Arimaa Forum
        (http://arimaa.com/arimaa/forum/cgi/YaBB.cgi)
      

        Arimaa >> General Discussion >> Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
        
(Message started by: browni3141 on Aug 7th, 2012, 12:07pm)
Title: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by browni3141 on Aug 7th, 2012, 12:07pm
As gold:
http://arimaa.com/arimaa/notconv/old/boardimg.php?orient=n&size=300&imgtype=jpeg&ranks=//////HMDEDRHC/RRCRRRRR
As silver:
http://arimaa.com/arimaa/notconv/old/boardimg.php?orient=n&size=300&imgtype=jpeg&ranks=rrcrrrrr/hmdedrhc/////RHCEMCHR/RRRDDRRR
Before explaining my ideas, I want to here what others think of it. I've had some great successes with it that perfectly demonstrate my setup's idea. I will show some examples after I hear what you think.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by Boo on Aug 7th, 2012, 1:01pm
As gold facing your silver setup I can play M->c3 + Ed3, and whatever your ideas are, the symetrical HME setup in the left wing should not lead to advantage for any side assuming correct play.
The question is if I am really scared or not ... :)
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by browni3141 on Aug 7th, 2012, 1:23pm

on 08/07/12 at 13:01:57, Boo wrote:
As gold facing your silver setup I can play M->c3 + Ed3, and whatever your ideas are, the symetrical HME setup in the left wing should not lead to advantage for any side assuming correct play.
The question is if I am really scared or not ... :)

The opening certainly doesn't mean to give silver an overwhelming advantage, but I would say after your move it is even or even very slightly better for silver because gold has used most of his extra tempi to achieve symmetry. Silver now throws the first punch.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by Fritzlein on Aug 7th, 2012, 3:36pm
As Silver I would face your MH with my M, face your H with my HH, and generally track your E with my E.  The strategic idea is that I am better able to pull rabbits than you are, so you have to do something aggressive to make it not a rabbit-pulling game.  On the other hand, you don't have an obviously good advance of your M or of either H, so it makes it easier for me to punish your aggression when it comes.

Or you can re-align your M against my HH, which would swing the slight strategic advantage into your court, but that takes time, and I should be able to use that time to provoke some weakness while you are shuffling around.  Obviously the game is fluid and anything can happen out of the setup, but if you set up that way as Gold I would feel slightly ahead as Silver as soon as I set up my pieces.

When you set up that way as Silver, the mainstream 99of9/chessandgo idea for Gold would be to centralize the E and advance the eastern H, starting with 2g E->d5 H->g3.  It isn't obvious from your setup what you would plan to do about that, or why Gold should have anything to fear.  Obviously your attacking chances are all in the west, but the gold E will be hovering and the gold M can easily cross, so only a full-out swarm of c3 seems to be threatening.  The day such swarms can be telegraphed in advance and still work is the last day anyone can be a "home" player.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by browni3141 on Aug 7th, 2012, 6:23pm

on 08/07/12 at 15:36:17, Fritzlein wrote:
As Silver I would face your MH with my M, face your H with my HH, and generally track your E with my E.  The strategic idea is that I am better able to pull rabbits than you are, so you have to do something aggressive to make it not a rabbit-pulling game.  On the other hand, you don't have an obviously good advance of your M or of either H, so it makes it easier for me to punish your aggression when it comes.

Or you can re-align your M against my HH, which would swing the slight strategic advantage into your court, but that takes time, and I should be able to use that time to provoke some weakness while you are shuffling around.  Obviously the game is fluid and anything can happen out of the setup, but if you set up that way as Gold I would feel slightly ahead as Silver as soon as I set up my pieces.

When you set up that way as Silver, the mainstream 99of9/chessandgo idea for Gold would be to centralize the E and advance the eastern H, starting with 2g E->d5 H->g3.  It isn't obvious from your setup what you would plan to do about that, or why Gold should have anything to fear.  Obviously your attacking chances are all in the west, but the gold E will be hovering and the gold M can easily cross, so only a full-out swarm of c3 seems to be threatening.  The day such swarms can be telegraphed in advance and still work is the last day anyone can be a "home" player.

I think my setup is strongest against 99of9-like setups. The main point of it is to attack c6 and minimize forward steps by aligning my pieces to be closest to their most common squares. a6 for the a2 horse, b5 for the b2 camel, a5 for the a1 rabbit, d6 or possibly c5 for the d2 elephant, and the dog may come through the trap to c5 and the cat will replace it on c2. The east I've tried to setup defensively with the cat on the h-file so that silver can't easily ensure progress with a rabbit pull. It is a little harder to drag a cat back than a rabbit, and a cat is barely worth more. The rabbit behind the trap could be a bit of a nuisance eventually, but this is most likely (IMO) to be a problem later on, and early tempi are more important than late tempi. What I've just explained is what I would consider the optimal outcome from my setup, and I have achieved it against some strongish opponents.

