consider to be their best move. I wonder why not. Specifically I wonder what move chessandgo was advocating, since he played the critical elephant advance in our live game, but he normally plays 2g Ed2n Ed3n Ed4n Hb2n, exactly as the Mob has just done. Is it possible that the live game, although chessadngo won it, swayed the Mob away from the move 2g he used? I haven't looked at any response other than 2s ee7s ee6s hb7s de8s, and that move only superficially, but I don't mind losing most of my previous analysis in exchange for having a slightly better situation on the board. For me to do extra analysis is no problem; time is definitely on the side of the One in these games, because for the lonely player there is no communication overhead. I shall answer Ron Weasley's chat with a taunt, and then analyze at my leisure. … After studying the position a bit more, I continue to like 2s ee7s ee6s hb7s de8. Every step has an important function. The elephant steps not only centralize my strongest piece, they also block the Mob's elephant from harassing my camel on move 3g. The horse step prevents the Mob from launching an effective elephant-horse attack on move 3g. The dog step is the least critical of the four, but it shores up my camel-side without conceding any weakness, and I can't think of any step that is more important. The step ra7e would anticipate a horse frame and also shield that rabbit from being pulled by the Mob's horse, but either a horse frame by me or a horse charge by the Mob is more remote than a potential attack by the Mob's elephant against my f6-trap. Indeed, in some lines the Mob is threatening to pull my westmost rabbit, not with its horse, but with its elephant, in which case my rabbit is safer on a7 than tucked into b7, so moving it to b7 now could be a double waste of time. Definitely the rabbit tuck is low priority at the moment. I could advance my elephant a third step, but really I am not prepared to race. Not only would a further advance re-open a lane for the Mob's elephant to attack my camel, it would leave my elephant further from being able to help against a central elephant charge by the Mob. I like my position strategically, but I'm not yet ready for a tactical melee. By the same token, advancing my western horse two squares instead of one is consistent with my strategic goals, but seems tactically unsound as it would make it just too easy for my horse to be taken hostage. Given that my preconceived move looks strategically coherent, I'm only going to abandon it if there is some tactical flaw. The most forcing try by the Mob seems to be an elephant invasion with 3g Ed5n Ed6e de7n Ee6n. The Mob's threat is to push my f7-rabbit into f6, but my resource is to threaten to smother their elephant. After 3s mg7s rf7e ee5n ra7e, the Mob would have no time for any rabbit pull, and would have to push out immediately with something like 4g hd7s Ee7w hd6s Ed7s. But then 4s ee6s hd5w hc5n ee5s leaves me simply ahead on time, clearly more than equal despite moving second. The Mob would hardly have a better plan than attacking my exposed camel after all, but 5g Ed6s Ed5e Ee5e Ef5e seems well met by 5s rh7s rh8s rg7w mg6n, when I am even further along in my plans. A second response for the Mob would be a horse advance on my non-camel wing. Sometimes such an advance carries the threat of taking control of an enemy trap, but here I have two defending horses, so an attacking horse would be more likely to end up framed than secure on a good square. With an elephant-horse attack probably not in the cards, the purpose of the Mob's horse advance would be to pull a rabbit. This is a serious issue, because I only want advanced rabbits on my camel wing. On the other hand, the horse advance also leaves the Mob exposed to counter-attack. After 3g Hb3n Hb4w Ha4n Ha5n it looks to me like 3s ra7e hd7s ee5s ee4s is such a strong threat that the Mob will have not time to pull a rabbit. The only move that immediately pulls a rabbit and keeps everything safe is 4g Ha6n Ha7s ra8s Dd1n, but the exposed rabbit is more than compensated by my taking control of the c3-trap with 4s ee3w hb6s hb5s hb4s. It appears that I get in the first shot so the Mob would not be able to afford dueling elephant-horse attacks, and I would simply have a strategic edge. The third main option seems to be playing for a horse hostage with 3g Ed5w Ec5w Eb5e hb6s. At first I dismissed this threat entirely, because an elephant and two horses should win a fight against an elephant and one horse, but the Mob can also shift its camel over to the west. In that case the Mob's elephant, camel, and horse can be expected to win against my elephant and two horses. My possible salvation would lie in having a camel as the sheriff of the other wing. There would be a race in which the Mob is trying to pass off a hostage horse from its elephant to its camel, while my lone camel is trying to get as much compensation as fast as it can on the other wing. First I would get my horses into their ideal position with 3s hd7s hd6w hc6w hb5w. If the Mob is over-eager about getting a horse hostage with 4g Ec5w ha5s Eb5w Me2w, then my elephant-camel(!) attack 4s ee5s mg7s mg6s mg5s is tactically difficult to meet. Better for the Mob would be the patient 4g Ec5w Me2w Cc2w Md2w, after which 4s ee5s ee4w ed4w ec4w leads into a very double-edged fight. I have a legitimate threat to flip the gold horse into a4, so the Mob can't just shuffle its camel around. If instead the Mob pushes my horse only to a4, my horse could pull a rabbit to a3, much delaying a handoff. Therefore it seems the Mob must push my horse all the way to a3 with 5g ha5s Eb5w ha4s Ea5s. Then I must act fast with something like 5s mg7s mg6s mg5s mg4s, launching a type of race that is characteristic of my unbalanced setup. I expect to have a general advantage in these races, because it costs my camel fewer steps to move up and back than it costs the Mob's elephant to move right and left. When the Mob's elephant switches sides, it needs to follow up the switch with elephant action on my camel wing, to avoid simply losing time shuffling. So I need to be careful that I'm never offering to give up as much to a sustained eastern assault by the Mob's elephant as I expect to gain with my unopposed western elephant. On the other hand, I have to be reckless enough in the east with my camel that I can compensate for an eastern battle that I will be slowly losing. My entire unbalanced strategy hinges on being able to be both cautious enough with my camel and being able to get enough compensation on the non-elephant wing. Will my racing strategy work? I am certainly not so scared of this race that I will leave my horse cowering on b7, opening b6 for the Mob's horse. Even if I were truly afraid of my horse being pulled, the alternative is worse. But I'm not afraid: I like my racing chances a priori. I recognize that this sort of thing must be determined by practice rather than theory, but the theory is at least as good for me as it is for the Mob. Since I have decided on my move early, and the variations are not so sharp that I have to triple-check them, it wouldn't hurt me to move in fewer than seven days. On the other hand, I'm traveling a bit between Christmas and New Year, so it will actually work out better if I move just before my reserve runs out on Christmas Eve, let the Mob deliberate while I am on vacation, and return to the game after the holidays. |
||||||
|
Title: 3g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:26am 3g: I'm oh-for-two so far at predicting Mob moves, and the current move doesn't promise to improve my record. The possibility that worries me most from my analysis is 3g Ed5w Ec5w Eb5e hb6s, but the lines that are good for the Mob aren't obviously good for the Mob, and I don't expect the Mob to grab a horse on nothing but general principles. Taking a horse hostage with an elephant seems to be widely out of favor these days, perhaps because the most reliable bot-bashing method is to give away a horse hostage and then swarm the enemy's hostage-holding elephant. Of course, just because bots have no idea what to do with a horse hostage doesn't mean the hostage is worthless, but the general perception of worthlessness remains, and will probably rule out this move getting majority support. I recall from being on the Mob that there was always enthusiasm for the most active, most forcing move, whether or not it was the best. Charging with 3g Ed5n Ed6e de7n Ee6n certainly meets this definition. But unfortunately for me, the Mob is also excellent at refutations, and they will hardly overlook the possibility that I can threaten a smother. I expect their discussion will label the move as interesting but refuted. The immediate horse charge 3g Hb3n Hb4w Ha4n Ha5n is in keeping with the standard operating procedure of trying to get a rabbit pull, so it might be favored for that reason. A majority of people like to pull rabbits. Again, though, I have a near-refutation tactically. The Mob must consider the possibility that I will hit back rather than defending, and they shouldn't like what they see in those lines. The only benefit the Mob could get from playing this move is adding to my false sense of confidence. What about moving the elephant to b6 with either 3g Ed5w Ec5w hb6e Eb5n or 3g Ed5w Ec5w hb6w Eb5n? To me it looks a bit dodgy for the Mob to decentralize its elephant so soon. I expect I could meet either move just fine with 3s hd7s ee5s ee4s mg7s, with a threat to either flip out the Mob's camel or to occupy g3 with my camel while the Mob's elephant is on vacation. Probably the Mob will play some hybrid move instead, i.e. perhaps they will not devote all four steps to the same purpose. Their elephant might well go to b5, but wait there until next turn to decide whether to pull my horse or my rabbit. That would leave two steps for general development, albeit non-obvious steps. Normally putting a horse on g3 would be automatic, but in this position that creates a target for my camel, so it is less clear. Advancing the camel is another generally useful move, but advancing it directly toward my elephant would be unwise. Perhaps instead the Mob camel could shift west to get ready to receive my horses in a hostage handoff; I guess that makes sense even if the east is left weaker. But that shift makes the Mob's rabbit on e1 look rather foolish: rotating the horse forward to g3 becomes almost mandatory so that the g1 dog can move up too and let the central rabbits over. I will therefore predict 3g Ed5w Ec5w Me2w Hg2n, although I have little chance of being right because the last two steps are malleable. The threat to flip my horse is non-trivial. On the other hand, I have what I wanted from the opening. The Mob has already let me cut off the sharp plan of attacking my camel, and I just don’t believe that pulling my rabbits is fast enough, so one way or another they will play against my western horses. This will tend to tie up both of our elephants in west and free my camel for action in the east, which will directly test my hypothesis that this general situation gives me an advantage. |
||||||
|
Title: 3s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:26am 3s The Mob played 3g Hb3n Hb4n Hb5w Me2w, confounding my predictions once again. Superficially the Mob's choice has the same weakness that 3g Hb3n Hb4n Hb5w Ha5n would have had, in that my counter attack with, say, 3s ee5s ee4s ee3w hd7s poses a triple threat of taking a cat, flipping out the gold camel, or launching an elephant-horse attack against c3. Unfortunately, it looks as though 4g Cc2w Cb2n Md2w Hg2n adequately stops the first two threats and prepares to answer the elephant-horse attack 4s hb6s hb5s Cb3s hb4s with 5g Ra2n Cb2w Mc2w xxxx. It never occurred to me that the Mob might be able to fight off my elephant horse attack without bringing home its elephant. Curses! I must analyze to see whether I can salvage an acceptable counter-attack, or must instead immediately play against the Mob's advanced horse with my elephant, probably allowing a rabbit pull in the mean time. … I have given some thought to 3s ee5s ee4w ed4w ec4w, attempting to play directly against the Mob's advanced horse. Although I would get some strategic pull, after 4g Ha5n Ha6s ra7s Md2n, it is truly annoying for me to have a rabbit on a6, because I need that square for my horse-framing tactics. This annoyance is so great that it might even counterbalance my other advantages, so I will play another move if I can find one that seems both good and clear. Further analysis apparently confirms that I can't make the elephant-horse attack work following 3s ee5s ee4s ee3w hd7s 4g Cc2w Cb2n Md2w Hg2n, but I have a glimmer of hope for the offensive play: If instead I change my fourth step to 3s ee5s ee4s ee3w mg7s, then the Mob's otherwise lovely defensive move 4g Cc2w Cb2n Md2w Hg2n can be well met with 4s ed3n ed4w ec4n ec5w, taking the Mob's horse hostage before it can disrupt my western rabbits. I believe that in that position I would have the whip hand, because the Mob would have no clear plans, and I could persecute the hostage horse at my leisure, playing to eventually frame it in c6, or at least tie down the Mob's elephant and camel while my own camel operates in the east. That would be precisely the strategic situation my opening setup was angling for. (Indeed, if my elephant could fly directly to b5 on the present move I would gladly do it without an intermediate threat.) Of course, the Mob could choose other means to defend itself from 3s ee5s ee4s ee3w mg7s in a way that does not leave its horse hung out to dry on a5. But the sharp 4g Ed5e Ee5e Ef5e Re1n, attempting to threaten my camel, is left flatfooted by 4s rh7s rh8s mg6n hd7s. I don't think I need to fear that the Mob will switch wings with its elephant just yet. And trying to pull my rabbit anyway with 4g Ha5n Ha6s ra7s Re1n just seems like a way for the Mob to enter a rabbit-pulling race at a disadvantage after 4s ed3e ee3w Re2n xxxx. (Incidentally, that last variation demonstrates one disadvantage of the Mob's choice to switch its e1-dog and g1-rabbit relative to the 99of9 setup; maybe in truth the chessandgo setup is slightly technically inferior to the 99of9 setup instead of the other way around.) I am provisionally a fan of the straightforward counter-attack for 3s, and will examine further possible responses by the Mob. … My preferred attacking move seems to be holding up under analysis, although there are too many possible replies to list. Generally speaking, the Mob's western horse by itself can't do anything other than pull a rabbit. If the Mob doesn't spend all four steps on the pretty defense, because they want to use at least one step advancing their western horse, my elephant can make a better rabbit pull or the equivalent. If the Mob wants to make a bigger threat than pulling a rabbit, though, it will need to use its elephant to dislodge my b6-horse, and if the Mob moves its elephant out of the center my threatened camel flip becomes very serious. I am quite fond of using my fourth step to advance my camel, because the Mob may want to respond to my elephant advance by putting its eastern horse on g3, and my camel would be a greater threat to it on g6 than on g7. Nevertheless, I should give due diligence to using my fourth step to tuck my a7-rabbit into b7. If it turns out that the Mob's best answer to my elephant charge is to accept a rabbit-pulling race, then I must at least consider a move that would leave me better off in such a race. … The move 3s ee5s ee4s ee3w ra7e is very tempting because it gains me time if the game turns into a rabbit-pulling race. On the other hand, if I end up taking the Mob's horse hostage with my elephant, the rabbit tuck ends up losing me time. If the Mob calculates along the same lines that I do, then they might respond to my camel advance by initiating a rabbit-pulling race, but respond to my rabbit tuck by letting me take their horse hostage. I analyzed for some time under the assumption that my fourth step would cause a divergence in the Mob's response into two very different types of games. I wanted to see which type of game I would like better, and ultimately concluded that the rabbit-pulling race will favor me even if I don't tuck my rabbit. My centralized elephant is making incidental threats that will constrain the Mob's options, so it looks like I will be able to capture the Mob's central rabbit while returning with my elephant in time save my flank rabbit, if not permanently, then at least long enough to gain time in the long run. Therefore my logic has doubled back on itself to the point that I don't think the Mob will start a rabbit-pulling race in response to either of my two options, and will let me take its horse hostage with my elephant in either case. According to that conclusion, 3s ee5s ee4s ee3w mg7s is clearly the better move, because in the hostage-related maneuvering I will have the b7 square available to rotate my pieces through if necessary. My move preference has clarified, but of course the value of my move depends entirely on whether I am correct to believe that taking the Mob's horse hostage with my elephant is a good strategy. I obviously can't calculate concretely that far ahead. I'm excited, though, that the opening may hinge on exactly the strategic dispute I anticipated when I set up my pieces with a decentralized camel. … I entered my move this afternoon, and was about to send it, when suddenly 3s mg7s ee5s ee4s ee3s looked attractive. Why not directly go after the Mob's exposed e1 rabbit? I closed out the game window to give it more thought. Unfortunately, after a closer look, I am at best equal in the rabbit-pulling race after 4g Hg2n Cc2w Cb2n Md2w 4s ee2n Re1n ee3w Re2n 5g Ha5n Ha6s ra7s Ed5e, and if I belatedly abandon the rabbit to chase the Mob's horse with 5s ed3n ed4n ed5w ec5w, then 6g Ee5e Ef5e Eg5e mg6s seems to leave me worse off. I guess I will play 3s ee5s ee4s ee3w mg7s while I am only a couple of hours deep into my reserve. |
||||||
|
Title: 4g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:27am 4g The Mob dipped a couple of days into reserve on its last move. They have lots of ways to defend my two threatened cat captures or counter-attack, so I do not expect them to be able to regain time. From my experience as a Mob member, only moves that avoided a preferential vote in favor of a consensus vote were able to add to the reserve, and this doesn't look like a situation for consensus. On the contrary, I somewhat expect them to eat further into reserve. My inclination heading in to the game was to avoid complications because the Mob will play better in sharp positions, but now it occurs to me that seeking complications might also be my best way to put time pressure on the Mob. I should generally have a time advantage over the Mob because I don't have to communicate or vote, which tempts me to try to create time pressure for the Mob and exploit it. It is not clear to me whether I should just play the board, or play the board plus the opponent, or play the board plus the opponent plus the clock. Obviously the position is the most important, most tangible factor. I should be able to win a won position regardless of the opponent. On the other hand, wouldn't it be foolish to play into the teeth of the Mob's strength? If the objectively best move leads to a type of position the Mob will play well, then I had better have worked it out extra carefully that my move is good. And I know from postal experience that I can look at a position for a long, long time without finding the best move, which undermines my confidence that I can ever justify ignoring the opponent by the argument that my preferred move is "objectively best". I think I must factor in the Mob's strengths at least to some degree. As for the clock, though, my calmer thought is that I will just get myself into trouble if I pay too much attention to the Mob's time situation. For the present, the one concession I will make to trying to create time pressure is this: if the Mob plays 4g Hg2n Cc2w Cb2n Md2w as I am predicting, then I will immediately respond by taking their horse hostage. I have looked the position over once again, and I really don't have any other plays. Either the resulting elephant-holding-horse-hostage position is good for me or it is bad for me, but I will have to go for it. On any other Mob move, though, I will forget about the Mob's clock and take it slowly. One possibility for the Mob that I didn't examine before I sent my move is 4g Ed5e Ee5e Ef5e Hg2n, attacking my camel and offering the c2-cat as a sacrifice. For me to take the cat with my elephant doesn't appear to give me sufficient compensation for the camel hostage I would be giving up. The super-sharp 4s hd7s hb6s hb5s hb4s appears more promising, but I can't quite see my way clear through the tactics after the Mob flips my camel on 5g. I am afraid that I would get the worst of it in that line as well. That leaves me only the staid 4s rh7s rh8s mg6n hd7s. Fortunately my boring counter-move looks strong. The Mob wouldn't be able to consolidate and continue to play against my camel with 5g Cc2w Cb2n Md2w Eg5n, due to a powerful elephant-horse attack with 5s hb6s hb5s Cb3s hb4s 6g Ra2n Cb2w Mc2w Ha5e 6s ed3s ed2w hd6s hd5s. So I'll put the elephant switch in the category of "hope for but don't expect". I was worried for a bit that the Mob might be able to avoid the horse hostage (and avoid any other disadvantage) with a scattering move like 4g Md2e Cc2w Ha5n Ed5w. But all the versions of that move that I have tried for the Mob let me get some compensation by pushing out the camel with 4s ed3s Me2n ed2e hd7s or something similar. It turns out to be important that my elephant is near the Mob's camel and the Mob's elephant is not near my camel. This development is gratifying because that was one of the justifications for my opening setup. The Mob can obviously defend the c3 trap by putting a rabbit on b3, but I have given such moves hardly any consideration at all. There would potentially be some benefit to the Mob in a western rabbit advance, namely that it would make it safer for their camel to operate in the west, which in turn might make it a bigger threat for them to pull out one of my two western horses with their elephant. This would combine with the threat of a western swarming attack. Realistically, though, the Mob will not be able to stomach trailing in a rabbit-pulling race, even less so if chessandgo is calling the shots. It ain't gonna happen, so I ain't gonna worry about it. Although the Mob's move 3g was a strong move I had not considered, as I await 4g I am nearly as optimistic as I was then. The critical move, i.e. the move that I think the evaluation of the position ultimately depends on (4g Hg2n Cc2w Cb2n Md2w), is the move I expect. If the Mob plays any of the other moves I have considered, it should give me a small, clear advantage, as opposed to a small, unclear advantage. |
||||||
|
