Author |
Topic: Move 40 (Read 7531 times) |
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender: 
Posts: 5928
|
 |
Re: Move 40
« Reply #15 on: Sep 16th, 2008, 7:10am » |
 Quote  Modify
|
My concern with rd5e would be that it opens up a lane for chessandgo's d-rabbit, which gains him time if he races. But maybe we win a race anyway, for example:
40g Ec4s dc5s Ec3e dc4s dc3x
40s ef4s ef3n Re3e Rf3x rd5e
41g Ed3e Da3n Da4n Da5n
41s ef4s Hg4w Hf4n ef3n
42g Ee3n re5n Ee4n Hf5e
42s dg3s Ch3w Cg3w Cf3x dg2n
43g Da6e Db6n cc7s cc6x Db7e
43s rh4s rh3s rh2w ce7w
44g Ee5s Ee4s Ee3s Ee2e
44s re6s re5s re4s re3s
I would never play rd5e in a live game, but in a postal game we don't have to instinctively shun risky-looking moves. If it checks out that chessandgo loses any race, then rd5e seems to do better for us materially than ce7s.
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
Soter
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2381
Gender:
Posts: 138
|
|
Re: Move 40
« Reply #16 on: Sep 16th, 2008, 11:43am » |
Quote Modify
|
After looking at some sharper lines ( rd5e instead of ce7s ), I lean towards a moderately optimistic stance regarding the rabbit race; maybe we should spend some time investigating this option - we do have enough time after all.
By the way, does 40s Hg4n ef4e Ch3s dg3e hold water?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: Move 40
« Reply #17 on: Sep 17th, 2008, 6:11am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Sep 16th, 2008, 11:43am, Soter wrote:After looking at some sharper lines ( rd5e instead of ce7s ), I lean towards a moderately optimistic stance regarding the rabbit race; maybe we should spend some time investigating this option - we do have enough time after all.
By the way, does 40s Hg4n ef4e Ch3s dg3e hold water? |
|
Your suggested move 40s looks about as strong as the alternatives, but the argument that we have time grows less persuasive each time we dip into reserve. We're coming into an endgame that will be tricky even if we are up CRRR for H or we are up RR straight. We're headed for the endgame paradox that even though our lead is clearer than ever, one blunder could be deadlier than ever.
Yes, 99of9, I think the post-mortem is premature given that one of the options on the table (and apparently the one that people are leaning towards) has barely been analyzed. What about this line?
40s ef4s ef3n Re3e Rf3x rd5e
41g Da3n Da4n Da5n Da6e
41s ef4w Hg4w Hf4s Hf3x ee4e
42g Db6n cc7s cc6x Db7e Rd4n
Sure, we are up by two rabbits, but how strong is his goal attack relative to ours? I don't know. I feel like I'm voting in the dark more than I have felt in a long time, and that may just be a feature of endgames where the slightest slip is fatal.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
warren
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2145
Gender:
Posts: 144
|
|
Re: Move 40
« Reply #18 on: Sep 17th, 2008, 7:38am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Sep 17th, 2008, 6:11am, Fritzlein wrote:40s ef4s ef3n Re3e Rf3x rd5e
41g Da3n Da4n Da5n Da6e
41s ef4w Hg4w Hf4s Hf3x ee4e
42g Db6n cc7s cc6x Db7e Rd4n |
|
Bomb thinks that line works fine for us. It suggests we reply:
42s ce7s re5s ef4n ef5w
With our elephant centralized his goal threats don't seem to work. Though as you say, it's rather close to disaster.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Janzert
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #247
Gender:
Posts: 1016
|
|
Re: Move 40
« Reply #19 on: Sep 17th, 2008, 8:04am » |
Quote Modify
|
I finally took a quick look at what opfor likes here. For 40s at depth 12 opfor would play the proposed move with ce7s:
depth 12
time 414
nodes 31257661
qnodes 13202975
losing_moves 16
score 155
pv ef4s ce7s ef3n Re3e Rf3x w Ed3e Rh1n Da3e Db3n b rd5w rc8e Hg4n ef4e
Yay, it actually chooses one of the same moves the humans do.
Taking a look at what it thinks after the two proposed moves it looks like this (scores are from the side to move's perspective, i.e. gold for these):
40s ef4s ef3n Re3e Rc3x ce7s
depth 12
time 90
nodes 8247673
qnodes 123001
losing_moves 81
score -79
pv Da3e Ed3e Rg1n Rh1n b Hg4n ef4e rd5e rb5e w Rg2w Ee3e Ef3w dg3w df3x
depth 13
time 159
nodes 15608482
qnodes 305092
losing_moves 81
score -118
pv Da3e Ed3e Rg1n Rh1n b Hg4n ef4e rd5e rb5e w Rg2w Ee3e Ef3w dg3w df3x b Hg5w
40s ef4s ef3n Re3e Rc3x rd5e
depth 12
time 199
nodes 18998800
qnodes 173353
losing_moves 1148
score -161
pv Rh1n Da3n Ed3e Rg1n b ef4w Hg4w Hf4n ee4e w Ee3n re5w Ee4n Hf5e
depth 13
time 417
nodes 41641378
qnodes 710956
losing_moves 1148
score -244
pv Rg1w Rf1n Rc2e Ed3e b ef4w Hg4w Hf4n ee4e w Ee3n re5w Ee4n Hf5e b ef4n
Basically the above means that at a depth of 16 and 17 steps from the current position opfor prefers rd5e over ce7s. Personally though I'm still favoring ce7s since I don't trust opfor's goal racing ability at all.