Of course I have considered that silver doesn't have to play into my hands, and will probably try something other than 99of9 in an attempt to refute my ideas. My setup doesn't really have any potential downsides except for the flank camel. With the camel on a flank an unbalanced setup, which you proposed, makes sense. I have thought of this. What I usually like to do against and unbalanced setup is attack the camel side with dogs and a horse with my camel being on the HH side ready to create a second threat when it becomes strongest free piece. I will possibly also pull rabbits on either side, especially the opponent's camel side, to get my home traps involved. With that being my main plan against an unbalanced setup I am not starting very far from it. My camel is on the wrong wing, but that's it. I can either try to correct this misalignment, or I can forget about it and try a slightly different plan. I am more free to be aggressive with my camel on your camel side because a camel hostage for you is pretty far from optimal due to the imbalanced horses and your camel being on the wrong wing compared to an optimal camel hostage. If I get a camel hostage it will be slightly better because although my camel is also on the wrong wing, I have balanced horses, and will likely already have advanced pieces because of my attack. Also, since our camels are on the same side a camel attack doesn't award you strongest free piece, so I'm not necessarily in a hurry to get something. The best your horses can get by themselves is probably only a rabbit, and they have to worry a little bit about my camel which can switch wings if it feels it needs to. You do not have the same liberty of switching wings with the camel because I will very easily complete an elephant rotation.

Let me also say that I laugh at your statement about a rabbit-pulling game being unavailable to me. You clearly don't know what kind of a player I am ;).  I almost never pull rabbits as my main strategy. I believe it to be inferior and believe in the power of time and attack. The stronger I get the less appealing rabbit pulling becomes, and the more appealing attack becomes. Pulling rabbits as part of an attack is a bit different though, and I will do that.

Finally, I do not swarm, I attack. Sorry, I just hate that word "swarm". It sounds like mindlessly throwing pieces forward :). I try to make every step of mine have a specific purpose when I can.

Edit: I believe you can now guess what my plans are as silver against 99of9. I won't do anything but ignore an eastern H advance the because the gains are small, and I am hunting bigger game in the west. If gold takes the time to move his camel to c3 then silver should have a theoretical advantage because the major pieces are all pretty similarly placed and gold has lost at least his first move's advantage worth of time.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by Fritzlein on Aug 7th, 2012, 8:07pm

on 08/07/12 at 18:23:15, browni3141 wrote:
My camel is on the wrong wing, but that's it. I can either try to correct this misalignment[...]

You crossed with the camel in our Postal Mixer game; why didn't it work out?  I rather felt that my pull of your rabbit, which you scorn as small game, led you to press too hard in attempting to get bigger game on the other wing, because you didn't have the viable option of patient defense and gradual positional improvement.  I'm not saying that it is a disadvantage to attack, but in my experience it is an uncomfortable situation to be forced to attack.


Quote:
[...] or I can forget about it and try a slightly different plan. I am more free to be aggressive with my camel on your camel side because a camel hostage for you is pretty far from optimal due to the imbalanced horses and your camel being on the wrong wing compared to an optimal camel hostage.

Awesome, I look forward to our next Postal Mixer game in which you give me a sub-optimal camel hostage on the wing where both of our camels live.  I'm quite proud of my collection of postal scalps from players (most notably (and repeatedly) Adanac) who gave me a sub-optimal camel hostage and thought it would be to their advantage rather than mine. ;)  Not that the camel hostage always works, as chessandgo is presently teaching me, but even an awkard camel hostage is not necessarily bad, as I am presently demonstrating (I hope) against Nombril.  Also I refer you to the 2011 World Championships in which rabbits beat Adanac and chessandgo back-to-back after each of them willingly gave up a camel hostage they didn't think would hurt.

I'm certainly not saying your position is unplayable after your setup as Gold and my response as Silver.  Neither side is committed to a single plan of action.  The game can take many different courses,  plenty of which I don't understand well, and tactics decide the outcome more often than strategy.  Nevertheless, I remain so far from "very afraid" as to feel my position as Silver will be slightly more comfortable to play than yours as Gold.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by Fritzlein on Aug 7th, 2012, 8:16pm

on 08/07/12 at 18:23:15, browni3141 wrote:
Let me also say that I laugh at your statement about a rabbit-pulling game being unavailable to me. You clearly don't know what kind of a player I am ;).  I almost never pull rabbits as my main strategy.

Ah, now I know what kind of player you are.  You are the kind of player who believes he can always gain some sort of an advantage without pulling rabbits.  I, on the other hand, believe I can shut down and punish any attack from anyone who refuses to pull rabbits.  Yes, I include chessandgo and hanzack in this sweeping statement.  If I could count on them to never pull rabbits, I could fend off anything either of them had to throw at me.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by browni3141 on Aug 7th, 2012, 10:38pm

on 08/07/12 at 20:07:23, Fritzlein wrote:
You crossed with the camel in our Postal Mixer game; why didn't it work out?  I rather felt that my pull of your rabbit, which you scorn as small game, led you to press too hard in attempting to get bigger game on the other wing, because you didn't have the viable option of patient defense and gradual positional improvement.  I'm not saying that it is a disadvantage to attack, but in my experience it is an uncomfortable situation to be forced to attack.