Title: 4s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:32am 4s I was right that the Mob wouldn't move quickly. They needed eleven and a half days, putting a noticeable dent into their reserve, now down to two weeks from the original three. Once again, however, they made a move I did not even consider. Their choice of 4g Cf2w Rf1n Ha5n Ed5w has advantages: it doesn't expose a rabbit on e2 for me to pull; it doesn't allow the Mob's advanced horse to be taken hostage; it intensifies the threat to pull my h7-rabbit; it adds the threats of pulling out my b6-horse and taking over the c6-trap; it prevents me from an immediate elephant-horse attack against the c3-trap; and of course it prevents me from making an immediate capture in one of the Mob's home traps. On the other hand, my immediate reaction is that 4s ed3e ee3w Ce2n hd7s, defending at home while again threatening both of the Mob's cats, should be strong for me. Yes, the cat, unlike a rabbit, can retreat, but how? That seems to require three steps, leaving the Mob no time for a rabbit pull or a horse pull. And if the cat doesn't retreat, getting it offside could easily compensate me for a pulled rabbit. My second horse prevents a quick takeover of the c6-trap, so it seems the Mob's main plan would be to try to take a horse hostage and ferry it back to their waiting camel, with the fourth step Re1n as the only way to prevent a cat capture using only one step. If, however, I can get a cat capture while the Mob is fussing with my horse, it could work out fine for me, depending on the position. I'll have to play out some lines to know. Also I have to remember to look at moves other than my first instinct. The Mob's elephant going even one square west gives my camel that much more breathing room in the east, and slightly increases my ability to threaten their centralized camel with my elephant. Maybe there is something there. The only thing certain on first analysis is that I won't be making a snap reply. … A bit more examination leaves me with a somewhat murky impression of the position. Playing defense with 4s ed3n ed4w ec4w eb4n seems reasonable, but not nearly as favorable as lines in which I could take the Mob's advanced horse hostage without having my rabbit pulled to a6. This will be my backup move if my instinctive choice doesn't pan out. The camel pull 4s ed3n Md2n ed4w Md3n seems to be refuted by 5g Ec5e Md4s Ha6s ra7s, although I could look at continuing with 5s ec4n ec5w eb5e Ha5e if nothing else panned out. It seems rather similar to playing defense immediately, but there may be a subtle distinction that I am missing. Mostly I have looked at my favorite move, which still seems critical. It seems the critical lines involve my winning a cat in exchange for a camel holding a horse hostage. I am saddened to discover that some of the lines work out badly for me, but others work out well. For the first time in the game I can't keep the most important lines straight in my head, and I need to create an analysis tree. 4s ed3e ee3w Ce2n hd7s 5g Hg2n Hg3w Ce3s Dg1n 5s dd8s hd6s dd7s hd5s 6g Ec5s Hf3e Ha6s ra7s 6s mg6s mg5s mg4n Hg3n 7g hd4e Ec4e he4s Ed4e 7s mg5n Hg4n mg6e Hg5n 6g Cc2w Cb2n Md2w Hf3e 6s hd4e he4s Ce2w he3s 5g Ec5w Eb5e hb6s Re1n 5s Ce3n ed3e de7s de6s 6g hb5s Ec5w Md2n Dd1n 6s de5w Ce4n Md3n ee3w 5g Rf2w Hg2w Ha6s ra7s 5s Ce3n ed3e Ce4n ee3n =+ … I followed the Mob game in my World Championship Preliminary game against Adanac, because I believe that I am winning, or at least creating more chances than Silver normally gets. I feel that it is up to Gold to deviate or prove that my opening is unsound. Unfortunately, that game revealed my planned 4s and 5s from analysis. This increases the pressure to be right if I actually go down this line, because the Mob will be better prepared to respond. Still, I don't regret the exposure, because it got me a good position and appeared to fluster Adanac. To do well in the Mob game is prestige, but to do well in the World Championship is money. … I have dipped a few days into reserve myself this turn. The primary culprit is spending my Arimaa time preparing my book. One result of that interlude will be that I will switch to short notation for this commentary just as I have switched in my book, because now that I have gotten used to the paradigm, it is easier to read and write as well as being shorter. I looked at the position with fresh eyes, and for a moment was attracted to 4s ME^HdvRa7>, but a bit of examination convinced me that the response 5g Dd^M<<E< leaves me with nothing. Indeed, pulling out the gold camel now would merely help get it to a better square. In this game it may turn out that I never get to launch my western EH attack, but even so the threat of it truly constrains the Mob's options. My present thought is that the Mob camel is misplaced in the center, and that the relatively better location of my camel is the reason that I am doing well in the opening. Not only could I find no move better than 4s E>CE<Hdv, I couldn't poke any holes in it upon further analysis. I know that the Mob must be expecting this move in light of my game against Adanac, but I can't find a satisfactory response for them. Obviously I can't look at every line, but in general the lines I play out seem to be working out well for me. The Mob's main threat of pulling out my b-horse and passing it off to their camel is a little bit too slow given the position of their camel. |
||||||
|
Title: 5g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:35am 5g I don't think the Mob will have the guts to play 5g E<HE>Re^ as Adanac did against me in the World Championship preliminaries. In part I think that my response from that game, 5s EC^Devv is actually dangerous to them and they will want to avoid it. But also they know that I know that they know what I played against Adanac. I had a long think, and followed that public game anyway, so I must have calculated that I am winning that line, right? I expect this consideration to intimidate the Mob away from Adanac's continuation. I'm sure the Mob would like to use two steps to pull my rabbit to a6 with their horse. The trouble with that plan is that only two steps are left for home defense, which means they would have to allow me to get their cat offside or at least pull out a rabbit. My central rabbit pull should be at least as valuable as their flank rabbit pull. I don't expect any move from the Mob which concedes that they have lost the opening, even by a little bit; instead I expect them to try to preserve tension and maintain hope that they have won the opening. The Mob could use three steps on defense and one to put their elephant on b5, for example 5g Hg^<CevE<. They may be attracted to this plan because their major threats to flip out my b6-horse and/or take over the c6-trap are intensified by the elephant step. If they are paying attention, though, I think they will find it is too tactically dangerous to decentralize their elephant another square, bringing to life my central horse and flank camel. The normal-looking waiting move 5g Hg^<CevH> leaves the horse directly opposite my camel, which I think gains time for me after the obvious pull 5s MvvHM^. Therefore I will predict the awkward-looking developing move 5g Hg^<CevDg^. It's not pretty, but it also is not clear how I could take advantage of it. It fits my opinion of the Mob that they would focus on tactical shots and not mind having pieces on weird-looking squares. The Mob's hope would be that they have conceded no disadvantage and will get at least a rabbit pull after my elephant gives up on the center and plays 5s E^<<^. Before I would respond in that way, however, I would give a long, hard look at 5s HdvDdvvHv, threatening both an immediate capture in the c3-trap, and threatening to swing my central horse around to g3, initiating a hyper-aggressive double-trap attack strategy. |
||||||
|
Title: 5s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:36am 5s The Mob played 5g Hg^<CevDg^. At last I have predicted a Mob move, so I know it is possible! Now that it has happened, though, I wish it hadn't. I predicted that move because it looks strong; I would have rather been wrong and faced a weak move. My lone elephant has no more targets to attack, so I must either play defense now, or I must raise the stakes and add a horse or camel to my attack. What I should have expected but didn't was that my choice of a predictable move allowed the Mob to regain reserve time. Their discussion this time had only a few posts and lasted less than five days, so I infer they did not have a formal vote, and merely agreed on a move that had been suggested in the previous move's discussion. Unless I miss my guess, the Mob will not be expecting 5s HdvDdvvHv at all, so if I play this move they will be forced to dip into reserve time again to respond to it. On the other hand, I must not get trapped into playing the clock instead of playing the board. I see that my analysis tree from 4s didn't include the possible responses 6g EvEH>Hf> and 6g EvEH>Hf<, either of which may refute my preferred move. If I can't make the horse charge work, I'll have to consider various camel advances and also the boring 5s E^<<Ra7>. … I looked for a bit at 5s MvvvRh7v, and I liked it just fine if the Mob's elephant immediately crosses, because I intended to run away. 6g E>>>v 6s R6vvM^^ leaves me in no danger and with a noticeable time gain. Unfortunately, the Mob wouldn't have to cross immediately, and could instead inch a step closer with 6g Rh1<EvRHhv, blocking my capture threat and threatening to continue with 7g E>>>>. My camel would then have to retreat empty-handed to avoid being taken hostage. My preferred move 5s HdvDdvvHv seems to be holding up under greater scrutiny. If the Mob pushes my horse to e4, then 6s DevvHe>> seems to work in most lines. In a role-reversal, the Mob would be giving up its elephant-horse attack on the wing where my camel isn't in order to defend against my elephant-horse attack on the wing where their camel isn't. And what choice would the Mob have? I believe they can't race my EH attack with an EH attack of their own. I have a horse at home on b6, which drastically slows their attack down, whereas they don't have a horse (or camel) at home on b3, which speeds my attack up. Therefore their elephant is strategically obliged to play defense against my advanced horse. The Mob could play for a "safe" rabbit pull with 6g RHhvEvHf>, but that allows me to start a rollicking fun double-trap attack with 6s DdvDevvv, followed by a camel advance against g3. The Mob's elephant doesn't seem to have time to stop both that and a potential EH attack against c3. Indeed, there seems to be a general theme in the position that both of the Mob's home traps are weak, and their elephant can only defend one. I don't see how the Mob's elephant can pursue a horse hostage in the east before shoring up the west which they have weakened with a horse advance. There are too many lines for me to keep straight, but I cling to the reassurance that the Mob's camel is not well-placed for a horse hostage handoff. One creative attempt at tactically refuting my horse advance would be 6g EvHE^, aiming for 6s E<CE>* 7g EHvM<<, sacrificing a cat to get a horse held hostage by a camel. Strategically their move is motivated by wanting to keep my horses on the same wing as the Mob's camel. I need to look at this tactical line more, because it is so far the line that is most making me question the soundness of my advance. … After further analysis of my horse charge, I have to admit that I don't really know what to think. I could never get the lines to play out the same way twice, particularly when the Mob cedes a cat capture to gain a horse hostage. In my past move summaries I have expressed confidence that I was winning the opening, but now that I'm going to take the opening into deep waters, it would be disingenuous to pretend that I have everything under control. At the end of the day I'm going to have to advance my horse on obscure justification. I haven't proved to myself that it works, but I haven't refuted it either. It just feels right. Does it feel that way because I won with swarming in the 2008 Postal Mixer, even from unsound positions? I don't know, and maybe by next year my feelings will be different. That's the beauty of Arimaa. I will regret not getting the Mob's horse hostage with my elephant. That would have been a theoretical dispute I relish. There are some people who won't believe that giving up a horse hostage to the opposing elephant is a disadvantage unless it is proven to them. Unfortunately, I want to win more than I want to prove that particular point. I will play the strongest-looking move that my limited analysis can uncover. The Mob has made sure of a rabbit pull (if only from a8 to a7) before I get a horse hostage, and that tips the scale slightly against my taking it. At the same time the Mob's horse has gotten even further from home defense, and the Mob has been unwilling to advance a rabbit to shore up c3. These decisions have helped them in the rabbit-pulling race, but have left c3 a little bit more vulnerable, which tips the balance slightly in favor of my counter-attack. The final weight on the scale is that my camel is poised for action whereas the Mob's camel is hemmed in, unless I play defense and allow the Mob camel to life. In short, although I may have overlooked something tactically, I feel my choice is strategically justified, if not outright invited by the Mob. Anyway, I won't be too sorry to have missed a chance at the elephant-holding-horse-hostage dispute, because I am quite directly making a statement in the other major theoretical dispute: is the opening of Arimaa essentially a rabbit-pulling contest? I claim that it is not. It may be good to have opposing rabbits pulled forward to weak positions, but who has time to make such pulls? There are more important things going on, or so I have been asserting. We will get the clearest insight into whether I am right if the Mob takes the bait, pulls the rabbit with 6g RHhvEvHf>, and permits my swarming semi-blockade on move 6s. Moves in which the Mob doesn't yet pull my rabbit leave the nature of the disagreement as yet unclear. If that happens, so be it. Some observers might look at this game as both sides playing soundly and waiting for the other side to make a blunder. I expect that there will be no blunders, especially not from the Mob, and instead the maneuvering will serve to bring the game to a position that each side thinks it is winning. That is to say, the contest is not about two opponents attempting the same strategy, where the winner is the one who has better execution; it is instead about two opponents with different judgment of what is important, where the winner is the one who has a more correct understanding. |
||||||
|
Title: 6g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:53am 6g I don't think the Mob will be able to stomach the cat sacrifice. The move may well be spotted and advocated by someone, but I don't think even a team effort will be able to analyze the cat sacrifice all the way to a forced material gain for the Mob. It will remain a concrete present loss in exchange for a nebulous future gain. When the ballots hit the box, the Mob will vote short-term and concretely. I will instead predict 6g RHhvEvHf>, not because it is the best move, but for psychological reasons. The Mob will feel good to play a move that pulls a rabbit, because they played for a rabbit pull in the opening. It would be psychologically painful for them to admit that going after the rabbit was a waste of time in the first place; pulling the rabbit has some chance of proving the Mob right, whereas shifting strategy feels like an early admission of error. Everyone likes to have evidence that they are right, even if it is self-manufactured evidence. I say this because I am projecting my own psychology onto the Mob. Possibly my best plan on move 5s was to chase the Mob's exposed horse with my elephant, but if so, then it was probably also the best plan on move 4s. If my elephant was going to leave the center anyway, it should not have first made a move that gains time for the Mob. But if my elephant stays in the center, then 4s didn't necessarily lose time. Thus I played my actual move 5s in order to justify the 4s that I played, and to avoid admitting that my 4s might have been a mistake. An interesting twist to the psychological drama is the possibility that a rabbit-pull strategy was initially correct for the Mob, and it has only become wrong now that I have advanced my horse. It may be that to distract them from a small gain, I had to offer them a bigger gain. The Mob could shift gears now in the confidence that my move 5s was a sign of desperation. They could feel that their threatened rabbit pull forced me to make a bad move which they can take advantage of instead of pulling the rabbit. But it is not in human nature to be so psychologically nimble. Instead of taking the best course of action and instructing ourselves to feel good about it, we humans take the course of action that feels good and instruct ourselves to believe that it must be best. One reason the Mob will be tempted by 6g RHhvEvHf> is that it threatens to push my horse to e3, fencing it and winning it the next move. Superficially it appears that to save my horse I am obliged to advance my camel, after which the Mob could push back my horse and attack my camel. Lucky for me I have the swarming option in my back pocket. I expect the Mob to overlook the swarm or discount its power if they see it. In spite of many swarming successes of late, it is still deeply ingrained that swarming is risky and probably unsound. ... Today chessandgo commented on my game against clueless that "a horse hostage is worth significantly more than a camel hostage in my opinion, 'under the proper conditions' as you say jdb, basically that gold has an advanced piece (Horse) on the hostage wing that silver's camel cannot mess with within a move or 2". That describes the type of hostage the Mob could get against me by sacrificing a cat, and since chessandgo rarely comments on games these days, I can't help but wonder whether his comment now is part of a raging debate within the Mob. Given that a camel hostage is worth slightly more than a cat, getting my horse hostage by their camel must be worth far more than a cat, in chessandgo's opinion. I obviously don't rate a camel holding a horse hostage so highly, or I wouldn't have offered it up for a cat. It is interesting to add this positional feature to rabbit pulls, horse frames, and elephant-holding-horse hostage as things chessandgo and I disagree about. How can the two leading players be at odds about so many fundamental questions? The Mob has just overstepped their week for this move and started dipping into reserve, so even if my move wasn't good, at least it may have been unexpected and complicated. |
||||||
|
Title: 6s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:53am 6s The Mob played 6g Cc<^M<Hf> two days into reserve. This is a very natural looking move that makes me wonder why I thought the Mob would be forced to use its elephant on home defense. I suppose I thought pulling out the Mob's g3-horse with my camel would be devastating, but now I can't remember why I thought that. So the Mob didn't pull my h-rabbit, but instead maintained both the threat to pull it and the threat to play E<HE>Ha>, securing the nice square on b6 for its horse. Apparently since they didn't execute the rabbit pull threat when they had a chance, it is the horse position that they are really after. I said that this game might prove to be a theoretical contest over whether rabbit pulls are worthwhile, but that won't be true if the Mob is as uninterested in rabbit pulls as I am. For my move I find 6s MvvHd>> very tempting, because that would certainly force the Mob's elephant to change quadrants after all, before getting it horse onto b6. Unfortunately it appears that in some lines I would give up my camel hostage in exchange for winning just the Mob's f2-rabbit. I regret that the Mob got smart and rotated its cat away from f2. Nevertheless, there may be something in the attack I am overlooking; I will examine it further. The obvious move 6s MvvHM^ appears much safer. I think it is forcing enough that the Mob can't afford 7g E<HE>Ha> due to 7s HM<Hd>>. So the Mob would have to play defense with either an elephant crossing, or by unfreezing and running away. I believe that if the Mob's elephant crosses, it will work out in my favor. I can retreat my camel at the "cost" of exposing a rabbit, but if the Mob's elephant then goes back west, the advanced rabbit is actually a time gain for me, because it makes my camel threats more potent. I simply need to verify that if the Mob's elephant stays in the east I can do damage in the west more quickly. The Mob's other defensive option of running away also looks all right for me. They can't end the move with g3 unoccupied, because my d4-horse will march right in to a strong square. So whatever is left in g3 I can pull right back to g4 for three steps. If we get into a trade of three steps to pull and three to retreat, I think I can make better use of my fourth step than the Mob can, because I want to push a rabbit up the h-file but the Mob doesn't have a similar incremental improvement to its position. Meanwhile the way for the Mob to avoid a three-for-three step trade is to put a rabbit on h4, but then I can pull that rabbit with my camel to good effect, or so it appears to me. At the end of the analysis, the Mob and I each have an elephant in the west, so we can each prevent the other from making a capture there, but my camel is the sheriff of the east, so I'm the only one that can make a capture there. The Mob has to get a positional feature in the west that is worth more than what my camel is doing in the east. ... I haven't had much time to analyze this week, and the weekend promises to be busy too, so I'm just going to close my eyes and move here on Friday night and pick up a little reserve. Pulling the Mob's horse with my camel looks safe enough. If they have a strong reply or I have a strong move I am overlooking, too bad. That's just the cost of being busy. |
||||||
|
Title: 7g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:54am 7g I was startled to realize this evening that the Mob has overstepped its week, and is dipping into reserve as I write. My move 6s was very natural and straightforward, so they can hardly have been taken by surprise. If that move wasn't in their analysis tree, they must not have had an analysis tree. Indeed, I would not have been surprised if the Mob had gained reserve after my 6s, just like they did when I played the 4s they expected from my World Championship game against Adanac. What accounts for the Mob's indecision? Perhaps they have been distracted by the most exciting Computer Championship ever, not to mention the World Championship which is still underway. Certainly I have been distracted myself, but then again, it wasn't my move. Taking time off on the opponent's move is not nearly as costly as slacking on your own turn. Unfortunately, if it is mere slacking, I can expect the Mob to get much stronger when the tournament season is over and the Mob game is (relatively speaking) the most interesting event left. Another possibility for the Mob's slow decision might be that there are many plausible options in the current position. The Mob has at least three quite different choices: defense with small pieces, an elephant crossing, and ignoring my horse pull in favor of getting the Mob's horse into b6. It can be wise to take a little extra time when the possible courses of action are so divergent. And even if the choices are not drastically different from one another, it can be confusing to have many reasonable variants. However, a fresh look at the position after a week off gives me some hope that the Mob's slowness has a more promising explanation. Perhaps they are simply having trouble finding any good move. I had initially made an off-hand prediction of 7g Dg^Hg<vDd^, but it seems I can counter that to good effect by blasting my camel into g3. Indeed, just now when I played out a few variations, it seemed to be of considerable importance that my last move brought my camel from g6 up to g5. My more-advanced camel means that if I answer a retreating move by the Mob with any type of attack against the f3-trap, my attack will arrive one step faster than anything I could have launched on move 6s. This is potentially very good news for me, because I already thought poorly of the Mob's elephant crossing and horse-to-b6 options. If the status-quo retreats are also unattractive to the Mob, then what plans are left at their disposal? I think I must alter my prediction to the much looser move 7g Ra2^Rh2^^Hgv. If the Mob is desperate, they might just give up on the pretense that they can get an advantage in a rabbit-pulling race in any variation. In the longer term, supposing the Mob is truly in positional difficulties and I can maintain the pressure, they might have a considerable stretch in which it is difficult to find a good move, and therefore difficult to move quickly. I love to imagine the Mob bouncing around alternatives that are all subject to refutation. What fun if they start thinking they can't play X but they can't play Y either, so they can't even decide! Well, perhaps there is another explanation. Perhaps I am spinning a dream, but the dream comes close to what I will have to bring about in order to win this game. My best hope truly lies in demoralizing the Mob, grinding them down so they feel hopeless and cease to function as a team. Once they are no longer enthusiastic and rallying together, the game should be no more difficult for me to win than any ordinary postal game. |
||||||
|