Janzert
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Janzert
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #247
Gender:
Posts: 1016
|
|
Re: Move 40
« Reply #20 on: Sep 17th, 2008, 8:23am » |
Quote Modify
|
Heh, that's the first time I had the mob game window open when the move was played. It was a bit startling. 
Janzert
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: Move 40
« Reply #21 on: Sep 17th, 2008, 8:49am » |
Quote Modify
|
Wow Ce7 won 6-4. It may be that we have rejected the objectively stronger move in favor of a safer-looking move. The only way I see out of the dilemma is increased analysis to show that the strong move really is safe, but my time was limited this past weekend, and other folks (except warren) were pretty quiet too.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
RonWeasley
Forum Moderator
Forum Guru
Harry's friend (Arimaa player #441)
Gender:
Posts: 882
|
|
Re: Move 40
« Reply #22 on: Sep 17th, 2008, 8:53am » |
Quote Modify
|
We chose to push our cat forward 6-4. A close vote and there was still some room for more discussion, but it seemed like much of TheMob had made up its mind.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
mistre
Forum Guru
Gender:
Posts: 553
|
|
Re: Move 40
« Reply #23 on: Sep 17th, 2008, 10:20am » |
Quote Modify
|
I wound up voting for rd5e after a bit more analysis. Seemed to be the stronger move and I couldn't find a way for Chessandgo to beat us in a race.
I think we may have rushed the vote this time, but what's done is done. ce7s shouldn't lose us the game, but it might have prevented us from a quicker win.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
NIC1138
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #65536
Gender:
Posts: 149
|
|
Re: Move 40
« Reply #24 on: Sep 17th, 2008, 5:25pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I actually thought about the rabbit option before reading the full thread, and was happy to see other adherents. But as a junior player, I lack sophisticated arguments for it. One of them is simply the basic principle of avoiding to get your rabbits pulled by elephants! It brings bad luck, IMO.
I play with my guts... And I'm out of shape! But I can tell you what I feel just to throw some wood at the fire. I feel like our rabbit is in a bit of a danger, and also might be more useful at the south-east region. The cat move is good, but I think it could wait for one or two rounds.
Wouldn't it be great if we were able to fork the game to see what happens after each choice?... 
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
The_Jeh
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #634
Gender:
Posts: 460
|
|
Re: Move 40
« Reply #25 on: Sep 18th, 2008, 2:15pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Just as an afterthought, I am happy with the choice to move the cat simply because it puts a second defender one step closer to c6. This saves us a step of time in case an immediate counter-attacking dog thrust is what c&g has in mind. If that is the case, this extra step will be useful if we play the tactic e->e4, H->f4; we can use it to get our dog out of the way to g4 so counter-capturing it becomes impossible. It's just an idea I have. I'll take a surer victory over a quicker one any time.
|
| « Last Edit: Sep 18th, 2008, 2:29pm by The_Jeh » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
mistre
Forum Guru
Gender:
Posts: 553
|
|
Re: Move 40
« Reply #26 on: Sep 18th, 2008, 5:27pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Just thought of this... thankfully it wasn't a tie. How would we resolve with only 2 choices?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: Move 40
« Reply #27 on: Sep 18th, 2008, 6:28pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Sep 18th, 2008, 5:27pm, mistre wrote:| Just thought of this... thankfully it wasn't a tie. How would we resolve with only 2 choices? |
|
We could vote again while we continue to discuss. I was certainly wavering, and others might have changed their minds as well. Also, for the re-vote RonWeasley could have refused to close voting until there were exactly eleven voters.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
NIC1138
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #65536
Gender:
Posts: 149
|
|
Re: Move 40
« Reply #28 on: Sep 18th, 2008, 7:31pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Sep 18th, 2008, 5:27pm, mistre wrote:| Just thought of this... thankfully it wasn't a tie. How would we resolve with only 2 choices? |
|
We could go into overtime, and start a postal match between the two antagonizing and angry factions of The_Mob! 
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
99of9
Forum Guru
Gnobby's creator (player #314)
 
Gender:
Posts: 1413
|
|
Re: Move 40
« Reply #29 on: Sep 18th, 2008, 10:35pm » |
Quote Modify
|
We could also allow people to cast fractional votes based on the strength of their opinion.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print