I don't really feel like discussing why what I did in our postal didn't work. If you insist though then can we go over all of my other games that I played as an 1800? I didn't really know what I was doing for about the first seven moves. I was a completely different player then and all I knew to do was try and survive, not play for any subtle advantages. I probably could play just about every move better if we replayed our game. I was at a disadvantage when I started my attack, and I don't believe I even executed the attack well. I'm not saying that I would beat you if I got to start over. You are still a better player than me, at least for now. I just don't really feel there is much to gain looking at a part of the game where I had no idea what I was doing.


Quote:
Awesome, I look forward to our next Postal Mixer game in which you give me a sub-optimal camel hostage on the wing where both of our camels live.  I'm quite proud of my collection of postal scalps from players (most notably (and repeatedly) Adanac) who gave me a sub-optimal camel hostage and thought it would be to their advantage rather than mine. ;)  Not that the camel hostage always works, as chessandgo is presently teaching me, but even an awkard camel hostage is not necessarily bad, as I am presently demonstrating (I hope) against Nombril.  Also I refer you to the 2011 World Championships in which rabbits beat Adanac and chessandgo back-to-back after each of them willingly gave up a camel hostage they didn't think would hurt.[\quote]

Realize that when I say I can give you a camel hostage I don't mean that I can certainly rush ahead, give you a quick camel hostage and expect to win no matter what. Obviously a sub-optimal camel hostage is different than a bad camel hostage. I simply mean that I have greater freedom to give a camel hostage because it will be advantageous more often than it would be in a more optimal setting. I'm sure you wouldn't argue that having more options is worse than having less options.

[quote]I'm certainly not saying your position is unplayable after your setup as Gold and my response as Silver.  Neither side is committed to a single plan of action.  The game can take many different courses,  plenty of which I don't understand well, and tactics decide the outcome more often than strategy.  Nevertheless, I remain so far from "very afraid" as to feel my position as Silver will be slightly more comfortable to play than yours as Gold.


I look forward to proving you wrong in the next WC, and in our next postal  :)


Quote:
Ah, now I know what kind of player you are.  You are the kind of player who believes he can always gain some sort of an advantage without pulling rabbits.  I, on the other hand, believe I can shut down and punish any attack from anyone who refuses to pull rabbits.  Yes, I include chessandgo and hanzack in this sweeping statement.  If I could count on them to never pull rabbits, I could fend off anything either of them had to throw at me.


I already said I would pull rabbits as part of a larger attacking strategy. It's important to play with not only your opponent's home traps, but your own as well. It can be difficult or even impossible to successfully attack without using your home traps.

So, it's clear you believe that my setup is weak for gold, what do you think of it in the above example as silver?
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by Fritzlein on Aug 8th, 2012, 11:37am

on 08/07/12 at 22:38:59, browni3141 wrote:
I just don't really feel there is much to gain looking at a part of the game where I had no idea what I was doing.

Ah, it is unfair of me to argue that your ideas are bad because of one bad position in one game you played when you were rated 400 points lower than you are now.  But you seemed to be saying something quite different here in the forum than you did in chat.  I was confused by the apparent contradiction.

In our game chat you expressed confidence as you played move 9g.  I apologize for the snarky tone of my "why didn't it work out?" question, but there was some real (hopefully not offensive) curiosity behind it, namely as to whether you had changed your mind about the early position.

Now you have clarified:

Quote:
I was at a disadvantage when I started my attack [...]

This is the main point of my question.  (Again, let me apologize for posing it in an insolent way.)  You believe that you were in fact already a bit behind as of move 9g.  This bears directly on our discussion as to the power of your opening setup, which is why I brought it into play.  You said that against an unbalanced setup you could switch wings with your camel and be in good shape, better than the opponent who can't switch wings with the camel.  In our game you switched wings with your camel but (you concede) you were at a disadvantage.  How is that possible?

The explanation that leaps to my mind is that you were at a disadvantage because I had pulled a rabbit.  But you also pooh-pooh my claim that one side's greater ability to pull a rabbit in the opening has any bearing on who has the better position after the setup phase.

So, if I can clarify my question without being offensive (and this has nothing to do with who played better at any stage of the game, only the position at 9g):  Why do you say that you were at a disadvantage when you began your attack?  How is Silver's position superior as of 9g?  Am I wrong to relate these questions to the discussion of the superiority of your setup?


Quote:
I look forward to proving you wrong in the next WC, and in our next postal  :)

I also look forward to you beating me!  Admittedly, one part of me hated slipping from #1 to #2 in the world, and again hated slipping from #2 to #3.  That part of me won't be any happier to tumble to #4 and thence #5.  Another part of me, however, is thrilled to see new players take Arimaa to new heights, with a special delight in seeing them dominate the encroaching computers.

On the other hand, when you beat me in the 2013 World Championship and the 2013 Postal Mixer, I won't necessarily concede that you are correct strategically.  Perhaps you still will be setting up badly and simply outplaying me from there.  When you are a stronger player than me, your argument will come back to haunt you, as I will be able to say that I was right in principle but made mistakes in execution.  ;)


Quote:
I already said I would pull rabbits as part of a larger attacking strategy. It's important to play with not only your opponent's home traps, but your own as well. It can be difficult or even impossible to successfully attack without using your home traps.

