Fighting for freedom.

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Hello, everyone !

I am very busy now with SIXTH, and don't have enough time to post a full and complete article about this. Couple years ago I wanted to publish this in "Draughts Razoo" magazine, and Nick McBride was very happy with this idea, but unfortunately it was never materialized.

I am going to publish here several major ideas of this concept and you all are welcome to discuss and continue develop the theory.

================================================================================

This theory of "FREEDOM" is well apply to the most (all ?) board games, not only checkers ... but also chess, GO, other forms of checkers etc

1. Both partners in the beginning of game have "even" or almost even amount of freedom. In other words - initial position 12x12 is drawn if both players play it right and don't lose much freedom.

2. The main goal game - eliminate opportent freedom: capture all pieces or block them from making any moves. In this case freedom of opponents gets to zero and opponent lose the game.

3. In any position partners try to achieve one of two (or both goals) - increase self freedom of pieces or eliminate (minimize) the freedom of opponent pieces.

4. Pieces, which have minimum freedom are weak: for instance - red mans on 21 or 28 etc

5. Positions with minimum freedom are weak (bad forms, no trades, limited way to go etc).

6. Why is is so imprtant (in general) to keep first row to the rest of game ... because pieces in the first row have maximum freedom and can go anywhere, and also - this minimize opponent freedom going for Kings.

5. Author of Chinook and some other people call this "mobility" instead "freedom"

6. Fighting for center, pitching in order to get King behind etc - thats all are strategic components of basic principle - "fighting for freedom"

7. The very famous Tom Wiswell quote : "Moves which disturb your position less - disturb position of your oppornent most" (not sure about exact quoting) - is just another presentation of the same idea.

8. The principe of freedom is very basic. It can't help you to find a right move without deep calculations. But one thing is for sure - the best move in each position is the one which eventually (24 pieces database !) leads to impRove the freedom of your pieces.

9. In real game you have to use this theory to find the best move and always estimate freedom balance in position.

=========================================================================

Now I propose everyone to give here examples, which supports the theory or contra arguments. I maynot respond you immediately, but you can continue the dialogue w/o me.

Also, it will be very interesting to hear - what our programmers think about this idea.

Respectfully,

Alex Moiseyev

[Ingo_Zachos]

8. The principe of freedom is very basic. It can't help you to find a right move without deep calculations. But one thing is for sure - the best move in each position is the one which eventually (24 pieces database !) leads to impRove the freedom of your pieces.

This points means, that it is not applicable to praxis, because, as you say, the mobility of a piece in the final position is what counts, or, so to speak: you have to know the impact of a given move or plan to the final position.
Again everything is reduced to calculation, and the theory does not give any clue which move to pick in a certain position unless u r able to calculate to the final position like a perfect computer (24 piece database).
The purpose of strategy should be to help finding the best move or plan without or with limited calculation, as we humas do.
In this respect your theory is just a reformulation of the rules, saying if you can't move (=no freedom) in the final position, you have lost, but what is it worth if you can't calculate that far?

And if you look at 1. 12-16, one of the best replies proved to be 24-20, although it reduces the mobility of this piece as it had two squares at 24, but only one at 20, and this is even blocked by a black man!
You may argue, that it cramps the opponent, and that it is preventive against a black 11-15 in the next moves, but here the question arises:
How do you know that? I believe you rely on your positional feeling, and published examples, not on the impact the move 24-20 has on the mobility of your forces or your calcuation, am I right?

Greetinx from Dortmund, Germany

Ingo Zachos

[matthewkooshad]

Enjoying this read, you guys! Keep up the great checkers talk

:angel8:

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Hi, Ingo ! It seems like "The freedom theory", as any other revolutionary theory requires 1-2 pages to define the basic principles and needed many hunderd pages for explanation and interpretation !

not applicape to praxis

Nope, this theory is 100% applicable to practice, but ... "freedom theory" is very basic concept, not a strategy. All strategy is a result of proper use and interpretation of freedom concept. Any single strategy "golden rule" is just a small part of the whole picture.

You can use in pratctice "golden rules". For instance - "keep trades in hands" ! This is one of the major strategy rules, but again ... only small part of "fignting for freedom"

We can compare "freedom theory" with some basic universy laws, lets say Newton laws in phisics: constatnt of global mass or energy. Same thing is applicable to freedom:

the total amount of freedom in each game remains permanent and unchanged. If positional freedom of one player is growing, freedom of his/her opponent is dropping.

Ingo, we all use this theory, more or less ! When we say - strong center, weak center, trap pieces, attack double corner etc - thats all about freedom and are part of freedom.

Freedom - it's about checkers as the entire game, not concrete moves.

I can prove - that correct understanding and "feeling" this principle, and how it is apply to checkers - greatly help me in my calculations.

There is a famous joke ... "how many moves ahead you calculate ?" ==> "Just one which I have to make !" This is fantastically true !!!

More later ...

Regards,

Alex

[Alan Millhone]

Hello Mr. Alex:

The great Chess GM, Mr. Emanuel Lasker once said, " When you find a good move....... look for a better one" !