Title: 7s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:55am 7s The Mob finally played 7g Dg^Hg<vE> after twelve and a half days, paring down their reserve almost to nine days. I looked back at a couple of critical moves from the 2007 Mob game: 28s when there was a three-way tie with a re-vote, and 35s when there was an extremely unstable tactical situation. In both of those cases the Mob moved in ten days. I am at a loss to explain the Mob's slow decision on 7g. Perhaps a complex situation delayed the first vote, and then they needed a tiebreaking revote as well? I will definitely not move quickly in response. The Mob's elephant step completely changes the strategic picture by giving up the threat to my b6-horse while creating threats against my camel and my d4-horse. I can't immediately see through the ramifications, but I am afraid the move was strong. ... Apparently the Mob didn't waste its long think. That one step to centralize its elephant puts a kink in all my eastern plans, yet doesn't stray far enough east to open up the west for me. I can't occupy b3 with either of my horses, or drag the b3-cat to b4, or occupy g3 with my camel. Obvious-looking plans that involve moving my d4-horse to f4 seem to falter because my camel can be pushed to g4. I gave a look to 7s Hd>>Devv, in order to give my camel an extra step of protection from the Mob's elephant, but 8g EDevv seems too strong a reply. I could certainly retreat my camel with 7s Hd>>>M^, but that seems so passive I fear the Mob would have time to pull a rabbit with 8g DgvHf>HaRv. I could pull the Mob's h-rabbit in response, but it is hard to find an advantage for me in the rabbit-pulling race. At the moment my only two candidate moves are 7s Hd>>>M< to deny the Mob's elephant any good crossing move, and 7s MvDM^Cgv to try to make the Mob's elephant commit to the east while I still have a second horse to help attack in the west. In the latter line I would be playing with fire after 8g E>>EM> 8s HbvvHCv, so I need a closer look before taking such a chance. ... The tactics just don't seem to be working out for me to move my central horse east. When both my camel and horse are over there, it is too fat a target for the Mob's elephant. Therefore I have reluctantly decided to pull the Mob's dog with my camel. For my fourth step it turns out that advancing my e7-dog is slightly more natural than advancing my g8-cat. I wish that I could secure any kind of safe advantage, but the type of game I chose (and the Mob's solid play) isn't leading to safety for me. It is the very nature of my flank camel strategy that I'm trying to lure the Mob's elephant into a futile, time-losing crossing with its elephant. My camel is bait, which will necessarily include some stomach-churning lines. If the Mob decides that it wants to take my camel hostage in the east, I must accept that, and act violently in the west to get sufficient compensation. At the start of the game, I had envisioned getting the Mob's horse hostage with my elephant before activating my camel. If I had achieved my dream position I would be threatening to capture a horse in exchange for the camel hostage, so the Mob's elephant would not be able to cross. Alas, I felt called to more aggressive play, so that now my western compensation can only come in the form of an attack against the c3-trap. In some lines I must commit my b6-horse to the attack, which also offers it as a hostage to the Mob's camel if their elephant comes home to help secure the area. To play this position well from either side will require fine judgment of wild, tactical races. Unfortunately, that should be exactly the Mob's strength, with many eyes (not to mention diverse bots) to examine crazy lines. I honestly can't tell who is winning this position objectively, but regardless of who is wining on the board, I have played into the Mob's strength. In such a position, I am much more likely to blunder tactically than the Mob is. My problem traces directly back to my decision to advance my second horse on move 5s rather than playing for an elephant holding horse hostage; it looks like I'm getting what I deserve. Of course, I won't let my complete uncertainty about the position deter me from talking trash in the game chat... |
||||||
|
Title: 8g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:55am 8g The Mob has an obvious threat to push my horse into c3 with 8g EH<v, but apparently 8s DM^> either forces the Mob to release my horse with a loss of time, or to lose a dog while securing my horse hostage with their camel. Chessandgo has said that a camel holding a horse hostage can be worth a whole horse, but I don't think this is one of those positions. The Mob is far too materialistic to give up a dog for a horse hostage that doesn't pay off within the analysis horizon. Instead the Mob might use two steps to threaten my horse and two steps to save its dog: 8g EH<Hf>Dg>. But the dog has not retreated far enough, so I will just secure it on h5 with my camel, again generating a capture threat before my horse can be secured by the Mob's camel. The Mob should fairly quickly reject taking my camel hostage via 8g E>>EM>. My counter-attack with 8s HgvvHCv is just too strong. An attack on the c3-trap is also the answer to some other Mob moves such as the lame rabbit pull attempt 8g E>>HhRv. The Mob can't bring its elephant east as a substitute for defending its dog. I am most concerned about 8g E>>Hf>Dg>. I am not sure if my attack on the c3-trap still works then, because my camel has lost three steps towards capturing the Mob's dog. The alternative for me is 8s Rh7vvM^ plus some fourth step, but that exposes my rabbit and invites the Mob to flip it to g4. This is my prediction for the Mob's move, because I am not sure I even have a good response. It seems the Mob also has a very reasonable move in 8g Rh2^^Dgv plus a fourth step. That rabbit advance would make it hard for my camel to attack anything but the rabbit itself. The Mob would have bought itself quite a bit of time before I could polish off their exposed rabbit. Still, it is not what I expect of the Mob to push rabbits unnecessarily. Probably they still think the game could devolve to rabbit pulling at some point, so they won't want to be behind. Yet another possibility for the Mob is to battle my three-step pulls with three-step retreats, and see who can make best use of the free fourth step. I expect to win that duel, because I am quite eager to push a rabbit up the h-file, while the Mob probably doesn't have a single step it feels like using anywhere on the board. (Assuming, again, that they are averse to pushing their own rabbits.) That would leave only an elephant step for the fourth: 8g Hf>Dg<vE>. The Mob's first step east with its elephant proved not to be a waste of time at all, but its second step east seems more likely to be misguided, as it leaves the west a bit more open without threatening much in the east. I think I could respond with 8s Rh7vvM^De>, leaving no eastern targets big enough for the Mob's elephant, which would be forced to run back west. |
||||||
|
Title: 8s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:56am 8s The Mob moved after ten and a half days, reducing their reserve to only five and a half days. Soon they will have to start moving within the allotted week. I hope the quality of their play will be weakened somewhat when they move within seven days per move, because so far their moves have all been solid. I totally didn't expect 8g E>>M^Rc^, the Mob's latest move. I have said how the Mob is unwilling to advance rabbits even when it is called for strategically, but their actual play belies my criticism. This is the second time they have advanced a rabbit behind a trap to help secure it. If they don't mind having rabbits behind their home traps it raises the question of why they didn't set up with rabbits there on move 1g, but I can't criticize a good plan just because it is inconsistent. Maybe setting up with rabbits on c2 and f2 is unsound, and the smart thing to do is exactly what the Mob has done: put them in place when called for. At the moment the Mob has four rabbits on the second rank while I have only three, so their rabbits are further forward than mine! The Mob's camel in c3 shuts down any hope I have of attacking the c3-trap with elephant and horse(s). Since I have no fast counter-attack, I am nearly forced to retreat my camel in order to buy time for a slower plan to take effect. With my strategic options looking very constrained, I expect to play 8s Rh7vvM^Hd^ in just a few days, recapturing some reserve time. My intention to move quickly means neither that I feel I am winning nor that I feel I have been cornered. It's just that one strategic plan clearly predominates, for better or for worse. Our camels have committed to opposite wings, as have our elephants. We are set up for a race, but I can't win the race with a multi-piece attack. Also I can't afford to break off the race and use my elephant to defend in the east. It seems we must eventually collapse into a position where both elephants are in the same wing as one of the camels, and at that time one player will have a free camel in the other wing. I want to be the one who has the free camel. Therefore my only viable option is for my lone elephant to make a threat in the c6-trap, strong enough and fast enough that it forces the Mob's elephant to defend the west, leaving my camel to rule the east. My plan is not hopeless, at least not superficially, because the Mob's camel on c3 is more exposed than it was on c2. Of course, I will have to play out a few lines to see how a race appears to shape up. It may be that my exposed rabbit on h5 will be too weak for me to save, in which case I will have to consider other camel-saving moves such as unfreezing with my dog or cat and getting my camel to h6. Also I will do some due diligence on alternative strategies such as flipping the Mob's camel to e3, or playing against the Mob's g4-dog with either 8s E>Hd>> or 8s E>^> plus a fourth step. I'm not in such a rush to move that I won't look around. Frankly, though, I expect this to be my easiest decision since the setup. ... My intuition was strong, but my analysis contradicted it. After some time at the board I have come to favor 8s Hd>>ME>. Pulling the Mob's camel with my fourth step is what I was missing before. My threat to the Mob's camel is entirely in earnest because the Mob might lose it in exchange for my horse in some lines if they fail to retreat. That threat alone wouldn't make my strategy right, but I'm also threatening to capture the Mob's f3-horse, and also threatening to flip the Mob's cat from e2 to e4. Add in to the mix that the Mob's dog on g4 is misplaced, and the combination of factors in my favor appears to offset the play that the Mob's elephant will have against my frozen camel and horse. At any rate my hope of moving quickly has faded. The elephant-horse switch I am now favoring is sharp enough that I must play out more lines before committing to it. ... Argh! After further anaylsis, I don't like either of my moves. 8s Hd>>ME> can be answered effectively by 9g Dd^M^<<, leaving a position where our camels are on opposite wings as I wanted, but our elephants are on the wrong side. I could take a key square with 9s E^HfD>Hv, but then 10g Hf<M^HMv follows, and I don't have enough tactical tricks to save both of my horses. On the other hand, 8s Rh7vvM^Hd^ basically admits that my central horse charge was no good, as I have to retreat with loss of time. I've played out several lines, and my problem is time. I need to make a western threat as soon as possible, to force the Mob's elephant back west, to let my camel rule the east again. But sometimes it seems the Mob can capture my rabbit before I accomplish my goal. I am not happy. The time the Mob spent on its previous move was obviously worth it. At one point I thought I would be able to win by out-working the Mob, but this past week gives my hope the lie. I haven't had time for very thorough analysis. Although I somewhat suspect that my intended move doesn't work, I have already overstepped my allotted week and I feel pressure to move despite my misgivings about my position. Let the chips fall where they may. |
||||||
|
Title: 9g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:56am 9g No time to analyze, but I can at least take a stab at predicting the Mob's move: 9g Dg>RDvE<, pulling my exposed rabbit and centralizing their elephant. |
||||||
|
Title: 9s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:56am 9s The Mob played 9g CbvM< Dg>Hf> in two and a half days, boosting their reserve to ten days. I didn't think they could move so quickly unless I made a move they had anticipated. Now I wonder, though, whether they might have reached consensus quickly even without anticipating my move, just because they wanted to gain reserve and a safe move was available. I suppose my curiosity about that and many other things won't be satisfied until after the game. I don't know why I signed up for nine Postal Mixer games given that I knew I would still be defending the Challenge and still trying to get my book out when the tournament started. Now I no longer have time for the Mob game. For this move I will forgo any pretense of deep analysis, and play my gut move: 9s E^<<Cfv. Getting my elephant near the Mob's camel can't be far wrong, as it also brings my elephant within range of the Mob's advanced horse, and my strategic objective is to create a western threat with my elephant. The fourth step, though, has a ton of options, and I'm just picking one arbitrarily. The one tactical point to consider is my exposed d5-horse, which the Mob's elephant could push to d4. However, I could in response flee with my horse to g4, taking the Mob's h4-dog hostage, so I don't think I need to fear at the moment. If I could retreat my horse with one step, I would probably get it out of the way, but since I need two steps to retreat, it doesn't seem worth it. |
||||||
|
Title: 10g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:57am 10g I suspect the Mob will get right to work pulling my h-rabbit with two steps while using two steps in the west, something like 10g RDhvE<M>, but I really don't have time to tell whether or not it is a good move. |
||||||
|
Title: 10s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:58am 10s Wow, the Mob played 10g E<EHvHbv, using just under a week. Not only did the Mob not pull my rabbit, it retreated its horse a step, giving up the threat of pulling my rabbit. Also it chose to make the threat to my advanced horse that I said I didn't fear. Either the Mob has just made a strategically weak move, or I don't understand the position. Since I didn't analyze much on 9g, 9s, and 10g, the odds are that I just don't understand. It's time to catch up on analysis. ... My punishment for not analyzing is that the escape hatch I was relying on is not available. After 10s E>H>>> the Mob can play 11g HvE>>>, taking my horse hostage. I can save it with my elephant, of course, but then our elephants will be tied up on the side where I have my camel, not the side where the Mob has its camel. That is exactly the opposite of what I want to happen. The whole purpose of my setup was to get a horse hostage with my elephant on the side where I had two horses, thus freeing my camel to operate on the other side. A couple of years ago chessandgo told me that he always wanted his camel on the "fight side", but in this position at least his insight would be wrong. Indeed, I believe this position has turned on a light bulb for me. I am a step closer to understanding when it is good for an elephant to hold a horse hostage, and when it is bad. For me to give up a horse hostage to the Mob's elephant in the east right now would be terrible. I don't even have to play out lots of tactical lines to see it; strategically I would be whipped. I'm done analyzing that possibility. My next instinct was to consider a double-trap attack with 10s EM<DevMv. My pieces are generally further forward than the Mob's, so the attack is becoming more and more natural. Unfortunately, I seem to be just short of the timing I need after 11g EHvM^Dh<. I would lose material in the f3-trap before my swarm would be far enough advanced to contest f3 with little pieces alone. It's too bad there is a tactical refutation, because attacking would be a lot of fun, and strategically it seems invited. The failure of both my horse retreat and my all-out attack puts me in a tight spot. I guess the Mob move was pretty good after all. I moved last time by my gut feeling, but my strategic intuition was lacking. The only silver lining in the cloud is that next time I am in a similar situation, my intuition will be better, I hope. It seems that my only playable option left for me is to offer a horse trade with 10s E^HEv plus some fourth step. The horse trade would leave the Mob on move in a strategically sharp position. However, it would least be a fluid position in which I would have nearly-equal chances, as opposed to my other options which would get me in a strategic bind and let the Mob squeeze me. I refuse to be squoze. What worries me about offering a horse trade is that the Mob doesn't have to accept. Nearly any Mob move beginning with E< is a way for them to decline, which makes it hard for me to be sure that there isn't some devastating reply to my trade offer. However, the first reply I thought of, namely 11g E<Hb<M>> can be neatly refuted by 11s E>Hd^E>Dev, cutting the Mob's elephant off from the center preparatory to swarming the f3-trap. Seeing that this move could be refuted gives me hope to look further. I see also that the Mob could undo three steps 10s E^HEv with three steps 11g E<Hb<E>, so I had better have a more useful fourth step than any fourth step the Mob can muster, or else I have lost in the exchange. This increases the pressure on my horse trade offer. On the other hand, the most obvious fourth step for the Mob is to step its camel toward my exposed horse, and that seems to leave me in reasonable shape after 11s E>H>ME>. When I play out other three-step-for-three-step lines that the Mob might undertake, it seems to me that my only hope of progress is advancing my a7-rabbit. When I advance it to a5 on 11s, the Mob can't push it back to a6 without running afoul of the repetition rule, whereas if they push it forward to a4, it suddenly turns out that I have the timing for an all-out attack after all. And even in some other lines where the Mob declines the horse trade, having the a6-rabbit is useful. Therefore I am leaning hard towards the move 10s E^HEvRa7v at the moment. How ironic is it that I predicted the Mob would pull my rabbit on 10g, but now that they haven't I am seriously considering using 10s to push the same rabbit they didn't pull? Apparently my intuition failed me both on the value of an elephant holding a horse hostage, and on the value of an advanced rabbit. Whether I win or lose, I seem destined to learn a ton from this game. I'm tempted to move quickly again this turn because every move I have looked at other than offering a horse trade is clearly poor. I don't need to gain time, though, because I boosted my reserve to eighteen days on my last move, and if the Mob accepts the horse trade I will have a forced recapture that will gain me almost a whole week of reserve. Additionally I am losing reserve in all nine of my Postal Mixer games, and I have my final Challenge game tomorrow. It makes sense for me to let this move stew a while and come back to it next week. ... I looked at my preferred horse-trade-offer move a bit more. I'm now afraid that 11g E<Hb<E>M> will give the Mob a small but clear advantage. Even if they consent to a horse trade on 12g, my exposed rabbit on h5 is a disadvantage after the horses come off. In desperation, I looked at flipping the Mob's camel to b5. I had rejected this out of hand after seeing the Mob's move, because it seemed that the entire point of stepping their horse to a5 was to permit 11g HM>Ha^> after a camel flip. I have been very concerned to keep the Mob's horse out of b6, so why let it in now? Furthermore, the camel flip is surely the response the Mob analyzed most heavily, so I would be walking into the teeth of their analysis if I played it. I would be accepting a line they could have avoided but didn't, so I should expect their analysis to show it is in their favor. On the other hand, I could continue with 11s E>EM^Hbv. My horse can't be kept out of b3 in that line. Strategically, why should my horse on b3 be any worse than their horse on b6? Admittedly, I would suffer if the Mob's camel could wriggle free and return home to pounce on my attacking horses, but would I have to allow that? Intuitively it seems that if I have HH attacking the c3-trap while the Mob has MH attacking the c6-trap, I should be in better shape, especially since my little pieces are slightly more advanced. I'm already more than eleven days into this move, but I need to look at it some more before I decide, because I can't immediately evaluate the camel flip. I should be able to replenish my reserve later, but I won't have a second chance to flip the camel if I don't do it now. ... I got distracted by contract negotiations for my book "Beginning Arimaa", and suddenly I am almost three weeks into this move with only four and a half days of reserve left. Looking at the board again just now, I literally can't remember why the camel flip seemed so dangerous. I think I had better just flip the camel now and hope for the best. I'm walking straight into their trap, but if I am lucky it won't be as bad for me as the Mob thinks. |
||||||
|
Title: 11g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:58am 11g I predict the Mob will play 11g HM>Ha^>, because otherwise I don't understand why they used one step on their horse on move 10g. It seems that 11g M>vE<Cb^ is also reasonable, but why would the Mob have allowed the camel flip if it intended to run away with its camel afterwards? They will play consistently with whatever they were thinking before. It could also be that the move the Mob actually prepared for me is something I haven't even considered, or that it is something I considered but (incorrectly) dismissed as weak. Normally I would give myself a reasonable probability of predicting correctly in a board situation such as this, but knowing that the Mob must have anticipated my move and must have prepared a reply makes me much less confident. ... Oh, blast, now I see it! The Mob will surely play 11g HM>v, retreating the camel while dislodging my b6-horse and keeping my d4 horse under threat. That will give me a terrible position. Why couldn't I see this before? It embarrassing that I overlooked such a crushing move after taking such a long time to play. |
||||||
|
Title: 11s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:59am 11s I have predicted the Mob's move correctly for only the second time, but this time is an occasion for sorrow. I would never have flipped the Mob's camel had I seen their crushing reply. I am only surprised that they took a little more than seven days to play it. I am chagrinned to recall that I said I would have to win the opening in order to win the game. I was already in a ticklish situation on 10s, where my best move of offering a horse trade seemed to give me a little less than equality. I had perhaps been slightly outplayed by then already. My oversight on 10s, however, has put me in a clearly worse position. Furthermore, the longer the game drags on, the more the Mob will have an advantage from having many eyes. Although no blood has yet been shed, nor will be for as far ahead as I can see, my prospects look bleak indeed. The only reasonable move I can see for me is 11s EMvHd>^, after which 12g EHdvv forces me to play 12s MvvMHv in order to save my horse. The Mob will have the pleasant choice between taking my camel hostage with its elephant and taking my horse hostage with its camel. Achieving either one will give them the advantage, while achieving both will give them the win. In the lines I have played out, it seems just barely possible for me to contest both of the Mob's traps in the near term. I don't see how they can force direct material gain, and therefore I feel obliged to go down this terrible path and try to keep my head above water for as long as possible. I am quite sure how it will end, though. The Mob is too tough to make a blunder like mine that will let me back into the game. They will put the squeeze on me, precisely like I was intending to squeeze them. Either that or 10s was a worse blunder than I feared, in that it leads to forced material loss. |
||||||
|
Title: 12g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:59am 12g The move 12g EHdvv seems obvious, forcing, and strong. Why the Mob would do anything else? Why would they fear to take my camel hostage? The question in my mind is not whether this is the Mob's best move, but rather whether it forces material gain. |
||||||
|