Hmmm... In that case how are you radically different from me?  I guarantee you that as I set up our pieces in our postal game, I was not thinking, "I intend to pull browni's rabbits, and if he stops me from pulling his rabbits I will fall back to some other plan."  On the contrary, I try to play for strategic advantage, and take what the opponent is giving me.  It is merely coincidence that most of my opponents choose to give me rabbit pulls rather than some other advantage.

To put it another way: I might value a rabbit pull more highly than you do.  I might think your advanced rabbit is a net disadvantage to you in a position where you think your advanced rabbit is a net advantage to you.  But that doesn't mean I set out in our game with the primary plan of pulling rabbits.  I ended up pulling a rabbit as a natural (almost inevitable) consequence of the difference between your positional judgement and mine.


Quote:
So, it's clear you believe that my setup is weak for gold, what do you think of it in the above example as silver?

I don't think Gold has much to crow about, but neither does Silver.  You speak easily of how Silver can switch camel from west to east if necessary, but then insist that Gold will lose time to switch camel from center to west.  Yes, indeed, if one player can re-organize pieces with no loss of time while the other must lose time, the player with hyperspace abilities has the advantage.  In the real game, however, I have a tiny preference for the Gold position.  I like answering 99of9 with something asymmetrical to avoid simply conceding the first-move disadvantage, but it is clearer to me how the EHH/M imbalance keeps the pressure on, and less clear to me how the EMH/H imbalance keeps the pressure on.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by chessandgo on Aug 8th, 2012, 3:40pm
This thread almost makes me want to laugh at Fritz' ideas, just to see if he apologizes for his insolence :)


on 08/07/12 at 20:07:23, Fritzlein wrote:
Not that the camel hostage always works, as chessandgo is presently teaching me,


Oh really? I like how we both think we're being schooled at most points of most of our games. We should play together more often :)
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by Fritzlein on Aug 8th, 2012, 4:05pm

on 08/08/12 at 15:40:04, chessandgo wrote:
Oh really? I like how we both think we're being schooled at most points of most of our games. We should play together more often :)

Wow.  I shouldn't be surprised if we each think we are behind, since it has happened so many times before, but I am nonetheless surprised.  Do you really think I am ahead?

I thought I was doing fine in the opening, slightly better in a sharp situation.  12g was when I first thought I was behind, as I regretted my overly-ambitious 11g.  (How many times must I learn? rabbit pull good, camel hostage good, both together bad) By the time 15g came around, I hated my position so much that in retrospect I thought I should have sacrificed my dog on 12g in order to secure the camel hostage on h3.  I'm not going to resign any games this tournament, but inwardly I gave up when my reserve ran out on 15g.  I have played all moves 15g, 16g, 17g, 18g, and19g thinking exactly the same thing: "Well, this won't work, but there probably isn't any good move in the position, so I'm not going to waste time looking for salvation."  I don't want to time out either, so I have moved faster.

Now I guess I should re-evaluate and start taking the game seriously again.  Perhaps my most awkward of all awkward camel hostages has some value after all?
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by Adanac on Aug 8th, 2012, 4:29pm
Camel hostage or not, if you can win against Jean with your elephant standing on f2 for the rest of the game, I will be very, very impressed ;)
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by Fritzlein on Aug 8th, 2012, 4:47pm

on 08/08/12 at 16:29:38, Adanac wrote:
Camel hostage or not, if you can win against Jean with your elephant standing on f2 for the rest of the game, I will be very, very impressed ;)

OK, thanks for that objective assessment.  I am in deep voodoo, just as I thought.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by Adanac on Aug 8th, 2012, 4:59pm

on 08/08/12 at 16:47:45, Fritzlein wrote:
OK, thanks for that objective assessment.  I am in deep voodoo, just as I thought.


That's why there's a 2-move delay for the spectators.  For all I know you've turned the tables on 19g.  ;D
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by chessandgo on Aug 8th, 2012, 5:53pm
I agree you were way ahead in the opening. On 10s I was already getting desperate, until I thought about the game move. Since then I have no idea what's going on.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by browni3141 on Aug 8th, 2012, 10:37pm

on 08/08/12 at 11:37:09, Fritzlein wrote:
In our game chat you expressed confidence as you played move 9g.  I apologize for the snarky tone of my "why didn't it work out?" question, but there was some real (hopefully not offensive) curiosity behind it, namely as to whether you had changed your mind about the early position.

Fritzlein, look back at the game chat, please. I said "...Not because my position is so great..."
I'm pretty sure that means I disliked my position then.

Quote:
In our game you switched wings with your camel but (you concede) you were at a disadvantage.  How is that possible?

The explanation that leaps to my mind is that you were at a disadvantage because I had pulled a rabbit.  But you also pooh-pooh my claim that one side's greater ability to pull a rabbit in the opening has any bearing on who has the better position after the setup phase.