Mr. Tom Wiswell had thousands of " Wiswellisms that he 'coined' in his lifetime. You can find some of them on Mr. Victor Niederhoffer's fine investment web site at: http://www.dailyspeculations.com

From this section on 'strategy and tactics' I will print off the postings and put into a new manuscript for review and study. I hope to see much more from our World Champion and others on this topic. Mr. Alex has casually strolled past me at several tournaments seeing what I was doing only to come back by later and admonish me for some dumb move I had made. Those lessons are priceless and something I do my best to remember and look for in every game I play. I have always made it a practise of mine over the years to seek out players better than myself to play. You will not advance too far in this game if you only play those you can easily defeat. I will continue to lose games,but now have a much better understanding of the deep mysteries of our game.

Sincerely:
Alan Millhone, President
American Checker Federation
" AN AVERAGE PLAYER "
===============================================
I will read my copy of 10th. ACA Tournament every day till my copy of " SIXTH" arrives"
===============================================

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Thanks for kind words, Mr. Millhone ! I do my best to serve checkers community to the best of my skills, knoweldges and abilities. This is my responsibility as a World Champion and human being.

Proper knowledges and usage of "golden rules" is a key point to success

Respectfully,

Alex Moiseyev

[matthewkooshad]

Here's a formatting that I did of Wiswell's quotes sometime ago.
http://www.draughts.info/wiswellprov.php from the books section on my site.

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Matthew, I visited this site, thanks. I find one interesting quote

"In many games, you have just two possible choices: you must make this move or you must make that move. Deciding is what it's all about."

Sounds nice but not always true. In many situations you have to figure out - what move you SHOULD NOT make ... this one or this one !

BTW. Another golden rule: if there are two winning moves in position, one ls almost always 99.99999999% leads to draw ! Same rule applies - when you have two drawn moves in weak position. Kind of Murthy law in checkers.

[Jason Solan]

BTW. Another golden rule: if there are two winning moves in position, one ls almost always 99.99999999% leads to draw !

Alex, you told me this quote after the very first game i ever played against you (which i managed to draw because you took the wrong 'winning' move) and i've always remembered it. Whenever i think of it and i think i'm in good position, it keeps me searching deep and deeper into the move looking to find that draw.

[jimloy]

I'm going to publish the following in the ACFB, some day.

Mobility (Freedom)

How are games lost? If you are a beginner, a lot of losses may seem mysterious, a kind of sinking feeling that gets worse until there is no longer any mystery, and you are sunk. I think that most losses (perhaps more than 90% of them) come in one of these varieties (most important first):

1. Tactical! You lost a piece because you didn't see a threat, such as a shot or something similar. Maybe your opponent can make some sacrifice that allows him/her to king.

2. Mobility (or Freedom, as Alex calls it). Pieces cannot move. Some pieces are physically blocked, and others are restrained by threats, and you have almost no safe moves left.

3. Ending. You got into a bad ending, through your own bad judgment or your opponent's clever trick.

Let's think about mobility, a little bit:

Scenario #1: You are playing against your computer, and you make a seemingly innocent move, and the computer instantly shows a value that implies that you are now losing, big time. This time, it turns out that you didn't fall into a shot. And, about five moves later, you are beginning to see what is wrong: you cannot move any of your pieces on the double corner side, for a variety of reasons, and you only have two moves left on the single corner side. You now see that once you have made those two "safe" moves on the single corner side, you will have no moves left, and you will lose. It may be too late, but it is time to do something drastic, like maybe sacrifice a piece to free up some other pieces.

Scenario #2: You have very few safe moves, as above, but the game is still a draw (maybe the computer tells you this, or maybe BC says that this line of the Skullcracker is a narrow draw). Your lack of mobility has not yet lost you the game, but it has made your life very difficult.

Scenario #3: This time, your opponent has limited mobility. Maybe you can see a win, maybe not. But, you can probably predict your opponent's moves with great clarity, because his/her options are so few. It would seem that your life just got much easier.

You have experienced all three of those scenarios, and maybe others like them. Do you see how important mobility is? There were probably warning signs that you missed earlier, your mobility was slowly (or rapidly) decreasing. You should have noticed. I think that mobility is something that we all must consider, as we play, almost every game.

[Patrick Parker]

its been a year since anyone posted here.......anyone.......

[liam stephens]

1st April 2007 Reuters Agency Report:

HOW TO BECOME A WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP CHALLENGER
An unusually reliable source has revealed that situated in the
University of Alberta is a games room devoted to the art of
Button Pushing. There, students practice daily, under the
ever watchful eye of the Dean of the Faculty for Scientific studies.
All around sit graduates from the Button Pushing Academy of the
Sorbonne in Paris, their eyes glued to every move. Some eager
Checker Players are also present. These exercises give them a
profound strategic advantage across the board, that may one day
lead to a world championship challenge.
The Michaelmas and Hilary terms were over subscribed,
but a few places remain open for the Trinity term at
a specially reduced enrolement fee of $1000, per student.
Watch this space for further details.

[Ingo_Zachos]

1st April 2007 Reuters Agency Report:

...

No further commemt...


Greetinx from sunny Dortmund, Germany

Ingo Zachos

[Alex_Moiseyev]

its been a year since anyone posted here.......anyone.......

Not enough time, Patrick. Everyone works hard trying to promote the game. If moderator cleanup and prohibit all promotional positngs, than people return back to game.

Alex

[Patrick Parker]

d'accord