Title: 12s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 6:59am 12s Again I predicted right, and again it is an occasion for sorrow. Furthermore the Mob moved in under two days. It seems unlikely that they will ever be in time trouble for the rest of the game. Further analysis confirms that 12s E>vHC< loses material by force, whereas 12s MvvMHv appears only to give up a camel hostage to the Mob's elephant or a horse hostage to the Mob's camel. In the lines I tried, the Mob's best policy was to play to for a favorable camel hostage rather than beating around the bush trying to win material and possibly ending up with a less favorable hostage situation for their pains. I shouldn't risk evaluating the situation while it is still so unsettled, particularly given my recent tactical lapse, but just for fun let me predict that I will end up on the wrong end of a camel hostage, nothing worse. |
||||||
|
Title: 13g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:00am 13g One way for the Mob to play for immediate material gain is with 13g EH<MHv. My elephant will be able to defend the hostage trap if there is only one hostage, but if there are two hostages, my elephant could become overloaded. I believe, however, that there are multiple ways for me to dodge this bullet, including 13s E>EM<M^. When there seems to be more than one escape hatch, I feel better about my chances of avoiding capture. Likewise I think 13g EH<HM< can be dodged by more than one move, including 13s Hc>De>vv. I think the Mob's best move is the most obvious one, namely 13g E>>EM>, taking my camel hostage. I expect that in predicting this move I will be correct for the third time in a row, as I watch my disadvantage inexorably become solidified. I can reply with 13s Hc>>>v, which gives the temporary illusion that I have a free elephant, but 14g M>MH^ puts a quick end to my fun. I can't think of any other reason the Mob wouldn't take my camel hostage, except of course if they see material gain I am overlooking. |
||||||
|
Title: 13s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:00am 13s The Mob makes the interesting choice of 13g E>Ce<Rf<Hg<. I am relieved that they saw no way to win material directly. Given that they can't win anything, I believe they are taking the correct approach of attempting to get as favorable a camel hostage as possible. Their move aims at making sure their eastern horse is not buried when they take my camel hostage, which is a reasonable idea. I am not sure, however, that the Mob has gained anything relative to immediately taking my camel hostage. Indeed, their move may represent a slight gain of time for me as I attempt to shore up the hostage position. Because I am no longer compelled to immediately bring another defender to the f3-trap, I have more flexibility in choosing my move. After not too much thought, I have decided to play 13s Hc>>ME>. I believe my threat to the Mob's camel compels them to spend at least three steps defending it, so that they still can't take my camel hostage on move 14g. This delay should give me enough time to prevent the Mob from activating its eastern horse anyway. If my calculation is correct, the Mob's move therefore fails to achieve its objective, and instead gives me a somewhat more comfortable hostage situation. Unfortunately, I will still be behind by a camel hostage, so the Mob is still clearly winning. I will need many more small inaccuracies on their part to make up for my large blunder on 10s. |
||||||
|
Title: 14g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:01am 14g I don't think the Mob can afford to play for material advantage with 14g E<EH3< plus a fourth step, because I have the counter 14s He>vEM^ to keep all of my pieces alive and keep up my threat to the gold camel. If the Mob takes my camel hostage, my choice is even clearer: I would be winning after trading my horse for their camel, despite having my camel held hostage. The Mob might consider defending the c6-trap with its horse on b6, but can't use up those two steps and still have enough steps to make an immediate capture threat in f3, so defending c6 would merely lead to a capture race that I would be winning. Advancing their camel too, seems to merely invite me into a capture race that I can either win outright, or at least tie; I would love an equal exchange of pieces rather than the coming hostage situation. No, the Mob's camel must retreat to c3, and the only question is which piece should unfreeze it. I am rather hoping they make the weaker choice of bringing back their advanced horse for the task. Their western horse ultimately needs to attack the c6-trap, so such a horse retreat by the Mob would be a second consecutive loss of time. My prediction is for the stronger move 14g Rh2^^>Mv, advancing a rabbit in anticipation of the coming race. I will be trying to swarm the f3 trap to free my elephant from having to guard it, so the Mob should anticipate this and start racing for a diagonally opposite swarm. The Mob's advanced horse and rabbit in the west will put enormous pressure on my position. My predicted move for the Mob will leave me in a world of hurt positionally. My only comfort is that I am fairly likely to have predicted wrong. The vast number of options open to the Mob may induce another inaccuracy. I don't look at the Mob's discussion thread, but I still frequent the Arimaa Forum several times per day, which incidentally informs me who is posting to which threads. I don't recall seeing chessandgo post about move 13g, although a contribution from him might have scrolled by before I noticed. Could his non-participation explain the Mob's poor choice? I blush now because I hoped earlier that chessandgo would dominate the discussion so that I would have an easier time winning. It turns out that I'm also losing my Postal Mixer game to him head-to-head (losing a rabbit in the opening), so even if he dictates every Mob move I should expect to lose! Misfortune has made me wiser: I now hope chessandgo is far too busy to contribute to the Mob ever again (not that the rest of the Mob isn't amply strong enough to beat me). |
||||||
|
Title: 14s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:01am 14s The Mob played 14g Cb^^MvE>. The camel retreat is correct and leaving the western horse forward is correct. The only difference between the Mob's move and my predicted move is that the Mob used a cat for the unfreezing, leaving an extra step for the east, which is probably as good as or better than my prediction. The purest clash of strategies in the standard camel hostage position we are heading for is for me to try to swarm the hostage trap in order to free my elephant from defense while the Mob swarms the diagonally opposite trap attempting to force goal. Of course it is always more complicated than that. I can occupy the c6-trap and put a phalanx on b7, which are moves that take fewer steps than the number of extra steps they add to the Mob's goal attack. On the other hand, advancing my western pieces makes them vulnerable to being pulled over to the c3-trap. Likewise, instead of playing in the west, the Mob can play in the east to slow down my swarm. For the last couple of moves the Mob has apparently been playing to take the camel hostage while activating either their eastern dog or their eastern horse. Either of those pieces, if active, could greatly slow down my swarm. In short, both players have an incentive to play pre-emptive defense on the wing whether the other player plans to attack. If I am not mistaken, the Mob's recent eastern maneuvers have been futile because I can now play 14s Rh8vvCgvv, blocking in the Mob's dog. If the dog tried to break free up the g-file, I would have a real threat to capture it in the f6-trap. Then on 15s, I should be able to seal in the dog so it acts as part of my phalanx on b4. My proposed move superficially gives the Mob a chance to activate its eastern horse with 15g EMvHf^^, but then 15s E>EH^H3^ eradicates my disadvantage. So I believe I have found a move that keeps both the Mob's eastern horse and the Mob's eastern dog bottled up, which in turn gives me rather more play for my camel hostage than I had anticipated getting. Of course, I am still clearly losing, but I am gradually starting to hope that I may live long enough for the Mob to make strategic errors which let me back into the game. I drained my reserve a bit this week with an eight-day family vacation, but it should be easy for me to make up time on future moves. |
||||||
|
Title: 15g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:02am 15g The obvious choice for the Mob is to take my camel hostage now, pushing it to g2 rather than h3 in order to keep their dog unfrozen. Since they can't activate either eastern piece, their other two steps might well advance their horse to b6 to start the diagonally opposite swarm. I believe, however, that I could answer 15g EMvHa^> with 15s H5>vCc<Rcv. My horses seem to keep the east stable enough that I can use two western steps to build a phalanx on b7. Slowing down the Mob's attack in the west would give me a chance to further consolidate the east on later turns. I have a hunch that the Mob will try to gain time by not securing the camel hostage for yet one more turn. The move 15s Ha^>^Ra2^ is a much more forcing move in the fight for control of the c6-trap, because I can't keep the horse out of c7. None of my responses are terribly convincing. I hesitate to predict a rather obscure move, but the Mob has already repeatedly shown a willingness to delay securing the camel hostage, so I wouldn't be too surprised by a sharp attack here. My hostage camel isn't going anywhere, so I will in fact predict that the Mob will be enticed by the value of occupying b7. One must also always consider the various possible ways for the Mob's camel to cross over, but I don't expect any of those, since all the ones I have examined make my position easier to play. |
||||||
|
Title: 15s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:02am 15s The Mob sidestepped my prediction in favor of the more obvious move of 15g EMvHa^>, which can hardly be called a mistake, but which does allow my obvious reply of 15s H5>vCc<Rcv. Two steps in the east seem to keep the Mob’s eastern horse and dog contained, leaving two steps in the west to keep the Mob’s western horse from jumping behind my traps. I expect my two western steps to pay large dividends in the number of steps the Mob is delayed from a western goal threat, which in turn will give me time to solidify my eastern swarm. I don’t really believe that my eastern swarm will succeed fast enough or well enough to free my elephant to rule the rest of the board, but it is my only viable plan, so I will pursue it without further ado and regain some reserve time for trickier tactics later. It is now up to the Mob to play forcefully and keep the pressure on me. We’ll see what they come up with. |
||||||
|
Title: 16g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:02am 16g The Mob has a sizable strategic advantage due to holding my camel hostage, but I am not out of options as long as I retain control of the f6 trap. The Mob surely would love to gain piece activity in the east using some combination of dog, horse, and camel, but I just don’t see how. For example the break 16g Da<DC<D^ seems to just get the Mob in hot water after 16s Hf>CfvH^R5v 17g Hf^Hc<H^ 17s R5<<vv or 17g Hf^Hc>H^ 17s E>>HgD^. Also if the Mob brings its camel east, the camel seems to become a target for my elephant more than it helps free up the Mob’s position. It seems therefore that the Mob will just have to accept that it can’t hold back my eastern swarm, and must instead play for faster action in the west. A tempting move would be 16g Ra2^^^^, to shore up its horse and start on a goal threat. I don’t really like the move, though, because it commits a rabbit while the Mob is not yet sure whether to play for goal or for capture. I will instead predict 16g CHg<HCv. I could hardly save my cat, and would instead have to continue swarming with 16s CgvRf7>vvv, and let the chips fall where they may. |
||||||
|
Title: 16s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:03am 16s The Mob flipped out my cat with its horse, which makes this move the fourth out of sixteen that I have predicted correctly. The down side of my correct prediction is that the Mob has again played a move that I think is good, but the silver lining is that my situation is at least no worse than I thought before. I am surprised only because the Mob took over nine and a half days to make their move, draining their reserve to seven and a half days. The Mob has managed its time very wisely so far, and I don't expect them to get into time trouble while holding a positional advantage, but this past move seems like a poor time to dawdle in making an obvious choice. Do they perhaps think their position is less favorable than I think it is? Whatever the case, I will intentionally hold my move until Friday, because sometimes in the past when I have moved on Friday the Mob has seemed to get a slower start on their analysis. It might not help me to try this little trick to increase the time pressure on the Mob, but it at least won't hurt me. For the sake of due diligence, I looked at threatening the Mob's horse in the c6-trap, hoping to get a favorable exchange of horses. However, my fourth step can't cover both a6 and c5 against the Mob's cat. If 16s E<^^Ra7v then 17g Cb>^M> and if 16s E<^^Ddv then 17g Cb<^^Hb^. Either way I am in trouble. I really shouldn't expect any western tactics to succeed while I have not yet hemmed in the Mob's elephant in the east. The only reasonable-looking move is the one that I anticipated making when I analyzed last time, namely 16s CgvRf7>vvv. I can't see far enough ahead to know how well this move will work, but it is my only viable strategy, so I have to stick with it even if the Mob's plan turns out to be better and faster than mine. |
||||||
|
Title: 17g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:03am 17g The Mob has to be careful here. If the Mob immediately threatens my cat with capture in the c3-trap with some careless move, it can backfire horrendously. For example 17g Cb<HbCvRa2^ permits 17s E<CbvME<. Unfortunately the many eyeballs of the Mob (including computer analysis) will never permit such a tactical blunder. My only hope is to make up ground strategically, which is a slender hope when my camel is held hostage. I think I played the best available move on 16s, but the sad fact is that it allows the Mob to flip my cat to h3 with 17g CE<EC>. The cat flip threatens once again to mobilize the Mob's dog. For me to re-establish the partial blockade with my next four steps would require me to commit a dog to the blockade, which I simply can't afford in this position because I am already stretched thin. But to complete the partial blockade with my f8-rabbit requires five steps. If I wanted to keep the Mob's dog hemmed in, I could only use three steps on 17s to get my rabbit from f8 to g6, and would then have to try to find the time for the other two rabbit-advancing steps on a later move. One could argue against the cat flip as merely inviting me to swarm further, and I admit that it would glue the Mob's elephant even more firmly in place, but I believe nevertheless that the time gain of nearly two steps is of critical tactical importance to the Mob. In the absence of the cat flip, my elephant has already palpably gained in mobility, which constrains the Mob's ability to act in the west. If this were a purely strategic decision, I might expect the Mob to blunder, but due to the tactical importance, I fully expect the Mob to make the cat flip. |
||||||
|
Title: 17s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:04am 17s The Mob took twelve days to move, reducing their reserve to two and a half days. I have a hard time accounting for the delay given the strength of their position. Perhaps they had a tie vote and needed to re-vote. Perhaps they delayed, not because they had trouble finding any good move, but because they found several good moves and couldn't choose between them. I predicted on move 12s that the Mob would never be in time trouble again for the rest of the game. Like most of my predictions so far in this game, events have proven me wrong. Probably I am also wrong that moving on a Friday has anything to do with making it difficult for the Mob to move within seven days, but since it seemed to correlate last move, I will move on Friday again this time, just in case. Since my reserve is nearly full, I won't consider moving in two days, but rather will take my time to move in nine or sixteen. The Mob's move of 17g Cb>Rb^^^ is one I did not consider at all, although it is reminiscent of the rabbit charge I predicted for 14g. The idea is presumably to get closer to directly threatening goal. However, it looks awkward in combination with the cat flip from 16g, because the charging rabbit is in the way of capturing the flipped cat, while the flipped cat is in the way of the charging rabbit. Why not advance the a-rabbit instead of the b-rabbit, for a relatively faster attack? Perhaps they were looking ahead to mobilizing their buried d1-dog, but if their plan is that slow, I might well have time to complete the smother and mobilize my own elephant. Strategically, I would like to complete the lockdown of the gold elephant with the move 17s RHe>Devv. Then the Mob could no longer flip my g4-cat, and its camel would have a more tortuous path toward regaining control of the f3-trap. On the other hand I'm a bit worried about 18g Cc^^CR>, gaining control of the c6-trap. Perhaps I had better play the defensive 17s RbvRa8>Dd<Rf8v. With my f-rabbit one step forward, I could re-establish the elephant smother in one turn after a cat flip. If the Mob's goal threat has been slowed down enough, I might be able threaten a capture in c6 or f6. I am leery of any tactical try such as 17s EC^>. With many eyeballs as well as multiple computers on their side, the Mob is not likely to have played something which allows me a horse trade. However, for the sake of due diligence, I must consider sharp moves as well as quiet ones. If I manage to come back in this game there will necessarily be fireworks at some point; failing to be on the lookout for the critical timing is tantamount to resignation. ... After further examination, it is clear to me that my position is still too weak to try to force trades, and too weak to try to flip the Mob's c4-cat towards the f6-trap for a potential capture. I need to solidify the smother of the Mob's elephant before I can think about trying to win or even exchange material. If I could only get a piece into the f3-trap, my elephant's range would go up dramatically. Unfortunately, I can't afford to let the Mob's cat get into c7. Therefore the only blockading move I can consider is 17s De<vRHe>. If that turns out to be too loose, then I still have the solid 17s RbvRa8>Dd<Rf8v. Although I have narrowed it down to just these two moves in time for a Friday move after nine days, I think I will delay another week to be quite confident that I am choosing the better one, because it is quite a divergence between the two. ... I underestimated the amount by which a vacation last weekend would cramp my schedule. Now it is twenty-three days into my move and I still haven't had time for the deep analysis that I wanted to do. Therefore, absent a solid justification, I am going to go with my gut feeling and play 17s RbvRa8>Dd<Rf8v. My take on the position, from intuition rather than extensive analysis, is that I would love to occupy the f3-trap, but it would be an ambitious move declaring that I think my position is superior and I am now playing for the win again. Deep down I don't believe my position is that strong. I expect that loosening up will make it more likely for the Mob to find strong moves, as opposed to the mediocre moves they have been finding since they took my camel hostage. If I keep it tight and strategic, perhaps they will continue to waste time and let my position improve some more. This is a frail hope, but it seems like a better hope than going for the jugular immediately. |
||||||
|
Title: 18g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:04am 18g The Mob can no longer flip my cat to h4 for a time gain, because I can use my f7-rabbit to restore the blockade in four steps. Also it is pointless for the Mob to go after my western cat with 18g Rb<^HbCv, because I could capture their cat with 18s EC^CD<*. More reasonable would be mobilizing their western dog up the b-file, although that looks rather slow. The most forcing plan I see for the Mob is undermining my b7-phalanx with Hb<RH>. The best fourth step is not obvious to me. Rb< looks reasonable, despite being an admission that they should have advanced the a-rabbit instead of the b-rabbit in the first place. From a broader perspective, however, the time is rapidly approaching when the Mob will need to occupy the f3 trap themselves in order to prevent me from occupying it, so I will predict Hf^ for their final step. My main plan for some time now has been to hope for mistakes from the Mob. Now my hope is compounded by the Mob's low reserve. I hope that first they can't agree on a move for nine days, and only then they make a mistake. Unfortunately for me, the Mob discussion started immediately after I moved, in contrast to their move 17s, so they will probably move quickly. |
||||||
|
Title: 18s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:05am 18s The Mob moved in a mere four days and six hours, building their reserve back over five days. My theory that a Friday moves puts on the pressure is busted. Or is it? Their move 18g Hb<RH>Dc< used the first three steps to undermine my b7 phalanx as predicted, but the fourth step went towards painstaking activation of their western dog instead of occupying the f3 trap. I think perhaps the fourth step is another inaccuracy, because now when I play out lines from the board position, I am no longer losing all of them. The position is about to explode into fireworks, but it seems that I can give almost as good as I get when the shooting starts. I was tempted to immediately start the hot war with 18s DcvE^^<. That would win the Mob's western horse because only their camel can come to the rescue, and the rescue attempt would cost them their camel. This seems very promising, because a horse trade relieves my position somewhat. Admittedly, with only one horse I can't easily keep the Mob's eastern horse bottled up, but on the other hand, the Mob's slowly materializing goal threat in the west would be stalled, and I would regain temporary control of the c6-trap, which is worth the trade in most circumstances. Unfortunately, the Mob could respond with 19g M>HM^Re2^, threatening one of my horses in each of their home traps. I would not be able to save both horses and my camel; at best I could get MH for MHC. So it is too soon for me to pull the trigger just yet. Since the Mob generously left me the f3-square, I intend to occupy it with He>. That makes it harder to split my horses, and leaves the Mob's camel further from a capture threat. This buys me time to undertake something tactical next move. Also the step Dcv seems mandatory. I must protect the c6-trap somehow, and that move is one of the four steps I was planning anyway to retake control. I need to keep the Mob's c4-cat out of the fight for c6. My last two steps are trickier. I want my e6-dog to either help out with defending the c6-trap or with swarming the f3-trap, but when I play out tactical lines, the dog is actually in my elephant's way on d5, d6, or e4. For now it seems that moving Dev to e5 is indirectly helpful in future lines without being in the way. That leaves me one step for which I have almost no use. My one piece which can perhaps improve its position and help in the critical areas is my f7-rabbit. Once I have occupied f3, I no longer need to worry about my cat being flipped. If I play Rf<, perhaps it will be of some help either around c6 or f3 where the action is hot. Thus my full move is 18s He>DcvDevRf<. I realize that I am completely abandoning the defense of my f6-trap thereby. I wish I didn't have to take this gamble, but I need all sixteen of my pieces for the two fights that are underway on opposite wings. If the Mob breaks through with any piece, I will have to try to capture it in f6 immediately with my elephant. Too bad. My position requires me to go for broke, because if I just sit on my hands the Mob will activate its western dog, generate a western goal threat, and force my position apart at the seams. Still, despite my camel hostage and despite multiple positional weaknesses, my hope is slowly reviving. It seems that the Mob's slight inaccuracies are giving me something to fight with. Probably when push comes to shove they will still get the better of me, both because they have the better position and because they are better tactically due to many eyeballs and computer assistance. However, it is nice to perceive my options gradually widening, where I am no longer on the thinnest razor's edge. Suddenly I am eager to see what the Mob comes up with next. By the way, this move is the fifth in a row on which I haven't moved my elephant. |