Okay, I was mostly at a disadvantage because I neglected my own development, and then pursued a wrong attack instead of simply letting you have the rabbit. Had I not neglected my development, then perhaps I could have begun attacking before you ever got the chance to pull a rabbit. Pieces don't belong at home. Your use of "pooh-pooh" makes me laugh.


Quote:
with a special delight in seeing them dominate the encroaching computers.

I'm not sure if computers are encroaching or not, but they are certainly nowhere near the level of top humans. I'm not even a "top" player (am I?), and I've gotten a 7-0 record against ziltoid, with most of the games being fairly easy. Engines will have to make some big breakthroughs I think before they can hope to get close to the best humans.


Quote:
On the other hand, when you beat me in the 2013 World Championship and the 2013 Postal Mixer, I won't necessarily concede that you are correct strategically.

Right, we don't really play at the level for one side to prove a setup is winning. However, after seeing some of my ideas in a real game do you think it's possible that you might think differently? There is a chance also that by the time the WC comes around I will have lost faith in my setup and will consider it unsound, and you will never meet it in a real game.


Quote:
You speak easily of how Silver can switch camel from west to east if necessary, but then insist that Gold will lose time to switch camel from center to west.  Yes, indeed, if one player can re-organize pieces with no loss of time while the other must lose time, the player with hyperspace abilities has the advantage.  In the real game, however, I have a tiny preference for the Gold position.

I think the two camel switching situations are different enough. Isn't there a difference between trading tempi for better piece alignment and giving up tempi almost for free? I guess it depends on timing. If gold were to immediately reposition his camel to shadow mine, I would put gold at a disadvantage, but perhaps if gold does it at the right time it would be good. I would almost certainly not switch wings with my camel immediately. It would be a loss of tempo, because everything will be happening in the west and tempi are very important before either side has a clear advantage. I would most likely switch wings much later when I had strongest free piece, or anytime I can switch wings without loss of tempo due to a threat.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by Fritzlein on Aug 9th, 2012, 1:52pm

on 08/08/12 at 22:37:10, browni3141 wrote:
Fritzlein, look back at the game chat, please. I said "...Not because my position is so great..."
I'm pretty sure that means I disliked my position then.

I read it as at least neutral (you didn't say you were gaining confidence, "...in spite of my slightly weaker position...," or, "...although you are a bit ahead on the board..."), indeed it seemed possible you thought you were slightly ahead even though your position wasn't "so great" as to be winning.  On the other hand, I might have been too influenced by your earlier comment asking me whether I thought I was making any progress during the opening.  A couple of moves earlier you certainly didn't think you were at any disadvantage.  But of course those intervening couple of moves (and intervening time for you to improve as a player) might have changed your opinion.

I'll take your word for it that you thought you were behind if you'll concede that the context (asking me whether I thought I was making progress and expressing confidence that you might win) could reasonably shade the interpretation of a neutral observer as to how you felt about your position.


Quote:
Okay, I was mostly at a disadvantage because I neglected my own development, and then pursued a wrong attack instead of simply letting you have the rabbit. Had I not neglected my development, then perhaps I could have begun attacking before you ever got the chance to pull a rabbit. Pieces don't belong at home.

It would have been interesting to see how you could have "developed" pieces more than you did without letting them become targets for my elephant.  Not that it is impossible, of course; I am just curious how you would have done it in this context.  Which piece do you not mind letting my elephant pull?  A horse?  On which wing are you happy to have a horse taken hostage?  But in any case, if you had put pieces forward instead of keeping them at home, you wouldn't have any reason to call me a rabbit-puller.  I take what my opponent is giving.


Quote:
However, after seeing some of my ideas in a real game do you think it's possible that you might think differently?

It is undoubtedly possible that I might think differently.  During my time playing Arimaa I have been confident of many things that later were proved against me.  There are still many things about which I am unsure, i.e. about which I wouldn't be too surprised to be wrong, and of course I could still be wrong about matters where my opinion is quite strong.  If I were convinced that I couldn't be wrong, it wouldn't be very interesting to discuss with someone of a different opinion.

That said, you're still wrong.  ;)  (Philosophical side question: Is it possible for me to think that I'm wrong?  Because as soon as I think my old opinion was wrong, I have a new opinion, thus I think I'm right about that new opinion, so by definition I always think I'm right, right?)


Quote:
I think the two camel switching situations are different enough. Isn't there a difference between trading tempi for better piece alignment and giving up tempi almost for free? I guess it depends on timing. If gold were to immediately reposition his camel to shadow mine, I would put gold at a disadvantage, but perhaps if gold does it at the right time it would be good.

I agree, the timing is important.  If I have a central camel and decentralize it to attack an encroaching horse, it can cost my opponent as many tempi to retreat the horse as it cost me to cross.  Or it can cost either of us more time than the other, depending on the situation.  Gaining/losing time with judgments like this one are part of the ways that progress happens in positions in which casual observers think nothing is happening because the players are just shuffling pieces back and forth.


Quote:
I would almost certainly not switch wings with my camel immediately. It would be a loss of tempo, because everything will be happening in the west and tempi are very important before either side has a clear advantage. I would most likely switch wings much later when I had strongest free piece, or anytime I can switch wings without loss of tempo due to a threat.

That makes perfect sense, although it undermines your previous argument.  If you wait to switch wings with your camel until you have the advantage, you have to somehow get the advantage with your camel still on the wing where it starts.  If, instead, you wait to switch your camel until an enemy horse has advanced that you intend to threaten, you run the risk that the enemy elephant will be between your traps at the critical time, preventing a cross.  Frankly, I think the best option with your gold setup and my unbalanced silver response of EHH/M is to cross with your camel immediately.  But you agree with me that that is a significant loss of time, and thus you must think you have a better plan.

Again, the position is always still fluid after the setup, and either player can chose any number of plans.  A willingness to advance a camel or horse or a rabbit each create a different type of situation, and all of them are different than anchoring the home corners and advancing nothing but the elephant.  My current understanding of opening theory is that you'll get in trouble with any of these plans by sticking to only one idea come hell or high water, and that to get an advantage you have to be willing to switch gears between plans depending on what the situation demands.  In that context, any advantage or disadvantage from the setup must be small, because the player who understands what the position calls for will adapt while the player who doesn't understand fails to adapt and squanders any advantage he might have initially had.  It is only later when the position gels that single-mindedness is more fruitful.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by browni3141 on Aug 9th, 2012, 10:10pm

on 08/09/12 at 13:52:41, Fritzlein wrote:
It would have been interesting to see how you could have "developed" pieces more than you did without letting them become targets for my elephant.  Not that it is impossible, of course; I am just curious how you would have done it in this context.  Which piece do you not mind letting my elephant pull?  A horse?  On which wing are you happy to have a horse taken hostage?  But in any case, if you had put pieces forward instead of keeping them at home, you wouldn't have any reason to call me a rabbit-puller.  I take what my opponent is giving.

I don't really want a horse taken hostage on either wing, unless I know it is a bad one. My main plans are to attack the camel side primarily with dogs and the horse supporting. I would try to share control of c6 so that neither your elephant nor your camel can leave, and I will have my camel as strongest free piece. I wouldn't mind a dog hostage held by your camel, and I might even force you to take my dog hostage. A dog frame may be good for me also. I don't think it's much to worry about, my dogs are pretty free to roam in the west since you lack a horse to face them with. Even a horse hostage may not be so bad depending on the circumstances, but I would try to avoid it in general. If my horse is taken hostage you will just have too much control over your trap since I have nothing to face the nearby dogs. The most likely outcome, assuming my plan succeeds is that you will have to expose pieces/rabbits in order to hold your position, and threats in both c3 c6 and potential threats in the east will be too much to handle. I guess I don't mind pulling rabbits so much as long as I am attacking. What I don't like is when players insist on playing only in their home traps. Just as bad I suppose are players that insist on winning the game using only the opponent's traps.
I think a dog hostage is bad for you, and a horse hostage good, so I guess that answers your question. I'm not really sure about cats/rabbits. I would most likely be careful advancing my rabbits because I've been learning that they tend to limit your own possibilities if advanced too far too early. I'd be a little bit more careful with my cats but wouldn't really mind a hostage as long as I know I can prevent a frame. I'm not really sure if a cat frame would be better than a dog frame. I'm only talking about the west here.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by Boo on Aug 10th, 2012, 1:20am

Quote:
I look forward to proving you wrong in the next WC, and in our next postal

Why wait so long?
After such a lengthy and exhaustive analysis of this opening position it is time for you to agree on a match of 6 games to verify your ideas in practice :)
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by Fritzlein on Aug 10th, 2012, 9:48am

on 08/09/12 at 22:10:39, browni3141 wrote:
My main plans are to attack the camel side primarily with dogs and the horse supporting.

That's an interesting plan and one that has not been much tested.  Chessandgo has considered answering the EHH/M setup something like this for a while now, although his results have been inconclusive.  It is admittedly awkward that no defending horse is available to deal with the attacking dog, yet even so it isn't a priori obvious that the defending elephant will be tied down leaving the attacker's camel free.  On the contrary, a dog hostage or dog frame might leave the attacking elephant tied down and the defending elephant free.  Jean, please weigh in if you have an opinion on how much I ought to fear an attack on my camel wing led by the opposing elephant and dog.