||||||
|
Title: 19g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:18am 19g I will not be too surprised if the Mob wants to get its horse to c7 with either 19g HRb<HRc^ or 19g HRb<HRc> or 19g HRb<HRcv. According to my calculations, however, all of them let me trade the Mob's western horse for my c3-horse. If they go for one of these lines, it will probably be due to disagreeing with me strategically rather than tactically. Perhaps they will feel that it couldn't have been right to break up my phalanx if they didn't intend to charge through it, but that is sloppy reasoning. In fact the phalanx needed to be broken anyway for their long-range goal threats, to keep up the time pressure on me. Perhaps instead they will think a horse trade is favorable to them. If so, one of us will be wrong in the kind of judgment call that separates good strategy from bad. If the Mob wants to avoid a horse trade, their options are limited. Their strategy of activating their western dog would help if they had five steps instead of four, but after 19g Dc<^^Rb< 19sE^^<Dev, they just get a horse trade, and a less favorable one than they otherwise might get. Furthermore, their western horse can't retreat without jeopardizing their western cat, which honestly looks a little silly on c4 at the moment. They might be tempted to get their camel closer to my f4-horse, so that my elephant has less time to wander on a western tactical venture. I don't see, however, how they could do this without jeopardizing the camel itself. If they try to help with little pieces, e.g. 19g M>Re2^^M>, my dog can play cleanup with 19s RDe^E>. It is convenient that all of the would-be helpers of the Mob's camel are cats and rabbits, which my central dogs can threaten. If I miraculously come back to win, the Mob may want to kick its western dog for being useless on the first rank at such a critical time. The only strong move I can find for the Mob is 19g Rb<^HbCv. Note that this isn't a direct threat to my cat, because even if I passed they couldn't take my cat without losing their own. No, the intent is to prevent a horse trade while intensifying the long-range goal threat. Better late then never. Then I can't diddle, because the Mob's threats of activating their western dog and furthering their rabbit advance in a corner where I have no piece defense are both entirely serious. If they play this move (or a better one I have overlooked) I will have to say I am still somewhat getting the worst of it, but even then don't expect me to go down quietly! |
||||||
|
Title: 19s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:18am 19s The Mob moved even faster this time: just three days and nine hours. That is barely time for a formal vote. Perhaps someone suggested 19g HRb<HRc^, which was agreed to by acclamation after too little analysis? I had considered this move and was not afraid of it. The Mob played something I thought would favor me, as if they had played too quickly. So why am I not rejoicing? I suppose that I can't quite believe I have calculated the tactics correctly. The bare fact that the Mob has played a move I thought they couldn't or shouldn't play makes me question my earlier confidence. It's like the old poker saying: "If a stranger offers to bet you a thousand dollars he can make the jack of spades jump out of the deck and spit in your eye, don't bet, or you'll get an eyeful of spit." Here the Mob has offered to let its horse be captured, so I have a gut fear that capturing it must be bad. ... My re-analysis of 19s Rc<E^^< confirms what I had thought before. The Mob can't prevent me from taking their western horse, so the only question is how much they can get for it. They have several plausible moves, and I don't have one answer that works for all of them. It seems, however, that in each case there is at least one move I can play that lets me limit my eastern losses to a horse and leaves me with a playable position, which is not bad considering I am down by a camel hostage. I have seen nothing to change my rational assessment that the Mob's offer of a horse trade was an inaccuracy by them. Emotionally, I am still worried. There are too many variations for me to believe that I have looked at all the important ones, and the position is so sharp that a very small oversight could completely wreck my position. The Mob has many strong players and diverse computer help. If I had more reserve time, I might feel compelled to examine the position more, looking for the tactical flaw in my plans. What ultimately tips my decision in favor of moving now is that I have essentially no choice strategically. If going after the Mob's free horse on this move loses quickly, then so be it, because anything else loses slowly. As soon as their horse gets free behind my traps, their camel can become fearless in the center. Eventually my elephant would have to hunt down the invading horse in much worse circumstances than I have at present. If I lose control of the f6-trap now, my position is strategically hopeless anyway, so there is no point in allowing such a position to arise and hoping for something good to happen later. I must act now, for better or for worse. Geronimo! |
||||||
|
Title: 20g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:20am 20g The Mob of course can't save its threatened horse with 20g Cc>M^MD>, because 20s ME>^ would cost them their camel. They must threaten to knock out my f4-horse with their camel. Unfortunately, they have many promising ways to do that. It seems most forcing for the Mob to use three steps bringing their camel all the way to e4, with a fourth step of either Re2^ or Cc> to support the camel. Either move threatens to capture both of my horses on the same turn. However, after the rabbit step, I can actually afford to allow the double-horse capture, because 20g M>>^Re2^ 20s HE>*E^^ 21g MH^^** 21s E>> leaves me clearly ahead. I therefore predict 20g M>>^Cc>, whereupon I plan to respond 20s HE>*E^H3<, allowing either of my horses to be taken. Neither horse capture looks very good for the Mob, so perhaps they will try to play for a delayed capture of both of my horses with 21g MHe< and two more steps. It gets messy after that, probably to my disadvantage, but I still don't see what I could have done one 19s other than what I did do. |
||||||
|
Title: 20s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:20am 20s The Mob moved in a week exactly, playing 20g M>>Cd^^. When I saw that the Mob decided to leave their camel on e3 instead of moving it all the way to e4, my spirits leapt. Is it possible that the Mob, with so many participants and such computer help, has made a tactical blunder? 20s DevRevvDc> appears to create chances for me to win a horse without losing one. Even if the tactical lines fail to bear out my hope, though, I can certainly play a safe move like 20s HE>*EvDd^, in which case we appear to have a horse trade without complications that favor the Mob, which means I have achieved my strategic objective without falling into a tactical snare. Is it too soon for me to start thinking again about winning? I must start analyzing immediately, because this coming weekend will be busy for me. ... Well, it didn't take much analysis to dash my hopes. The Mob's d4-cat is indeed in their way, and helps me build a phalanx with 20s DevRevvDc>, but after 21g HM<v the same cat prevents my dogs from unfreezing my d3-horse. I should have known the Mob would never slip tactically and lose material in the short run. And in other lines, too, the d4-cat is a major thorn in my side. I would much rather get my elephant back to e3 than to f4, but that cat clogs up the middle so that I always seem to get to e3 one step too late. For example, 20s HE>*E>Ddv 21g MD^HMvHf3* 21s Ra6vvDe<Ev 22g Ccv<Dgc< and I must lose a cat because the Mob's cat on d4 costs my elephant a step in getting to e3. It will be a major loss of time for me to have to defend from f4 instead. It is looking rather like the Mob's 20g was in fact brilliant. In fact, I don't see a better plan than admitting their cat advance was so good I have nothing better to do than push back that cat with my elephant. I feel compelled to play 20s HE>*EvDdv, expecting 21g MD^HMvHf3* 21s Ra6vvECdv, when my goal threat tactically buys me time to get my elephant to e3, but too late because 22g Ccv<H^^ activates the Mob's horse before I get there. Sigh. Oh, well, I guess my inaccuracy was on 18s, when thought I was leaving my eastern dog out of the way of my elephant, but it turned out to be in the way after all. My evaluation of the position has swung back to thinking I am materially even but strategically busted, just like I was several moves ago. I tip my hat to the Mob as I play the least bad choice I can find. |
||||||
|
Title: 21g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:21am 21g The ambitious move by the Mob would be 21g MD^MH^Hf3*, trying for immediate material win, but then 21s De^E>vH< seems to liquidate into an even-material endgame. I should be so lucky. Playing to threaten each horse in a different trap is even more futile. 21g HM<< 21s CDe^EvHd> leaves the Mob struggling not to lose material. No, the correct move of 21g MD^HMvHf3* is unfortunately both obvious and strong. I am depressingly sure of making a correct prediction this time around. It seems that 21s Ra6vvECdv will prevent me from losing material, but the Mob's next move 22g Ccv<H^^ is also one they surely won't miss. I'll get to have two correct predictions in a row, and both sides will have fuller reserves, but I will have depleted hopes. |
||||||
|
Title: 21s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:21am 21s The Mob needed only 36 hours to play my predicted move of 21g MD^HMvHf3*. I wish there were a good way for me to deviate from my planned move 21s Ra6vvECdv, but a quick double check shows nothing promising. I must accept that I misjudged the timing of the horse trade, and landed in a worse position that I expected. So sad. The only thing I will salvage from the wreckage is some reserve time by moving quickly. |
||||||
|
Title: 22g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:22am 22g The Mob must defend my goal-in-one threat, and it seems that they might as well safety their c4-cat at the same time by moving it south. Two purposes met with one step, leaving three steps for the east. I do not, however, see three good steps for the Mob. 22g CcvDgC< H^ blocks my elephant from e3, but also lifts the threat to my camel, so I can play 22s Cf^De^H^E>. The Mob could try to win a cat without blocking their camel threat, with 22g CcvDgC<Dc<, but I think then 22s ECd<EM> doesn't allow either the Mob's camel or its dog to take cat. I expect instead 22g Ccv<H^^, activating the Mob's horse at long last, and giving them a strong position after my forced ECd<EM>. |
||||||
|
Title: 22s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:22am 22s I am surprised the Mob needed twelve days on this move. Was something wrong with activating their horse immediately, although I didn't see it? Probably they were merely having trouble deciding between good and better, because their actual move of 22s CcvRc>Dc^H^ keeps my elephant out of e3, forcing me to defend the f3-trap from f4. They lose some time building the phalanx, but probably make it up with interest by forcing my elephant to occupy a worse square. I am still puzzled, though, about why the Mob spent a step filling d2, to keep my elephant out of d3, when their horse in f3 keeps my elephant out of e3 in any case. Perhaps I had a tactical resource I overlooked. My camel is temporarily safe because of the Mob's horse in f3, but my g4-cat is threatened, so I have no reasonable option beyond moving my elephant to f4. There are only four ways for me to do that; either retreat my horse to f5, or retreat my horse to e5 while moving my dog to f5, e6, or d5. Given my narrow range of very-similar choices, it shouldn't take me long to move this time. With the elephant deadlock about to be restored, it is time to take stock strategically of the effect of the tactical interlude. On the positive side, I regained control of the c6-trap, and snuffed out the goal threat that the Mob's horse was slowly developing. I therefore have many moves to try to free my elephant again before it is forced to leave to stop a western goal. Furthermore, the absence of a horse on each side mitigates the disadvantage of losing my camel. I could now trade my camel for just a horse and a rabbit to land in a materially even position. On the negative side, I can't prevent the Mob from activating its remaining horse, because I needed so much time to get my elephant home. Furthermore, the limited elephant mobility I spent so many moves building up is all gone now. With a horse absent from each side, it may be even harder for me to regain elephant mobility than it was the first time. Finally, I exposed my rabbit on a4, giving the Mob a much easier capture target than they had the first time around. I will be quite lucky if I can trade it away for the Mob's b4-rabbit rather than losing it outright. At the end of the day, the Mob's camel hostage is still keeping them in control. It seems improbable that I will be permitted to abandon the camel without conceding material disadvantage. If, on the other hand, the hostage situation is maintained, the Mob has plans in the west that will work faster than I can improve my position in the east. Either way I am in trouble. ... A bit more analysis doesn't brighten my outlook at all. My only active plan is to swarm the f3 trap, and that is too slow. Of my few move choices, moving my horse to f5 ends up looking most like a swarm, so that's what I'll do. Also, the Mob's camel is probably quickly destined for the west, so my horse will be relatively less powerful in the west than in the east. But there's not much in it for me. |
||||||
|
Title: 23g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:23am 23g Superficially, it appears reasonable for the Mob to go after my exposed rabbit immediately with 23g Cc<<RC>. However, there is no reason for them to start fighting in the west while we are on equal terms there with cats and dogs. That would be voluntarily giving up the advantage that their camel hostage provides them. No, in order for the Mob to use their advantage, they must mobilize their camel and horse. I don't see why they wouldn't do so immediately. I predict a straightforward developing move like 23g M^H<M^Cc<, which leaves me very little to go on. Unfortunately, I am afraid they have even better in the form of 23g M^H<Dc<^, hemming in my elephant and getting their dog to its natural square. I'm not sure how I could make progress in face of this simple plan. Ugh. |
||||||
|
Title: 23s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:23am 23s My first thought on seeing the Mob's 23g Cc<M^H<M< was that I had caught a break. The empty e4 square allows me to play 23s E<EH>Hv, beginning a process of liberating my elephant that could continue with steps EHvE<HvDv> in some order. Belatedly I realize that the whole plan is brought to a screeching halt by 24g Re2> plus three steps such as M<DM>. I now question even my choice to bring my horse to f5. Since I can't liberate my elephant, my only hope is to abandon the f3-trap with my elephant at an opportune moment, hoping to lose as little as possible. But when will there be an opportune moment? My swarm is now working against me, because all my advanced pieces besides the camel are also in jeopardy. At a minimum, on the two turns after my elephant leaves, the Mob can capture my camel and cat. When will leaving ever be worth that much? I might now contemplate a waiting move to shore up my trap defense and get my c5-dog to a less exposed square. Sadly, the moment I leave c5 with my dog, the Mob can occupy c5 with their mobile dog. Once the c6-trap is protected by a gold dog, my elephant will stand to gain even less from abandoning the f3-trap. I have taken more than three weeks to make this move, not due to prolonged analysis in an attempt to find a way out, but due to despair and disinterest. It seems that not only was I wrong to trade horses, I was wrong by more than I first thought. I could willingly resign now, although that would be a disservice to the Mob. No, let me continue to play on for a while a least, if not with the same enthusiasm as before, at least with a hope to make things interesting again at some point before I lose. It seems the only way I can regain a fluid position with some possibility to make progress, as opposed to passively awaiting disaster, is to immediately attack the Mob's camel, effectively offering to trade it for my own camel and cat. I will then be behind a whole cat with no compensation, but at least I will have freedom to plan. I believe that 23s E<EM^De^ will not end with worse than a cat loss for me, e.g. 24g ME<^* 24s EM^H^Re>. Let me finally take my medicine and pay the price for giving up a camel hostage with my terrible move 10s. |
||||||
|
Title: 24g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:24am 24g What is to discuss? The Mob gains material and takes no chances by playing 24g ME<^*. Not only will their position be widely superior, they will also gain reserve time. |
||||||
|
Title: 24s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:24am 24s Yep, the Mob played 24g ME<^* in only 20 hours. I think instead of 24s EM^H^Re> I will play 24s EM^H^>, since it leaves my eastern flank in better shape to have the horse there. |
||||||
|
Title: 25g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:25am 25g Taking my cat is obvious, either with the elephant or with the dog. The only reason the Mob might deviate would be to prevent me from getting in the first shot in the west with 25s EM<*RC<. So 25g Cb<RC>Rb< deserves consideration, but I think it is too great an invitation for my dog to head towards b3. 25s EM<*Dcv< looks like a refutation. Of the two cat captures, I expect the Mob will decide against using the dog, so as to leave it in place to pull a second rabbit. My prediction is therefore 25g CE>ECv*. |
||||||
|
Title: 25s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:25am 25s The Mob failed to take my cat, for reasons that are not clear to me. 25g E<DhC<Re2> will still permit a cat capture for next turn, but what has been gained? The Mob can't intend to complete the capture with the elephant, or it would have done so at once. They must intend to complete the capture with the dog. But they also could have finished the capture with the dog this turn, unless they want the dog on f4 instead of on g3. So my best guess is that the Mob is trying to save time by rotating their horse to g3 and dog to the middle of the board. That makes sense because with a material advantage the Mob wants strength to meet strength, elephant to fight elephant, horse to fight horse, all the way down the line so that their extra piece weighs in their favor. They don't want a race where time can matter more than material. However, the Mob may not end up saving any time despite their contortions, because there is more important stuff going on than their piece re-alignment. If I play the natural 25s EM<*Evv, I don't think the Mob will want to complete the maneuver with 26g H>>DfCv* due to 26s CR>RDc> with a nice rabbit frame to give me some compensation for my lost cat, instead of zero compensation as I have presently. And if they don't complete their piece realignment at once, they might be forced to retreat their exposed dog first, actually losing time in the exchange. Perhaps the answer to the riddle of the Mob's move is that the immediate cat capture on 25g offered me a different form of compensation that I didn't see. If that is true, then the Mob's actual move need not be better than it looks; only my suggested move needs to be worse than it looked. I obviously must capture the Mob's camel with two steps. There is nothing to gain from delay. For the other two steps I could re-centralize my elephant as above, but it is tempting to pull their b4-rabbit to a nice hostage position on b5. At first glance this appears to be refuted by, 26g DfCv*E<^, but apparently then I have a nice resource in 26s E<Dv<Ev, where the rabbit hostage is almost as good as a frame, and I have the bonus of putting my dog on a nice attacking square. I'm in a bit of a dilemma, because my strategic instinct is to immediately recentralize my elephant. It feels like the right thing to do. On the other hand, the rabbit pull seems tactically difficult for the Mob to refute. In the best lines I can work out so far, at the end of my playouts, I am slightly better off with the rabbit pull than the centralized elephant. I guess the only sensible thing to do is come back to it later, although I confess I burned ten days off my clock before even looking at it the first time. ... Another look at the position didn't turn up anything wrong with 25s EM<*RCb< other than being behind by a cat, which I am anyway. My head is going to overrule my gut on this one. I can't reject a strong move for which I can't find a refutation just on my gut feeling that it is unsound. |
||||||
|
Title: 26g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:26am 26g The Mob could play 26g ECv*RDgv, ignoring my threat to their b-rabbit and countering with a threat of their own. This is a reasonable plan, but I don't expect it, because it is not consistent with their failing to take my cat on 25g. If they wanted to work in the east, it would have been faster and more flexible to go with the immediate cat capture. Besides which 26s HvRg>Re>Ev seems to prove that my rabbit threat is better than the Mob's, and to inch me closer to a type of unbalanced racing game that I must create to have any chances when down material. More likely the Mob took pains to centralize its elephant one square on 25g precisely to move it west now and save their rabbit. Indeed, they could even delay capturing my cat for a turn by threatening my dog with 26g E^<EDv. But then 26s EvvD< gets my dog to a very nice square, and the Mob has accomplished nothing by again delaying capture. Therefore I predict 26g DfCv*E<^, which I intend to meet with 26s E<Dv<Ev. The terminal position is terrible for me, but holding the Mob's b-rabbit hostage at least gives me a tiny bit of positional compensation for the lost cat. |
||||||
|
Title: 26s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:26am 26s Move 26 was the seventh time I correctly predicted the Mob's move. 27% accuracy is much better than I expected, but still lower than I would expect if this were a chess game. A quick look at the position gives me no reason to change my mind about playing 26s E<Dv<Ev. I don't see any crushing responses for the Mob, and even if I did, I'm not sure what else to do. I need to save my threatened dog, and this way of saving it incidentally gets my dog to a nice square. I will move quickly this time. |
||||||
|
Title: 27g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:26am 27g The Mob can't be happy about my dog threatening to invade b3. I'm sure they would like to bring their horse west to take care of that dog, but that line is strategically barely worth considering. Without the Mob's horse in the east, my own horse will spring to life, creating a very sharp position with latent race potential. With a material advantage, an unclear race is the last thing the Mob wants. On the other hand, it would not be in character with the Mob's fighting spirit to tamely accept being tied down to defense of their hostage rabbit with, say, 27g E^Dc<Cb<D^. Therefore I predict that they will try to complicate by picking on the most obvious target with 27g E^EDvRh1<, final step to preempt any goal-threat tactics by me. With my horse in danger, I won't be able to snatch the Mob's rabbit immediately, but I don't see why the ensuing maneuvering should favor them over me. Apart from being down a whole cat with no prospects of recovering it, my position is in reasonable shape. |
||||||
|