In any event, the ED(H) attack you propose can be carried out just as well by someone who has used the 99of9 setup, in fact better: to have maximum effect, your camel needs to be on the other side threatening my HH, and the 99of9 setup gets the camel to the correct position a few steps sooner than your setup.  If you think your setup as Gold is powerful against the EHH/M setup as Silver, you must think the 99of9 setup as Gold is yet still better against it, right?  Well, perhaps it is, in which case EHH/M will eventually be thrown in the dustbin of opening history.  Time will tell.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by browni3141 on Aug 10th, 2012, 12:09pm

on 08/10/12 at 01:20:01, Boo wrote:
Why wait so long?
After such a lengthy and exhaustive analysis of this opening position it is time for you to agree on a match of 6 games to verify your ideas in practice :)

I've actually done very little analysis of this setup and responses to it. My setup is the product of all of my acquired Arimaa knowledge, especially 99of9 and M/EHH games. Everything I talk about is what I've learned through playing those types of games, not through actual analysis of my setup.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by browni3141 on Aug 10th, 2012, 12:24pm

on 08/10/12 at 09:48:10, Fritzlein wrote:
That's an interesting plan and one that has not been much tested.  Chessandgo has considered answering the EHH/M setup something like this for a while now, although his results have been inconclusive.  It is admittedly awkward that no defending horse is available to deal with the attacking dog, yet even so it isn't a priori obvious that the defending elephant will be tied down leaving the attacker's camel free.  On the contrary, a dog hostage or dog frame might leave the attacking elephant tied down and the defending elephant free.  Jean, please weigh in if you have an opinion on how much I ought to fear an attack on my camel wing led by the opposing elephant and dog.

In any event, the ED(H) attack you propose can be carried out just as well by someone who has used the 99of9 setup, in fact better: to have maximum effect, your camel needs to be on the other side threatening my HH, and the 99of9 setup gets the camel to the correct position a few steps sooner than your setup.  If you think your setup as Gold is powerful against the EHH/M setup as Silver, you must think the 99of9 setup as Gold is yet still better against it, right?  Well, perhaps it is, in which case EHH/M will eventually be thrown in the dustbin of opening history.  Time will tell.

I don't think this is necessarily true. The M->HH alignment isn't so important in the beginning, and who says I can't make use of my camel in the west? At the very least it makes it slightly less appealing to bring a horse over to meet my attacking dogs. A very small advantage my setup over 99of9 is that my dog is on e2 rather than f2. 99of9 cats behind the traps is even farther from optimal concerning only the dogs. The main ideas of my setup are against a b-file horse, then I tried to make it good against M/EHH also by keeping my dogs close to my camel side. I also have a cat one step closer to the west over 99of9 dogs behind traps, which I may pull rabbits with :o.
I'm not necessarily trying to say my setup is better against M/EHH than 99of9, just that I don't think it's quite as clear as you seem to think it is. I actually do think it is better than 99of9 cats behind traps, but I'm not sure about all of the other 99of9 variants. Of course each setup has it's own unique downsides.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by Fritzlein on Aug 10th, 2012, 9:20pm

on 08/10/12 at 12:24:19, browni3141 wrote:
[...]just that I don't think it's quite as clear as you seem to think it is[...]

My opinion is very clear, in that I have no doubt that I'd rather play the 99of9 setup than yours as Gold against a Silver who sets up with EHH/M.  But as clear as my opinion is, I'm not very confident that I'm right.  I don't have any experience attacking with that specific plan, and only a little experience defending against it, so I could very well be wrong.  I look forward to seeing your results with that setup!
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by browni3141 on Aug 10th, 2012, 11:07pm

on 08/10/12 at 21:20:33, Fritzlein wrote:
My opinion is very clear, in that I have no doubt that I'd rather play the 99of9 setup than yours as Gold against a Silver who sets up with EHH/M.


Even if you're right, 99of9 will soon become unplayable because of my silver setup, and your opinion will become insignificant ;)


Quote:
I look forward to seeing your results with that setup!


I don't have very many good HvH games using my setup, but I could try and scrounge some up. I have a postals against Alfons and Hippo where I am testing it out right now. I'm also testing it as silver against clyring in our blindfold chatroom postal!
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by chessandgo on Aug 11th, 2012, 4:13am

on 08/10/12 at 09:48:10, Fritzlein wrote:
That's an interesting plan and one that has not been much tested.  Chessandgo has considered answering the EHH/M setup something like this for a while now, although his results have been inconclusive.  It is admittedly awkward that no defending horse is available to deal with the attacking dog, yet even so it isn't a priori obvious that the defending elephant will be tied down leaving the attacker's camel free.  On the contrary, a dog hostage or dog frame might leave the attacking elephant tied down and the defending elephant free.  Jean, please weigh in if you have an opinion on how much I ought to fear an attack on my camel wing led by the opposing elephant and dog.


The few games I seem to remember with a similar theme are:
- our 2010 WC game: http://arimaa.com/arimaa/games/jsShowGame.cgi?gid=135491&s=w with an E+H attack instead of E+D. It was more  a matter of  timing though, since you counterattacked in the east. The advantage of attacking with a Horse against the silver dogs is that we can always push the defending dogs later on, and avoid a frame on c6.
- My 2011 postal  game against Hippo http://arimaa.com/arimaa/gameroom/opengamewin.cgi?gameid=198270&role=v&side=w (with an E+C attack instead of E+D, purely for time reasons, although I'll try to avoid attcking with a Cat in the future ^^)
I'd say that E+H/D attacking against the camel side is logical, the doability could be a matter of time, as in our WC game above.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by Hippo on Aug 11th, 2012, 3:27pm

on 08/11/12 at 04:13:31, chessandgo wrote:
- My 2011 postal  game against Hippo http://arimaa.com/arimaa/gameroom/opengamewin.cgi?gameid=198270&role=v&side=w (with an E+C attack instead of E+D, purely for time reasons, although I'll try to avoid attcking with a Cat in the future ^^)
I'd say that E+H/D attacking against the camel side is logical, the doability could be a matter of time, as in our WC game above.


I am still not sure your attack was good, but my defense was better than against Boo ... . It seems to me it was even till my blunder ... .
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by Fritzlein on Oct 6th, 2012, 12:10pm

on 08/08/12 at 16:29:38, Adanac wrote:
Camel hostage or not, if you can win against Jean with your elephant standing on f2 for the rest of the game, I will be very, very impressed ;)

Ironically, I did end the game with my elephant standing on f2.  :)  OK, it wasn't literally there for the rest of the game, but for 29 out of the last 37 moves, including the finale.

http://arimaa.com/arimaa/gameroom/comments.cgi?gid=246100

I remain convinced that I was behind from move 11s through the discussion here and beyond.  It turns out, however, that there was more play remaining than I thought.  This a great example of how an Arimaa position can hold tension, so that the player who is behind can come back if the player who is ahead plays inaccurately.

The camel hostage is dead.  Long live the camel hostage!
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by browni3141 on Oct 6th, 2012, 12:59pm

on 10/06/12 at 12:10:28, Fritzlein wrote:
The camel hostage is dead.  Long live the camel hostage!

When did it die? :(
Even if the hostage giver achieves an elephant rotation it can often be difficult for the player with the "free" elephant to win.
I may be a fairly aggressive player, but I still don't like giving my camel hostage unless it is pretty clearly a disadvantage for my opponent to take it.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by Fritzlein on Oct 6th, 2012, 3:10pm

on 10/06/12 at 12:59:11, browni3141 wrote:
When did it die? :(

Late 2005, depending on who you ask.  Robinson, the 2006 World Champion, was one of the first strong players to intentionally give away camel hostages.  Prolific postal player blue22 gave up his camel as a hostage almost every game for years.  There were even a few high-level games in which one player offered a camel hostage and the other player refused to take it!  As recently as the 2011 World Championship, chessandgo and Adanac intentionally gave up a camel hostage to rabbits in back-to-back rounds.  Rabbits won both games, though, and perhaps these high-profile victories for the hostage-taker influenced popular sentiment and decreased the frequency of camel-led attacks.

I have built my entire Arimaa career around taking camel hostages, so I always feel like I have to defend the faith against the heretical masses.  My general belief in the bedrock of Arimaa strategy made it especially painful that I lost to hanzack in the 2012 World Championship after giving up my camel for him to hold hostage.  Grrr....


Quote:
I am more free to be aggressive with my camel on your camel side because a camel hostage for you is pretty far from optimal due to the imbalanced horses and your camel being on the wrong wing compared to an optimal camel hostage.


Quote:
Even if the hostage giver achieves an elephant rotation it can often be difficult for the player with the "free" elephant to win.  I may be a fairly aggressive player, but I still don't like giving my camel hostage unless it is pretty clearly a disadvantage for my opponent to take it.

Hmmm, I wonder which of these two guys I will play next.  The one who believes in his setup so much he will attack with his camel to justify it, or the one who thinks that even sub-optimal camel hostages can be advantageous to the hostage-taker?  ;)
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by browni3141 on Oct 6th, 2012, 4:24pm

on 10/06/12 at 15:10:13, Fritzlein wrote:
Late 2005, depending on who you ask.  Robinson, the 2006 World Champion, was one of the first strong players to intentionally give away camel hostages.  Prolific postal player blue22 gave up his camel as a hostage almost every game for years.  There were even a few high-level games in which one player offered a camel hostage and the other player refused to take it!  As recently as the 2011 World Championship, chessandgo and Adanac intentionally gave up a camel hostage to rabbits in back-to-back rounds.  Rabbits won both games, though, and perhaps these high-profile victories for the hostage-taker influenced popular sentiment and decreased the frequency of camel-led attacks.

I have built my entire Arimaa career around taking camel hostages, so I always feel like I have to defend the faith against the heretical masses.  My general belief in the bedrock of Arimaa strategy made it especially painful that I lost to hanzack in the 2012 World Championship after giving up my camel for him to hold hostage.  Grrr....


Hmmm, I wonder which of these two guys I will play next.  The one who believes in his setup so much he will attack with his camel to justify it, or the one who thinks that even sub-optimal camel hostages can be advantageous to the hostage-taker?  ;)

My opinions about Arimaa seem to change so fast. Your guess is as good as mine.
Title: Re: Be Very Afraid! My New Setup
Post by Fritzlein on Oct 6th, 2012, 4:45pm

on 10/06/12 at 16:24:24, browni3141 wrote:
My opinions about Arimaa seem to change so fast. Your guess is as good as mine.

Another reason Arimaa is awesome!


Arimaa Forum » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.1!
YaBB © 2000-2003. All Rights Reserved.