Title: 27s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:27am 27s I was right that the Mob would counter-attack rather than defending, but wrong about the specific move. With 27g Ev<Dc<H>, the Mob threatens my b4-dog with capture, preventing me from immediately capturing their b5-rabbit. I had thought to answer such a move with 27s E>DbR>, winning a rabbit on 28s, but I see now that their horse step permits them to reply with 28g H>Df>RD>, intending to trade rabbits rather than losing one outright. As a bonus to the Mob, they would complete the rotation of their horse to the g3-square, not losing time as I had hoped, but actually gaining time by leaving their dog high and out of the way of the crossing. As usual I didn't look at the tactics deeply enough. Despite the probability of merely trading rabbits, what can I do apart from 27s E>DbR>, plus some fourth step? I must save my dog somehow. Can I contemplate occupying d3 with my elephant? It seems extremely loose to move my elephant away from the wing on which the Mob has an advanced rabbit, but that rabbit can't easily advance, and indeed I would still be threatening to capture it. Perhaps this complication is the reason the Mob used almost seventeen days to decide on 27g. ... After a second look, it seems clear that I must hold the tension with 27s E>vEc<. In the long run this may turn out worse for me than a simple rabbit trade, but I have to give the Mob more opportunities to make mistakes. Straightforward play is no longer reasonable given my material disadvantage. If I sink my ship all the more quickly, it will at least be better than a calm, protracted, inevitable loss. |
||||||
|
Title: 28g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:27am 28g Stylistically the Mob is not given to patient defense. It would be very like them to attack something instead of defending their hanging rabbit. For that reason I might anticipate 28g Df>RD>H>. Also this would be consistent with having left the dog high in the first place to ease their horse’s transition to g3. On the other hand, I could reply with HvRf<<Hv, creating a much tenser position than the Mob should be comfortable with given their material lead. Even if they want to play tactically by nature, it would not be wise in the present circumstances. They should make every effort to keep the position as calm and balanced as possible. Therefore I will instead predict 28g Cb<Db^DE^, defending their threatened b-rabbit. This justifies the westward dog step of 27g. Also, pulling my dog from b4 to c4 frees locks down my elephant to defense while opening a square for counter-attack. The Mob is certainly not committed to passive defense after this move, as they will still be able to harass my a5-rabbit and g5-rabbit, potentially overloading my elephant. |
||||||
|
Title: 28s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:28am 28s After another long think, the Mob played 28g H>CcvCb<Db^. They are conceding their b5-rabbit. I can’t believe it! To be behind a whole cat seems insurmountable, but being down a cat for a rabbit suddenly makes me feel like I’m back in the game, and could even potentially come back to win. Yippee! Of course the Mob didn’t overlook the capture, so either they thought much more highly of my position than I did, to the point that giving up the rabbit is cutting their losses, or else there is catch, and the offered rabbit is a snare. Of course I can’t take the rabbit with my cat, because then they would just flip my cat into c3 for a cat frame. But why not take with my dog? True, it would allow their dog to invade b6, but I have enough support from little pieces at home that the attack hardly looks crushing. Yes, an elephant-dog attack is valuable, but surely less valuable than a whole rabbit? … OK, now I see that 28s DbR>^* can be met by 29g Db^RD^Dfv, after which I could not prevent my rabbit from being framed. With the current piece alignment, a frame would be essentially unbreakable. Furthermore, there would be false protection around c6, which I would have to defend before trying to stir up counterplay, and further furthermore my dog would be frozen on c5 with no friendly piece that can conveniently unfreeze it. The fourth step retreating dog to f3 efficiently completes the Mob’s piece rotation to align strength against strength and deaden the position just when I need to make it tense. All of this makes my rabbit “capture” no better than a rabbit trade. I should have known the Mob would not voluntarily give back material without seeing a concrete refutation. On the other hand, what else can I do? I need tension, action, and imbalances, but the Mob’s last move put a dog on the western corner where my dog was attacking, and a horse on the eastern corner where my horse would want to attack. They are sucking the life out of this position, exactly as one should do with a material advantage. Their only weakness apart from the b5-rabbit that I dare not take is that their dog is still temporarily exposed on f4. So perhaps 28s H<vDH<? Moving my horse toward the center could eventually leave my eastern flank exposed to the Mob’s horse, but now is not a time to be shoring up weaknesses. I will have to weaken some part of the board to get play elsewhere, and create any kind of race. Furthermore, I see only three responses for the Mob to save its dog, all of them requiring four steps. Forcing moves are easier to analyze. 29g E>>EH< is optically crushing, getting the gold sheriff next to the silver deputy and hitting hard at my suddenly-depleted eastern flank. But it seems to me that after 30s Re>CR>E^ I may be able to get the rabbit for nothing. It would create a race at a time when I’m very eager to race, with elephants on opposite wings and horses on opposite wings, which is all I can ask for. The Mob’s second saving move, namely 29g H<^DfR^, seems to at least gain me time after returning my horse to f5 plus three other steps. That leaves only 29g H^HR^Dfv, after which 29s H>Rh5v<Rh6v gives the Mob something to think about. All in all I have convinced myself that picking on the Mob’s exposed dog is at least not bad, and keeps tension in the position. As this move coincides with the early rounds of the World Championship, it is a great reminder for me to consider more vigorous moves in my live games as well. |
||||||
|
Title: 29g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:28am 29g In addition to the moves I previously mentioned, the Mob can also save its dog with 29g E>^HEv. I should not get my hopes up, though, for either this elephant move or 29g E>>EH<, because either is a dream come true for me, i.e. a live position with possibilities to swindle a win. No, as much as I would wish for the Mob’s natural taste in active play to guide them to an incorrect choice, I am afraid I must predict the “deadest” move of all their options, namely 29g H^HR^Dfv. With the Mob’s horse out in front of their dog, it will be tough for my horse to keep picking on the dog. It may get to the point that I can’t stir up further trouble without making clearly weak moves, at which time I can only hope the end is mercifully swift. |
||||||
|
Title: 29s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:29am 29s I am shocked that the Mob played 29g E>>EH< in under two days. Is it so obviously superior to the move I predicted? I can’t believe they would move so fast unless they had discussed my move 28s before they played 29g, but in that case they must not have considered my 28s to be any threat, and must now consider their position to be very strong. In short, the Mob is not only disagreeing with my evaluation, but doing so with a confident flair. In previous analysis I liked 29s Re>CR>E^, but perhaps the Mob has a refutation already in the can for that move as well. I will be in no hurry to move now that the position has shifted from dead to sharp in only two ply. As I consider moving my rabbit from e7 to f7 on 29s, it is worth remembering move 18s, when I moved it from f7 to e7. I hesitated then to abandon defense of my f6-trap, but I didn’t hesitate enough. Since then, the tactical vulnerability of f6 has caused many of my potential plans to fall through, while the central position of the rabbit has been of no use whatsoever. That rabbit step on 18s was worse than useless: is has had negative ramifications ever since, and finally I am forced simply to undo it, wasting another step in addition. My failure on 18s traces back to my misjudgment that the Mob ought not play a horse invasion on 19g; if I had seen the full power of that move I would have positioned myself better to survive the aftermath. This is a powerful lesson to me to be less sure of my strategic intuitions, and to give even more weight to generally good-looking moves over special-purpose moves. … I analyzed for a long time on 29s Re>CR>R8>, changing the fourth step from my previous favorite. The first three steps seem very logical. First, I must protect my e6-dog from capture because I can’t make a counter-threat as big as a dog. Second, I must take action in the west as quickly as possible, because I intentionally permitted my east to be weakened in the hopes of creating a race. Having succeeded in getting an imbalance by distracting the gold elephant to the other wing, I had darned well better take advantage of my side of the imbalance as quickly as possible. The fourth step, though is more problematic. I like R8> better than E^ for my fourth step because my elephant’s current location is strong and flexible. If the Mob chooses to defend the c6-trap, I will want to frame their rabbit and attack the c3-trap immediately, for which purpose my elephant is better on d3 than d4, and my rabbit on c8 means I need only three steps for the rabbit frame so I would have a general-purpose step left over. Also if the Mob attacks the f6-trap with 30g DfRvED<, I would like to be able to respond with 30s CR^*Rh6<E>, i.e. two steps to take the Mob’s rabbit, one step to defend the f6-trap, and one step to defend the f3-trap. I seem to have a good position whether the Mob plays to defend its own material or make a material counter-threat. Unfortunately, I seem to have a losing position if the Mob plays for goal threat rather than material with 30g DfRvRh2^^. They would then have eight steps to goal via RD^R^RD^R^^^, which is exceptionally difficult for me to halt or slow without either my elephant or horse in the east. It seems that I have gotten the race I want, and I am losing it! And if I use 29s to position to get my elephant or horse east to stop the threat from developing, then I am trying to call off the race with a net loss of time. After analyzing the Mob’s eastern goal attack long enough to verge on strategic despair, it finally occurred to me that I can use my fourth step to play Rh5v! This single step slows down the Mob’s eastern goal run by three steps, which appears to be just long enough that I can capture their b5-rabbit and yet defend goal, assuming they still choose a straight goal attack. For me it is counter-intuitive that advancing my own rabbit would slow down theirs so much, but after staring at the board for a while it finally occurred to me. Thus I will play 29s Re>CR>Rh5v in high spirits. It is true that slowing the Mob’s h-file rabbit advance leaves f6 slightly less defended, which weakens me in the line where the Mob chooses to defend the c6-trap, but if the Mob feels forced to defend rather than counter-attacking, I will feel that I have won a moral victory, and will fight on with renewed enthusiasm. |
||||||
|
Title: 30g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:29am 30g The Mob has a credible option to defend the c6-trap with 30g ED>E< plus a fourth step. Since I would have to spend one step to save my eastern dog, I would not be able to frame the Mob’s rabbit, and would probably have to defend my b6-rabbit with another rabbit on c7, allowing the Mob to pull it into c6 on the next turn for an awkward-looking position for me in the west. Nevertheless, the Mob’s move 29g has convinced me once and for all that the Mob is constitutionally incapable of playing passively. They will always counter-attack rather than defending, and I just have to get used to that. I don’t see any effective material counter-attack for the Mob, so all that remains is goal an eastern goal attack, despite my delaying rabbit step on 29s. I therefore expect 30g H^Rh2^ plus two more steps. For those two steps the Mob has many reasonable-looking options which seem to hinge on sharp tactics several moves into the future. Their f2-rabbit would be hanging, and their g-file is open, both of which can be remedied with Rf2>, but then they would have no defense of the f3-trap, which is important in some lines. 30g H^Rh2^ED< is optically strong for goal attacking, as it gets my dog on the wrong wing too, leaving only rabbits defending goal in the northeast, plus it incidentally threatens capture. It appears, however, that the simple 30s CR^*Rh6<Rg5> is then adequate to defense. A subtle point is that with the elephant off the fifth rank, my horse is able to come back to f5 in some lines. 30g H^Rh2^Rf>Re> protects the g-file and keeps my horse out of the east, but the lack of a capture threat allows 30s CR^*Rh6vE> as a defense. 30g H^Rh2^Re^^ precludes my elephant taking one eastern step on 31s, but perhaps then I could take two with 30s CR^*ERev. I guess I will have to predict the shiny-looking 30g H^Rh2^ED<, which makes me feel good because I believe that will let me catch up materially and still defend goal. |
||||||
|
Title: 30s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:30am 30s The Mob played 30g DfRvRf^^, and my heart sank when I saw it. I was so proud that my fourth step of 29s slowed down the Mob’s h-file rabbit that I didn’t even consider they would attack up the f-file instead. I was right that they would counter-attack rather than defend their threatened rabbit, and right that their counter-attack would need to be focused on goal rather than material. What I didn’t see was their excellent move to achieve these objectives. I simply must spend two steps of turn to capture the Mob’s c5-rabbit in c6. If I delay, my position will only get worse, because the pieces holding the rabbit in place, particularly my horse, can’t otherwise participate in the game. That leaves me two steps to try to defend against the Mob’s powerful goal threats. I would like to make use of my rabbit on g4 and the Mob’s thin goal defense by stationing my elephant on e3. Then if the Mob advances their f4 rabbit, it opens a four-step goal for my g4-rabbit through the f3-trap. They would be required to use one step on defense while attacking, which makes my own use of steps more efficient. Furthermore, it is good for my elephant to rest temporarily on e3 so that if the Mob attempts to take my horse hostage with 31g EHvv, I will have the resource of 31s HRvRH> to keep my horse at liberty. Finally, my elephant on e3 protects f3 so that I don’t lose my g4 rabbit, and thus remain behind only by cat for rabbit. So what to do for my fourth step? Defending the f6-trap with Rh6< would be ideal for trap control, but unfortunately weakens my h-file too much. After 30s CR^*E>Rh6< 31g DgR6<Rf^Re>, the Mob’s goal threat is too strong and mine is too weak. Their threat of 32g R5>E> is so strong that if they can stop my goal threat with their other two steps, I just flat lose. In particular, my move 31s Rg<E>HE<*, which captures a horse, and creates two goal threats, loses to 32g R5>E>Rh2<. What a bummer. What if I instead use my fourth step on something innocuous like R8>? That doesn’t weaken my h-file, but it does give the Mob one extra step on attack because their dog doesn’t have to push to g6. 30s CR^*E>R8> 31g Dg^Rf^>Re> sets up a goal-in one threat, so I again don’t have time to take the gold horse. Moreover, the threat is made without moving the gold elephant, so my horse is still shut out of the action. Having achieved material gain by a lopsided position, I would gladly restore piece balance to stop the Mob’s goal threat, but it seems they need not give me that option. I hate to contemplate that I might not get the efficiency of having my elephant on e3, but I might be forced to play 30s E^HR^*E>. My horse would rather chase after the invading gold dog, but if it doesn’t run away from the gold elephant, it will simply be taken hostage. My elephant is the wrong piece for defending against the goal attack, but do I have a choice? Perhaps in this position I will, for a change, do some deep tactical analysis to decide between my primary choices, rather than relying solely on my strategic instincts as I have for most of the game. I built my reserve up to fifteen days, and this seems like a fine move to spend it on. … I confess, this is the first position of the game in which I miss having a computer to help me analyze. The goal threats on both sides mean that I have to spend time sorting out moves that merely look deadly from moves that actually are deadly. A computer could do that instantly and accurately, but I must suffer through the analysis myself, and probably come out with the wrong answer anyway. Yet I don’t regret my resolution not to use computer assistance. My goal attack and defense are still quite weak, so I need all the practice analyzing in my head that I can get. … My reserve is almost drained, and I haven’t done that deep analysis that I promised myself. I would simply submit 30s E^HR^*E> on instinct and on the shallow analysis I have done, except that it occurred to me that 30s CR^*RE> deprives the Mob of the d3 square for forking my horse, so that in some lines my elephant can leave e3 while my horse is still standing on d5. So before I decline to take the rabbit in that fashion, I would rather be very sure the Mob has a crushing attack to deter me. If my defenses hold, for example 30s CR^*RE> 31g Dg^Rf^^E> 31s RDe^DRv, then leaving my horse in the center looks strongest. … All right, I think I am going to take the plunge with 30s CR^*RE>, hoping that there is no forced goal that I have overlooked. The gold rabbit on d3 matters in the critical continuation 31g Dg^Rf^>Re> 31s E^>^Rg< 32g Rf^H<RH>* 32s E^Dev*Rf>, where Gold can’t push the horse to d3, forking and winning it. Alternatively 32g Rd>H<RH>* 32s E^Dev*Rf> 33g EHvv 33s Db>vDC> means there is no good square for the Mob to hold my horse hostage on, allowing me at least to make a race of it. A losing race, perhaps, but at least a legitimate fight. In short, I have several intuitions about the position, i.e. that I must take the Mob’s rabbit, that my horse wants to be on d5, and that my elephant wants to be on e3. If that configuration doesn’t lose me the game by goal, it should gain me time in the trap control fight, and leave me just down a cat for a rabbit in a tense position. I will still be losing, of course, but given how desperate I have been since giving up my camel hostage in the opening, such an ending is all I can ask for even if I ultimately lose it. … Aargh! Just as I was going to enter my move I saw that 30s CR^*RE>31g Dg^Rf^>Re> 31s E^>^Rg< is crushed by 32g EvHvDg^Rg>. It makes a world of difference that the rabbit is not pinned in the trap, so that the Mob has a scattering option available. I tried to save my d5-horse, e3-elephant configuration in a variety of ways, but I just couldn’t do it. It turns out the Mob’s f4 rabbit is simply to powerful to permit to advance. Therefore I’m back to the uninspiring 30s E^HR^*E> in order to slow down the Mob’s rabbit. It doesn’t give me half the chances at counterplay of the other move does, but at least it will lose relatively slowly. Oh, well. I guess the Mob could always make a mistake later. |
||||||
|
Title: 31g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:30am 31g The Mob has me over a barrel with their elephant-dog attack. Given that MHx is gone from both sides, the ED attack is the new EH attack. My elephant will be obliged to defend the f6 trap, and my horse had to leave the center and relinquish its crossing prospects. The standard strategy would be for Gold to swarm on the wing where my elephant is tied down, in order to tie me down even more and release their own elephant. However, they can’t be in too great a hurry with 31g ED<Dg^, because then my horse would triumphantly cross to the east after all, temporarily able to slide through e5 due to my elephant on e4. The gold elephant has to stay put for now. On the other hand, I am threatening to capture the f4-rabbit in f6. There is no way the Mob wants to let go of their excellent rabbit in exchange for capturing my sickly g4 rabbit with 31g RHvHR<*. Therefore the Mob must play at least Dg^ to secure shared control of f6. The Mob’s other three steps are less clear to me. Coming after my horse with the gold elephant would be a clear waste of time. First they must tie down my elephant, and only then use the fact that their elephant is more mobile than mine, making my horse less free to roam. The all-out attack 31g Dg^HR^Rf^ is amusing, but can be slowed by 31s H^>De>H> with a counter-threat to capture the attacking rabbit in f3. I would have time to secure my position with the positional improvement that my endangered g4-rabbit would be safer on g5. The Mob’s three steps don’t suffice to unfreeze the f4-rabbit with anything other than the horse, so I suspect that their best play is to put the goal attack on hold and think strategically about the control game. One option is 31g Dg^Ra2>RCav to threaten two rabbits at once. That’s a good plan to keep for future reference, but at the moment f6 is not yet secure, so 31s ERvE^Rg< threatens a dog and goal and gives me time to consolidate and try to save everything. If I managed to get my horse and dog going against c3, that rabbit on a3 would be an asset to me rather than a liability. First the Mob should make sure I can’t contest the c3 trap. And that brings me to my actual move prediction. 31g Dg^Rh2^Re^^ shores up the Mob’s f3 trap and starts a swarm consistent with the general plan of an ED attack. For a positional move like this, I am unlikely to predict exactly correctly, but the Mob will love to advance rabbits with three pieces off each side, so I doubt I will be far wrong. Rd^ is also tempting because it overprotects c3 in case I have any ideas of counterplay there, but I rather expect the Mob to be focused on its own attack rather than on slowing down my plans. 31g Dg^Re>^^ might be optically strong, but appears over-eager to me. After 31s REvER<, the Mob might regret having filled their f3-trap, granting my g4 rabbit a move to breathe. |
||||||
|
Title: 31s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:52am 31s I was shocked by the Mob’s 31g Dg^ED<Re^. In my analysis, I had seen my possible reply 31s H>>>Ev and looked no further. I reasoned that the Mob surely couldn’t allow their advanced dog to be given as a hostage to my horse. Alas, after the fact I see that the Mob could pull my f7 rabbit into the f6-trap, after which I would have no way to save it. My instincts are not attuned to a situation where I have so few defenders around my home traps that I don’t have an extra one to bring up behind it. This turn of events is terribly demoralizing. I had begun to see lines where I retained a rabbit as compensation for my lost cat, but now it appears I am forced to return the rabbit immediately. I don’t see anything better than 31s ER^<, trying to endanger the Mob’s advanced rabbit in the c6-trap. This late in the game it is probably suicidal to bring an enemy rabbit forward, but how else should I even complicate the game? Since it turns out that my horse is an inadequate defender of the northeast, my elephant must park there if I am not to lose in short order. The northwest is the only other place I have pieces that can threaten anything. I have looked at a few tries for the Mob to gain more than simply capturing my g4-rabbit, and I don’t see any worse trouble than that. Then I would be a cat down once again, and every trade makes my cat disadvantage worse, but I would at least have some minimal compensation from threatening their advanced rabbit. I could be wrong, though. I almost hope that the Mob has a devastating followup to put me out of my misery. |
||||||
|
Title: 32g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:53am 32g The Mob has some flashy moves that might look tempting given the fragile nature of my position. 32g EDvv threatens my dog, my horse, and goal in one. But 32s E^DE<*Db> trades dogs with a probable rabbit trade to follow. The Mob can do better than trade DR for DR. Going straight for a goal would be the Mob’s style, but 32g ED<EvRe^, threatening my horse and threatening goal in two steps appears comfortably met by 32 Dc>H^DRv. Other direct goal tries also appear to let me get a piece in front of the threatened rabbit. According to my analysis, 32g RHvHR<* is simplest and best, so that’s my prediction. The Mob’s horse would not be hanging, since taking it would allow goal, so I would play something like 32s H>RHvDb> to get a threat against the Mob’s rabbit before it could be supported. My threat would be poor compensation for the Mob’s extra cat, which is precisely why the Mob should allow it for the privilege of getting my rabbit off the board. Given my track record, though, my analysis is not to be trusted. Probably the Mob will come up with some devastating plan that hasn’t even occurred to me. |
||||||
|
Title: 32s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:53am 32s As expected, the Mob made the simple and strong move of capturing my g4 rabbit. That makes 8 of 32 moves I have correctly predicted. ... After a week of vacation, I return to the game with fresh eyes only to see how hopeless my position is. Being down by a cat in an endgame is in itself quite bad, but my depleted eastern flank and the Mob's well-placed dog on g6 put me at a positional disadvantage as well. I wanted a race, but now that the position has become extremely imbalanced, it is obvious that the Mob can generate a goal in the east faster than I could in the west. My only hope is for the Mob to blunder, which they haven't done all game. I see nothing better than continuing with my plan to harass the Mob's advanced rabbit with 32s H>RHvDb>. That incidentally creates a threat to capture the Mob's hanging horse as well. My hope is that the Mob will make the strategic mistake of attempting to defend their rabbit, but throughout the game they haven't shown the slightest inclination to defense. Of course they will ignore my current threat as well and counter-attack instead. Earlier, I had briefly hoped to win back a rabbit to be down only slightly in material, but at present I don't imagine that I can win a rabbit without giving up either a rabbit or a goal in return. |
||||||
|
Title: 33g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:53am 33g I don't see a way for the Mob to advance its d5-rabbit or to save it without allowing its elephant to be awkwardly pinned. The Mob could pull my f7 rabbit into f6, which would have won a rabbit outright in another line, but here is too slow. Among other things, it would open the possibility of my horse switching wings along the fourth rank. It would be typical for the Mob to ignore material and advance a rabbit as quickly as possible in the east, say with 33g H>Rh2<^^, but then 33s H>>HRv is fine for me. They may have a safer way to advance a rabbit, though, as I have overlooked their attacking possibilities in the past. The Mob should at least consider trying to capture my dog and/or horse in their home traps, but I don't see how to pull it off. Trading dogs would be silly for them given the current power of their g6-dog. I'm going to predict 33g H>RH<Re^. A rabbit trade is great for the Mob, as it would weaken my east even further while not hurting them positionally. I would be forced to launch a doomed elephant-rabbit attack in the southeast. The Mob, with its prodigious tactical calculation ability, will not fear a dangerous-looking line that they can prove will peter out. They will instead force matters to a head, which will be a mercy to me relative to drawing out my misery even further. |
||||||
|
Title: 33s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:54am 33s The Mob thought for the full week and played the surprising 33g ED<R5>E>. I would have thought they had something better to do than reverse my dragging their rabbit from e5 to d5. True, because of the way the repetition rule works, I can’t directly undo their move, but I can effectively undo it with 33s Dc>H>HR<. Then it will have to be the Mob that deviates, not me. I frankly don’t see what they gain by having forced my horse to from d4 to e5. I am going to make this move with perhaps the least analysis of any move so far in the game. Mostly this is a byproduct of despair; I think I am strategically forced to hunt down the Mob’s advanced rabbit even though it is a losing strategy. If there is some tactical point that I am overlooking which will speed my demise even more relative to the doom I already face, then so be it. |
||||||
|
Title: 34g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:54am 34g I am trying to understand why the Mob wanted my horse on e5 rather than on d4. They can fork it with 34g EHvv, but this seems to lose material after 34s E^DEv*Ev. More promising would be a single push while protecting their exposed horse and dog with, say, 34g EHvRe>Dg^, but then I can hold everything together starting with Rh6< to protect the f6 trap. I think I will predict the same move I did for 33g, namely H>RH<Re^. A rabbit trade is as fruitless for me now as it was before. The Mob must realize this and not expect me to trade rabbits, because if they did expect a trade then their move 33g results in the same position after the trade, except one move later, delaying their ultimate victory by two weeks. Instead I am guessing that my horse on e5 is a liability in this line, frozen if my elephant leaves first, and soon in danger of capture in f6. I think this is the answer to the riddle of 33g: The Mob already knew that a rabbit trade was hopeless for me, so they maneuvered to make my last-ditch ER charge hopeless as well. |
||||||
|
Title: 34s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:54am 34s The Mob confounded my prediction again, playing 34g EHvRe>Dg^ as I considered but dismissed. I certainly didn’t do any deep analysis to justify my intuition last time, so the obvious conclusion is that the move I did predict works less well than I thought it would, or that the move the Mob actually played works better than I thought it would. It seems improbable that the Mob simply miscalculated. On the other hand, I noticed several people posted to the forum thread for the Mob’s move after their move had been played on the board. (I don’t read the Mob’s discussion, but since I constantly hang out in the forum, I can’t help but see when people post.) My recollection from the 2007 Mob game is that we seldom discussed anything after sending the move unless there was a sharp split in the voting and someone thought we had made the wrong choice. Knowing that the Mob’s discussion continued raises my estimate of the probability of a Mob mistake from miniscule to merely minor. One possibility for me is 34s Dc>H>>^, chasing the Mob’s exposed dog. This seems promising because my horse can’t easily be persecuted by the Mob’s elephant, and my exposed dog can’t be chased by the Mob’s horse because of the weakness of their eastern wing. Whether my horse takes the Mob’s dog hostage, or their dog runs away, my elephant is suddenly freed from defending the Mob’s urgent goal and material threats in the east, while their central rabbit remains an liability to them. Strategically this looks promising. Tactically, however, the Mob could apparently force the trade of DR for DR with 35g EvEDvDg^ 35s H^^DHv 36g ED<*CaR>. After the pieces come off, I am still behind by a cat, which weighs more as the board become emptier. Futhermore, my rebalancing of pieces would leave horse facing horse in the east, which would tend to deaden the position and make the creation of an endgame race less likely. Therefore I am drawn to the sharp move 34s Rh6<EvDdR<. Yes, that permits my horse to be forked and/or taken hostage between the Mob’s traps. On the other hand, eliminating the Mob’s only advanced rabbit, even at the potential cost of a rabbit in the f6-trap, would give my small western pieces the freedom to advance, potentially enabling a double-trap swarm by me, with my elephant contesting the Mob’s eastern trap while my little guys fight for the southwest. My pieces are not badly aligned for a swarm; it would be a bonus that my elephant would be attacking the trap with the Mob’s deputy. Also my advanced rabbits, which are a liability in a tame and balanced position, become an asset in a swarm. Finally, the possible dissension within the Mob gives me courage to play sharply, even though the Mob should by rights be better at calculating tactics than I am, and therefore should have foreseen and refuted my move before allowing me to play it. Yes, the Mob will have a pair of powerful strategic assets in the form of holding my horse hostage and their dog playing sherrif of the northeast, which combined with their extra cat still give them the upper hand. However, according to my calculations, I don’t immediately lose material and I do get a tense, unbalanced position. Given that my other option is trading down into a sterile endgame behind by a cat, I will not be sad to lose via a last-ditch swarm instead. |
||||||
|
Title: 35g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:55am 35g The Mob’s c5-rabbit can be saved only by its elephant, which has more important things to do. Passive play is no longer an option for them. Indeed, they must not only play actively, but quickly. My threat is to share control of all four traps, making it impossible for them to ever make a capture for the remainder of the game. The two steps EHv, forking my horse, seem mandatory. If the Mob has no capture threat in the c3-trap, I have too many possibilities for capturing the c5-rabbit and consolidating with the other two steps. Pushing the horse a second time, however, can only weaken the threat by either giving me a second defender of the c3-trap, or by allowing my dog to retreat from the c3-trap. On the other hand, my horse standing next to the f3-trap will give me the bodacious goal threat of 35s Rh4vEvEH^. This may have been overlooked by the Mob’s computer checking, given that 36g HE<EDv* appears to win a horse for a rabbit, when in fact 36s HvvHR^* appears to force goal or win the Mob’s horse in another few moves. Therefore, if the Mob intends to fork my horse (and I think they must), it seems they also need the defensive step Rh2^. That is hardly pure defense, since my own eastern defense is so weak. My goal line is almost h4, given the gold dog waiting to help any gold rabbit that gets so far. Nevertheless, that leaves the Mob only one free step. I don’t see anything they can do with that step to deter 35s CR^*Ddvv, winning a rabbit for nothing. Indeed, very few single steps improve the Mob’s position at all. Therefore I predict 35g EhvRh2^Rh1^. Am I hallucinating? Probably, because the Mob never blunders material. But they do get a horse hostage for it, so perhaps it is according to their plan, and I will shortly feel the pain. |
||||||
|
Title: 35s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:55am 35s The Mob played 35g Rh2^Db^E^<, defying my glib assertion that their elephant could not defend passively, and had more important things to do. I forgot to adequately account for the fact that defending an advanced rabbit is inherently also threatening to bring that rabbit to goal in some degree. The Mob’s dog advance prevents me from simply framing the advanced rabbit, as I otherwise intended to do (based on remembered calculations from when I had a dog on b4, blocking the Mob’s dog). Indeed, it seems that I must now keep the Mob’s dog out of b6 at all costs. Furthermore, the Mob’s step Rh2^, which was necessary for defense, also has a latent attacking threat because my defense of the h-file is paper-thin. Another way in which my predictions have been confounded is that I confidently asserted that the Mob would never again be in time trouble. Indeed I stopped keeping track of how they were using their time because it seemed like a distraction. The temptation to time my own moves differently in order to influence the Mob’s time usage was simply a pitfall for me to put pressure on myself. But somehow over the past several moves they have slowly drained their reserve to just one day. I can only guess that they perceive their position as getting worse. A brief analysis suggests that 35s Ra7^^Rb8^< is a viable way to protect the c6-trap and keep the Mob’s dog at bay. I will have to look closer at the tactics, but strategically it would feel good to be using three of four steps on rabbit advancement in a position nearing the endgame, in which I was just last turn calculating whether I was sufficiently advanced to start a swarm. If the rabbit advance is not viable, it seems that I would have to keep the b4-dog out of b6 by pulling the Mob’s advanced rabbit to b5 while plugging c5 with a dog. This would be a strategic concession and net loss of time, as I make my capture threat less pressing while advancing nothing. But if that’s the only way to prevent an invasion without losing material, it may be forced on me. … Further analysis shows that 35s Ra7^^Rb8^< is refuted by 36g ED>EvRd^. In previous analysis I had dodged this sort of maneuver by sliding my c4-dog back to b4, but now that the Mob’s dog is on b4, I have no retreat. Thus the Mob’s move 35g was strong for more reasons than I realized. My alternatives appear to be 35s RC<Dc^E> and 35s Dc>D5RvE>. I would prefer to keep the Mob’s advanced rabbit on b5 rather than c4, because on b5 it is more threatened and it blocks the b4-dog from b6. On the other hand, the rabbit would remain more of a threat on offense from b5, and I may need the option of pushing the rabbit into the c3-trap in order for my swarm not to lose a piece. The elephant step is both an attempt to race and a recognition that my elephant has nothing else to do. It can’t leave the east without permitting immediate catastrophe anyway, so my elephant might as well try to generate a threat on offense instead of remaining passive while the rest of my pieces fight for their lives. I have three threats in this position: capturing the Mob’s advanced rabbit; forcing goal in the southeast; and chasing their g7 dog with my horse. The latter is so slow as to be incidental to the main action, so I would temporarily prefer to leave my horse in the middle where it can choose to help with the goal attack or help me not lose material in the c3-trap. But, all positional thinking aside, it all comes down to tactical analysis. Knowing that the Mob has a refutation to my strategically preferred move makes me wonder whether both of my present two candidates are tactically flawed as well. … Yep, they’re both flawed. 35s RC<Dc^E> fails to 36g EDvv. My d3-dog could then only be saved by my c5-dog, but mobbing the latter opens up both the threat of the Mob’s b5-rabbit goaling up the center, and the threat of my b6-rabbit being captured in the c6-trap. 35s Dc>D5RvE> also appears inadequate, although it prolongs the struggle. 36g EvEdvRh1^ 36s EH<DcRv 37g Re2>^EDv gives the Mob enough defense of the southeast while regaining control of the c3-trap to win more material. Therefore I am now leaning towards 35s Dc>D5RvHv. I hate for my horse to abandon the hope of ever coming back to the f6-trap to menace the Mob’s dog and provide some defense to free up my elephant. Also I hate to voluntarily move my horse closer to a position where the Mob’s elephant can fruitfully hold it hostage. Unfortunately, the strategically poor horse step seems tactically necessary to help me contest the c3-trap just a little bit longer than I otherwise could, buying me another few moves in which the Mob could blunder. I know the Mob isn’t going to crumble, but I have to keep hope alive as long as I can. If I need to resign, I can always do so later. |
||||||
|
Title: 36g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:56am 36g With its goal threat pushed back, the Mob has to switch gears again, and not continue its attack with 36g DbC<DR<. I could defend the c6-trap for a little while as I progressed in the southwest, and ultimately reach goal faster. 36g DbC<EvRh1^ is more critical, as I can’t defend both eastern traps at the same time, and therefore must lose a dog. Apparently, however, I can attack instead of defending and have just enough tempo to come out on top after 36s E>EH<R. Neither dog capture seems to work. 37g DbR<ED^* 37s EvRcE^H*C> or 37g EDv<* 37s EvER<*. I would not be surprised if I have miscalculated this race, because this is exactly the type of position where the computers and many eyeballs of the Mob should enable them to outplay me, but beggars can’t be choosers. Since I am a cat down, racing is my only hope. One should keep in mind that Mob’s dog is poised to make a capture threat in the f6-trap at any time, but at the moment it would be awkward with my elephant still in striking distance and none of my heavy pieces (yet) held hostage by the Mob’s elephant. The Mob’s elephant is under-utilized at the moment. It would like to either take my wayward horse hostage or capture one of my dogs in the c3-trap. Using three steps on 36g EvEDvRh1^ is a bid to keep both options open. I would need five steps to occupy both c4 and g3, so instead I would have to defend with something like 36s DcRvHvCb>, offering my horse hostage on e2 to prevent my dog from getting pushed to d2, which would lose control of the c3-trap. Oh, and the Mob’s rabbit step stifles my counter attack again. Ugh. That’s why I predict this move. Ironically, if the Mob directly attempts to take my horse hostage with 36g E>vvRh1^, it works less well because I have the option of 36s DcRvDdvH>. |
||||||
|
Title: 36s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:56am 36s The Mob played 36g HvRh3<^H^. I didn’t even consider this move, so I am presumably dead meat. At first glance I would say that I can no longer contemplate swarming, because the Mob’s g4-rabbit is now too threatening, but I am too far advanced to pull out of my swarm without suffering losses. First attention will go to 36s H^^>>, with a plan to give up on the f3-trap, use my elephant to defend the c3-trap, and (very optimistically) win something in the f6-trap with my horse or (somewhat optimistically) keep pace with what I am losing to the Mob in their home traps. The only thing the Mob’s move gives me strategically is the opportunity to target the rabbit they just pushed and the dog they left offside. Tactically, though, I expect my horse retreat to lose material because of my own offside rabbit and dog. … My defensive mindset is betrayed by the fact that I didn’t even notice the possibility of attacking with 36s EvEHvRhv until later. Of course, this will have been the first counter the Mob looked at. My attack is apparently strong enough to force the gold elephant home with 37g E>v>v, but it is cold comfort to have forced the Mob into a winning position. After 37s HvHR^Rhv 38g Rh<HR^Rg^, my elephant is the only thing that can stop the Mob’s rabbit, so I have to defend on 38s. Whether I use my elephant on defense then or on 37s, it would be strategic resignation on my part. I must defend the northeast with my horse to keep my elephant free to keep fighting. I’m not even going to use my whole week on this move, because no move other than 36s H^^>> looks remotely viable. |
||||||
|
Title: 37g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:57am 37g Although I made a defensive move, the position remains as tense as before if not moreso. The Mob can make capture threats in both c3 and c6, as well as having some goal pressure from their two fourth-rank rabbits. Meanwhile I am threatening an immediate capture in c6, threatening to take a hostage around f6, and threatening a goal attack of my own around f3. An optically devastating tactic for the Mob is 37g EvDbC<, threatening captures in both c3 and c6, which I can’t defend in only four steps. However, the Mob must use its fourth step for defense with Rh^, or else my goal attack with 37s RhvER> is too powerful for the Mob to execute either of its capture threats. And 37g EvDbC<Rh^ itself permits me to play 37s Rb8>vRg>H^, initiating a dog trade that at least keeps me hoping for a few more moves. That’s better than the immediate loss I feared when their 36g hit the screen. The direct attack on c6 with 37g DbC<DR< is tempting because it is awkward for me to defend, but in that case I can initiate a strong counter-attack instead. In that line I would be helped by having a slightly more advanced rabbit than the Mob has. I wish it were hard to find a crushing move for the Mob, but 37g EvEDdvDg^ is a very straightforward attempt to win a dog, for which I have no adequate counter. I talked before about using my elephant to defend the c3-trap, but analysis of this line convinces me that my center is too open for me to commit my elephant to the southwest. So instead of switching flanks with my elephant, I can perhaps try 37s DcRvC>Rhv, trying to keep the tension in the position for another move or two, but after the Mob takes my central dog hostage on d2 on move 38g, I can’t keep my position from collapsing for very long. I’m afraid the move 37g EvEDdvDg^ is only too easy to correctly predict. Sigh. |
||||||
|
Title: 37s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:57am 37s The Mob played 37g EvDbC<Rh^, which was at least a move that I had considered. That’s a step up from my performance the move before. On the other hand, the fact that the Mob moved in only two days after having earlier reduced their reserve to a bare minimum suggests that they had anticipated my move and my analysis was flawed. I thought 37s Rb8>vRg>H^ would be an adequate counter. Obviously, that’s the first move I will examine in my present analysis. … My intended move turns out to suck. I believe it gets me a dog trade, but then the Mob has a vastly superior position, i.e. an advantage of more than just a cat. The situation is, however, extremely sharp. I can initiate a goal race with 37s Rg>H^ER^, and perhaps the only way the Mob can beat my goal attack in the southeast is by racing me in the northwest. That’s a situation where tactics rule, so I will have to roll up my sleeves and analyze. … After several brain-burning hours, my analysis tree is showing some lines where I win the opposite-corner goal race. It may be that the Mob must not take my dog in f6, racing for goal, but rather take my other dog in f3, leaving their elephant available for home defense. Could it possibly be that the Mob only calculated far enough to see material gain, and miscalculated the goal race? I shouldn’t even hope for a tactical blunder by the Mob, with their many eyeballs and computer assistance, but they did move very quickly, which could mean they were relying on analysis from their discussion of 36g. That would mean their analysis was two ply shallower from the perspective of 37g, so an error creeps into the realm of possibility. But when I work on these goal races, I severely miss computer help, and I am probably overlooking critical lines. The position is so sharp that one tiny oversight in one line can totally change the evaluation. … Further analysis leaves me in doubt as to whether the Mob has a winning dog capture if I play the southeast goal attack. If the race is double-edged, as opposed to being clearly in my favor, I should expect that the Mob will outplay me tactically, so I should avoid the line merely because it is unclear. On the other hand, I see no alternative other than jumping into the minefield. There is no longer any way for me to quietly play for control and hope to come back gradually. The position is too complicated for me to analyze, so just maybe there is at least a tiny chance that the Mob will also have an analysis failure, and I will win by sheer luck. If you had asked me a few moves ago whether I would be willing to gamble everything on a super-sharp unclear goal race, of course I would have accepted it rather than a tortuous loss. I am not going to cry now for lack of another option. I will play 37s Rg>H^ER^ and be glad it gives even the appearance of hope. |
||||||
|
Title: 38g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:57am 38g The obvious direct try for the Mob to win is 38g DbR<EDc^*. I can’t recapture a dog in f6 without losing more material or a goal in short order. But, although I am two pieces down, I can race with 38s EH<Rh4vRb>, and apparently win because my lonely d4-dog is providing just enough defense to slow down the c4-rabbit and just enough offense to help my own attack through in some lines. Yes, there is a high probability my tactical calculation was faulty, in which case the Mob will play this move for a forced win, but I can’t predict a move without seeing why it works, can I? A less dangerous move for the Mob is 38g EDv<*, capturing in f3 to bring their elephant home on defense. This stops my goal attack, but leaves the Mob’s c4-rabbit, g5-rabbit, and g7-dog all in jeopardy. It appears that I can at least get a dog back, plus a rabbit, after tying the Mob’s elephant down on defense. On the other hand, the Mob could get a rollicking goal attack started up the middle while I was trying to catch up materially. From my analysis, I suspect I am objectively lost after this move. Given that, and given the way the Mob loves to attack, this is the move that I will predict. Apart from taking one of my dogs, the Mob can’t really improve its western position; two steps would be useless. Therefore their other alternative as far as I can see is to use all four steps on defense, say with 38g Rf>H>Rd>>, to stop my attack before it gets rolling. But this and similar moves allow 38s EvRh6vRa7>>, leaving only my d4-dog for capture, after which I get at least two rabbits and a good position in return, if not a dog and a rabbit outright. Therefore I expect the Mob to be forced into a sharp race whether they like it or not. |
||||||
|
Title: 38s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:58am 38s 38g DbR<EDc^* has hit the board. For the second move in a row, the Mob quickly played a move that I had considered but declared unsound. This time I saw JDB post at least twice to the discussion thread, so I know the Mob has had computer help. All signs point to the conclusion that my analysis was flawed, I am dead meat, and all that remains is for me to figure out why 38s EH<Rh4vRb>, which I considered a refutation of the Mob’s move, is actually a forced win for them. … Now I see it. I had been focused on the Mob directly racing with its c4-rabbit, or on coming home with its elephant to defend, or on trying to defend without its elephant. None of these plans work as far as I can see. But I failed to account for the power of the Mob’s g5-rabbit. With 39g H^>Rg< plus another step, the Mob sacrifices the rabbit, but buys enough time that they will win the goal race instead of me. It is in no way surprising that it would be me rather than the Mob overlooking a tiny but decisive tactical point. That is their strength. Oh, well, I hope the game was at least interesting to them. I puzzled over the Mob’s move for my own curiosity, not because it can help me now. I committed myself two moves ago. Now I am down a cat and a dog with no hope of recovery. Since I have no good moves any more, continuing the goal race as I originally planned is no longer a last, desperate hope, but rather a graceful way of resigning. |
||||||
|
Title: 39g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:58am 39g If the Mob begins its move with 39g H^>Rg<, a lot of different fourth steps win the game. For the sake of completeness in making a prediction every move, I will predict 39g H^>Rg<E>. |
||||||
|
Title: 39s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:58am 39s The Mob quickly played 39g H^>Rf>E>. I had the idea, but missed the execution by one step. Since they didn’t set up a goal in one, I have a chance to for a last hurrah, capturing their horse and setting up my own goal in one. Yay! Of course all of moves are losing. For the benefit of posterity, I will let the Mob demonstrate how the most obvious of my moves loses. Therefore I will play 39g EH<v*. |
||||||
|
Title: 40g Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:59am 40g The Mob must spend at least one step to defend my goal threat with Rg2^. The three steps that get them closest to goal are Cc^Rc^^C*. Therefore I predict 40g Rg2^Cc^Rc^^C*. There may be other winning moves for the Mob, but I don’t need to find them, do I? |
||||||
|
Title: 40s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 7:59am 40s A correct prediction of 40g Rg2^Cc^Rc^^C* leaves me 9 of 40 predicting for the game. I can mercifully no longer stop the Mob’s goal threat even if I want to, so there is no harm in ending the game with 40s E>ER<*Ev for a material advantage and an unstoppable goal threat. Good game, Mob! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Move 2 Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 8:47am 2g on 12/19/08 at 07:51:46, Adanac wrote:
Yep, I was joking with my trash talk, but really did feel at the time that E->e5 was best and the Mob's actual move was slightly inaccurate. I didn't properly account for the vulnerability of my a7 rabbit to being pulled. There's a serious irony here, because I took 2g E^^^Hb^ as a sign that chessandgo was dictating affairs to the Mob, when in fact chessandgo had been persuaded away from his original suggestion and was advocating 2g E^^^>. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Move 18 Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 11:50am on 08/31/09 at 10:05:44, RonWeasley wrote:
Rats, it looks like the Mob was on the verge of a snap consensus for the much weaker move. Time pressure almost worked in my favor there, but then you guys voted for the stronger move and still gained reserve. Maybe I had slightly more chance in this game than I realized. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Move 14 Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 11:55am 14g on 06/11/09 at 11:34:08, Simon wrote:
Well, I managed to scare Simon and arimaa_master at least. I am happy that you guys at least felt some pressure, although I never thought I was winning at any point after 10s. Perhaps my over-confident trash talk served some purpose of keeping you in doubt. :) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Move 19 Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 12:00pm 19g on 09/09/09 at 10:06:58, jdb wrote:
In hindsight my 18s was a tactical miscalculation. If I had seen in advance how badly the horse trade would work out for me, I would have played differently. However, the invasion of the Mob's western horse was putting me in a serious tempo shortage, so I am not sure I had a good move available. I don't feel nearly as bad about this tactical inaccuracy as I do about 10s. The Mob's discussion on 20g and its eventual move really showcase the Mob's tactical prowess, and show why it is so hard for the lone player to compete. Even if there has been a long sequence of relatively quiet moves, cashing in on a strategic advantage always requires some sharp bloodletting eventually, and that is when any tactical deficiency can more than undo any strategic gains. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Move 28 Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 12:30pm 28g on 01/16/10 at 17:01:51, RonWeasley wrote:
Gosh, given the incessant coin flipping, it's no wonder I had trouble predicting the Mob's moves. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Move 35 Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 12:57pm 35g on 05/04/10 at 04:12:59, RonWeasley wrote:
Argh! How could the Mob be so chaotic and still crush me with ease? That's rubbing salt in the wound. >:( |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by Fritzlein on Jun 1st, 2010, 1:21pm I have finished skimming all the Mob discussion. I now have a very different impression than I did before. The Mob is not nearly as infallible as I was giving it credit for. In particular, after 38g I was convinced that the Mob had analyzed to a forced goal when it had done no such thing. I think I was just psychologically broken down from having tried so hard to come back from the early camel hostage, to no avail. This game has taught me above all how flawed my own play is, and how much room there is to play better than I do, particularly since there seems to be plenty of room to play better than the Mob which already plays far above me. There is still much uncertainty and confusion about Arimaa strategy, and great possibility to refine our tactical training. More clearly than before, I anticipate the possibility of a 3000-level player emerging. The future of Arimaa is bright. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Move 14 Post by Hippo on Jun 2nd, 2010, 12:13am on 06/01/10 at 11:55:24, Fritzlein wrote:
I were not in arimaa comunity at that time ... but ex post ... was the move 14g ending with Ef3 instead Eg4 winning fast? BTW: Thanks for the comments |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Move 14 Post by Fritzlein on Jun 2nd, 2010, 4:35am on 06/02/10 at 00:13:25, Hippo wrote:
That's an interesting suggestion. It looks more accurate than the Mob's actual move, because it forces my elephant to lose time going to d3. In the actual game my elephant was able to hang out on d4 until forced to head north, so I gained two steps net relative to your suggestion. I was concerned at the time to prevent the Mob from activating its eastern horse, and thrilled to discover on 14s that I could also prevent activation of the the Mob's eastern dog. I believe that after your suggested move, I would have been forced to give up on containing the dog. So my time loss would not merely have been academic; it would have forced an immediate positional concession from me. On the other hand, I don't know what you mean when you say your move would be "winning fast". Is there some forced capture that I'm not seeing here? Quote:
I'm glad you are enjoying my comments. I had fun writing while I was playing, but there were definitely times when it would have been more convenient for me to just move without having to explain my thought process. Therefore, it will be gratifying if my efforts on this score are of some interest/use to the community. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by Hippo on Jun 2nd, 2010, 6:06am Let me clarify that ... actually the move was suggested in the discussion and lost 3:5 to the move played. Fast has no real meaning here. I just think it constraints your options more. With dog operating on NE and horse on NW it seems to be thought for you. (If I remember it well I have went through the entire game almost at the same time I start contributing to the mob. I have tried do it move by move before looking to the future. I would not propose the same 13g now, but I would surely give 4th vote for that 14g. It seems to me each plan with Eg4 can be achieved with Ef3 in that position so advocating Ef3 would be easy.) I must agree the power of cooperating mob is big, but sometimes mob drifted almost without contributions. Interesting was how Nombril's deeper study persuaded c&g his intuition is not OK... especially saving the rabbit that goals at the end. I have enjoyed my participation in the Mob at the end of the game as well as going through all the discussion. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by Fritzlein on Jun 2nd, 2010, 9:49am on 06/02/10 at 06:06:12, Hippo wrote:
Yes, it was quite clear from reading the comments that chessandgo wasn't just dictating moves to the Mob. I wasn't beaten up by one strong player or a couple of strong players; I was beaten by cooperation of a team. It would be hard for me to understand how that could happen if I hadn't been on the inside of it the previous time around. When cooperation is so effective, it makes me feel good about the future of humanity. Individually we each can do some pretty stupid things, but collectively we can come a lot closer to perfection. :) Thanks for your comments, Hippo, and for taking the time to read mine. It makes me feel happy and proud. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 29s Post by Nombril on Jun 3rd, 2010, 3:59am Fritz, thanks for taking the time to record your thoughts, reasons, and predictions. It made very interesting reading for me. (Well, at least the opening and when I picked up again at move 28 when I joined the discussion...) I wish I had time to compile a summary of the mob views to intersperse between some of your descriptions. I found it very intriguing to see the number of times our respective view of the game was completely opposite of each other. With both sides having the same knowledge of the physical position, Arimaa amazes me by how differently each person interprets what is happening. One example: After 28g, where we had a move selected by flipping a coin: on 01/19/10 at 07:30:19, Adanac wrote:
on 06/01/10 at 07:29:10, Fritzlein wrote:
Ron - I think you most frequently predicted what Fritz would do - did you happen to keep a tally of how often you were correct? |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 29s Post by RonWeasley on Jun 3rd, 2010, 5:03am on 06/03/10 at 03:59:38, Nombril wrote:
Really? No, I was not keeping any personal statistics. Or any at all. I spent lots of energy on this game, mainly making sure each move was getting attention and trying to invite comments. Then trying to move to a consensus. I was constantly worried that we would run out of time or that too few players were contributing. Another thing worrying me was that mobsters might not be following the entire discussion after making a comment. There was no way to know if a mind-changing critical comment was going unread. One social dynamic that worried me was that potential mobsters might not comment when they disagreed with the value of a proposed line, for fear of exposing their own ignorance to the rest of TheMob. This seems like natural human nature but is counterproductive in this setting. TheMob is not a top players' club. I was most happy to see comments like "how do we respond to ....". Even if easily refuted, I thought the response illuminated the position significantly. After a while, I tried to include from my own analysis comments like "I looked at xxxx and it went badly because of yyyy". Adding to my worries was that the number of mobsters voting was decreasing and I'm thinking many people thought if they weren't making comments they shouldn't vote. Keeping up with this difficult game is hard on anybody, so it's not a big surprise that not many people could do it. Those who did were rewarded with a good one. I expect these games only to get harder in the future. I spent so much effort on this that I would like it if somebody else did the moderation on the next game. I need a rest. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by Hippo on Jun 3rd, 2010, 5:36am Yes, we must very thank you for your continous effort. Even after I started contributing (at the end) there were moves I was not participating. Seems none of mobsters was contributing all the time. Except you ... the coordinator. In a case you were going to 14 days holidays we would lost on time ... I think if we could play without a moderator at all. May be there should be account for the Mob where all interested mobsters could log to be able to made the move agreed on sufficient consensus. The rules for consensus could be more formal in that case ... for example mobsters should mark their intention to vote in upcomming moves. There should be some expiration time not to block the mob ... Or the voting system itself could be coded to play move itself? I expect there would be a lot of problems to solve during the game even when such a system of rules would be defined. On the contrary the enthusiasm with creating the rules video shows there could be working system without a leader. So who knows :) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by Fritzlein on Jun 3rd, 2010, 6:53am on 06/03/10 at 05:36:42, Hippo wrote:
Ha ha! Exactly the opposite was true. The rules video would have bogged down and never even been completed if Omar hadn't stepped in and started making decisions. As for the Mob game, I congratulate Ron on his efforts. I recall from the Kasparov vs. World match that when the World did not have a strong facilitator, the discussion was pretty much a useless flame war. The only reason the World became a formidable foe to Kasparov was that Irina Krush started facilitating, actually gathering the suggestions and refutations into a comprehensive analysis tree. The power of the Mob is not in the voting, it is in the discussion. Again, well done Mob & Ron. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by Arimabuff on Jun 3rd, 2010, 9:08am on 06/03/10 at 06:53:51, Fritzlein wrote:
Does this mean that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts? |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by Fritzlein on Jun 3rd, 2010, 11:11am on 06/03/10 at 09:08:17, Arimabuff wrote:
Yes, according to the Banach-Tarski Paradox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banach%E2%80%93Tarski_paradox). ;) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 29s Post by Fritzlein on Jun 3rd, 2010, 11:24am on 06/03/10 at 03:59:38, Nombril wrote:
Thanks, Nombril. That's an interesting insight. I am not sure how much this arises from different perspectives as from blind spots and tunnel vision. If I could have read the analysis going on in the Mob, I might not have disagreed so much. Chessandgo once said something that didn't strike me as important at the time, but which now comes back to me with particular force. He wanted to correct the "leak" in his game of examining too few candidate moves. Normally I'm only made aware of the problem when my opponent makes a strong move I didn't consider, but the privilege of reading the Mob's commentary makes me aware that there were strong moves for me that I didn't consider. Particularly in a postal game, I don't have to worry that looking at my bad moves will give me no time to look at my good moves. I should loosen up the breadth of my search and worry less about the depth. The Mob, of course, has the luxury of breadth and depth, because the blind spots of each individual are likely to be corrected by the insight of other individuals. When I'm playing all by my lonesome, however, I should try somehow to broaden my tunnel vision myself, by disciplining myself to take alternatives seriously. Given that Arimaa has a gargantuan branching factor, I shouldn't be surprised by oversights. On the contrary, I should expect them, and be amazed that two different people ever independently reach the same conclusion. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by Hippo on Jun 3rd, 2010, 11:28am on 06/03/10 at 06:53:51, Fritzlein wrote:
Oh I have not watched carefully ... oh yes starting by selecting megajester for the voiceover. So that mean he finally accepted our will to make him dictator :), but except Arimabufs immediate response I have not notice a problem with it. on 06/03/10 at 06:53:51, Fritzlein wrote:
I agree the moderator is important, I just think it neednot be fixed and naturally some would arise. on 06/03/10 at 06:53:51, Fritzlein wrote:
Of course the pre-voting discussion is the most important. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 29s Post by Hippo on Jun 3rd, 2010, 12:10pm on 06/03/10 at 11:24:46, Fritzlein wrote:
Yes it would be interesting to write down what moves expected by mob from you do you consider better than the move you actually played (If you have time and will). |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by chessandgo on Jun 5th, 2010, 1:49am Good game Karl! And wow @ the comments ... I'm going to read them, and give you some feedback as I progess through them. Starting to replay the game, I realized that this game has lasted so long I had absolutely forgotten most of it :) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by chessandgo on Jun 5th, 2010, 2:06am Today chessandgo commented on my game against clueless that "a horse hostage is worth significantly more than a camel hostage in my opinion, 'under the proper conditions' as you say jdb, basically that gold has an advanced piece (Horse) on the hostage wing that silver's camel cannot mess with within a move or 2". That describes the type of hostage the Mob could get against me by sacrificing a cat, and since chessandgo rarely comments on games these days, I can't help but wonder whether his comment now is part of a raging debate within the Mob. Given that a camel hostage is worth slightly more than a cat, getting my horse hostage by their camel must be worth far more than a cat, in chessandgo's opinion. Hmmm, even though these values can heavily depend on the position, I would rather capture a Cat than get a good Horse hostage (rather get a good Horse hostage than a caMel hostage). Also, assuming that getting some hostage has the same value as capturing some piece, then giving up this piece for this hostage is subpar (since the fight with one piece down will yield less than the original fight). So no, I think I would have advocated against a cat sac on 6g (did I? :)) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by Fritzlein on Jun 5th, 2010, 6:09am on 06/05/10 at 02:06:18, chessandgo wrote:
Thanks for clarifying the relative values in your judgment. I didn't know that you valued a camel hostage less than a cat capture. I must be old fashioned, because I still value a camel hostage (at least a good one) more than a cat. It's funny that in the Mob game, a cat capture is exactly what giving up my camel as a hostage eventually cost me. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by chessandgo on Jun 6th, 2010, 2:26am on 06/05/10 at 06:09:55, Fritzlein wrote:
It's interesting that you thought your position was losing after 10s. As far as I remember, all the way until 19s we were very unsure about how to assess the position. We sure would gladly have traded this camel hostage for a cat, and maybe even for just the promise of an equal position :) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by Harren on Jun 6th, 2010, 2:37am I haven't really paid attention to this game before, but I'll surely do so soon; with all the comments, from both fritzlein and the Mob, this is a very well studied game. I'm sure I'll learn something from it :) So the Mob has won twice from the One. Is it perhaps an idea for the next time to pitch the Mob against two or three persons? I would for instance be very interested to find out how the Mob will play against the combined forces of Fritzlein and Chessandgo. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by Fritzlein on Jun 6th, 2010, 7:30am on 06/06/10 at 02:37:51, Harren wrote:
That's an interesting suggestion. I would also be curious about the Mob's strength, as well as the strength of my partnership with chessandgo. (What move would we make if we couldn't agree? But even if we simply alternated making moves, having someone to discuss with would be hugely helpful.) I'm afraid, however, that the Mob would not be large enough or enthusiastic enough to compete. It appears from the discussion that the Mob was skirting a minimum participation at times even during the last game. Size and morale are very important to the Mob's competitiveness. Unless there is some change in Mob psychology, we may have seen Arimaa's last Mob game for a long time. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by Fritzlein on Jun 6th, 2010, 7:32am on 06/06/10 at 02:26:56, chessandgo wrote:
I guess I also felt worse about being down a cat because it was more certainly bad, whereas the camel hostage could have turned good if the Mob had misplayed badly enough. Still, there was some dichotomy of opinion as I considered myself in much worse shape all along than the Mob did. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by chessandgo on Jun 6th, 2010, 11:05am on 06/06/10 at 07:30:21, Fritzlein wrote:
I'd definitely love it :) I learnt things as the One, learnt much more as part of the Mob, and I'd expect playing in tandem with Fritz would be engrossing as well. But: on 06/06/10 at 07:30:21, Fritzlein wrote:
This (unfortunately). |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by chessandgo on Jun 6th, 2010, 11:35am on 06/06/10 at 07:32:24, Fritzlein wrote:
Indeed. Btw, what is your current opinion of the game before 19s? What do you think of just keeping the position basically as it stands, like 19s de5ss ra6ss or rb8ss? I would fail to feel confident as gold after such a move... |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by Fritzlein on Jun 6th, 2010, 12:50pm on 06/06/10 at 11:35:00, chessandgo wrote:
It seemed strategically quite hopeless for me with your horse running around behind my home traps. That would free your camel to come to e3 as well, so I would by no means obtain shared control of f3 and a roving elephant. In previous moves your camel's options were limited by the possibility of me flipping it towards f6. Likewise, after your horse breakthrough I could no longer threaten to flip cats towards capture in f6 if your horse could cover it. There remains a threat of my exposed little pieces being captured in c3. And if nothing else sharp there is a goal threat brewing in the northwest with the gold horse being the strongest local piece around c6, such that you can threaten me there while I can't threaten you. I guess since you see the position as so double-edged while I see it as strategically won for Gold, I should take another look at it. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Fritz's commentary Post by chessandgo on Jun 7th, 2010, 4:50am I see what you mean. Still, I think you can attack around c3 while keeping gold's caMel away from f3, so it depends on whose attack is the strongest (but yeah, I'd take gold over silver). |
||||||
|
Arimaa Forum » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.1! YaBB © 2000-2003. All Rights Reserved. |