I have posted an analysis of the 4-move and 5-move ballots at the kingsrow website. It consists of a breakdown on which ones draw and lose, a difficulty rating for each of them that draw, and new play in the kingsrow opening book for all these ballots.
-- Ed
4-move and 5-move ballots
-
Ed Gilbert
- Posts: 146
- Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 7:37 am
- What do you like about checkers?: shots
- Location: Morristown, New Jersey
- Contact:
-
Richard Pask
- Posts: 306
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:15 pm
- What do you like about checkers?: Much!
Re: 4-move and 5-move ballots
A Happy (and healthy) Christmas and New Year to all!
This, and its follow-up, are rather lengthy posts, so for those of you who don't want to trawl all the way through them, I'll summarize my thoughts right now:
First, many thanks to Ed for yet another wonderful and invaluable contribution to our great game!
Secondly, although Ed has made it quite clear that he is neither advocating nor criticising any particular form of restriction, my personal response to his post is that it bolsters still further the remarkable 3-move restriction.
Different opening conventions
As has often been stated, all 4 opening conventions have much to recommend them. For myself, I find that 3-move is rightly considered to be number 1. Furthermore, having served its purpose admirably for almost 90 years, there is every indication that it will continue to do so for another 90 years.
Practically limitless scope
The work I have done on Solid Checkers, 21st Century Checkers and Complete Checkers, where I was continually striving to sift, organize and reduce the material, convinces me that for practical purposes 3-move has limitless scope. This opinion is further strengthened by the following (just a sample):
The games played in modern (2003 onwards) WCMs;
The games played in the 2005 UK & Ireland v USA and the recent Italy v USA match;
Wonderful books such as Alex's Sixth;
The many innovations being thrown up by the leading computer programs such as KingsRow.
The 25000+ indexed newspaper columns I purchased from W T Jenkins, featuring all manner of openings moves.
As will be shown, Ed's work shows that 3-move has even more scope than we previously thought possible!
No need to go further
As Derek Oldbury argues on Page 74 of Volume One of his great Ency, it is neither desirable nor necessary to enter into the realms of the 4-move restriction. However, studying sound 4 and 5-move sequences is another matter entirely!
Early innovation
On Page 112 of the same DEO book we find the following: 'In a 3-move ballot, the best cooks come in on the 4th move!!!' (Willie Ryan)
Thus, after all the preamble, I finally come to the meat of my post. In order to make it manageable, I have only looked at Ed's list of sound 4-move ballots, although similar arguments will by extension apply to the 5-move list. I have divided them into 3 categories: Void, Mainstream and Esoteric.
The three categories
In all, 542 sound 4-move ballots are listed. (As an aside, for Ed to designate them sound is, to my mind, to effectively state that at a decent time limit KingsRow is effectively unbeatable when using these ballots. I don't doubt that he is correct.) If, in 90 years time (I'll be 150 by then!), anyone were to put forward a serious case for a 4-move restriction, I would argue that 54 of these ballots aren't actually wholly sound. That is, they feature unsound 3rd and 4th moves. One example will suffice: 9-13 22-18; 5-9??? 18-14??? If the future of the game ever depended upon the inclusion of such ballots - it never will - then it would be better to allow it to die an honourable death.
I designate such ballots as being Void. There are 54 in total (I think) which, according to Ed's system are numbered as follows: 46, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 198, 200, 239, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 341, 343, 344, 345, 346, 405, 437, 440, 441, 470, 471, 472, 473, 474, 476, 477, 479, 505, 506, 507, 508, 510, 511, 544, 573, 574, 577, 579, 580, 594, 595, 596, 597, 599, 754, 763, 765, 775, 779 and 787. (Apologies for any typos.) Even if players consider these ballots to be sound, they certainly have nothing to say to the 3-move fan.
We then enter woolly territory. I am fully aware that, given enough research, we will discover that every one of the 488 remaining ballots (and some of the unsound ones!) will have been played by someone at some time. Indeed, several of them are relatively popular. For example, 9-13 22-17; 13-22 26-17 (Everett Fuller) & 9-13 23-18; 5-9 24-20 (Willie Ryan) & 9-14 24-19; 6-9 22-17 (Huggins v Chamberlain) & 11-15 24-19; 15-24 27-20 (many). However, to stay sane, I have designated a ballot as being Mainstream if it meets one of the following criteria: it forms one of the 2200 numbered variations in Complete Checkers; is covered substantially by a note in the same work; is covered by transpositions in the same work. This gives rise to 332 Mainstream 4-move ballots. The remaining 156 4-move ballots have been designated Esoteric and are addressed in the following post.
This, and its follow-up, are rather lengthy posts, so for those of you who don't want to trawl all the way through them, I'll summarize my thoughts right now:
First, many thanks to Ed for yet another wonderful and invaluable contribution to our great game!
Secondly, although Ed has made it quite clear that he is neither advocating nor criticising any particular form of restriction, my personal response to his post is that it bolsters still further the remarkable 3-move restriction.
Different opening conventions
As has often been stated, all 4 opening conventions have much to recommend them. For myself, I find that 3-move is rightly considered to be number 1. Furthermore, having served its purpose admirably for almost 90 years, there is every indication that it will continue to do so for another 90 years.
Practically limitless scope
The work I have done on Solid Checkers, 21st Century Checkers and Complete Checkers, where I was continually striving to sift, organize and reduce the material, convinces me that for practical purposes 3-move has limitless scope. This opinion is further strengthened by the following (just a sample):
The games played in modern (2003 onwards) WCMs;
The games played in the 2005 UK & Ireland v USA and the recent Italy v USA match;
Wonderful books such as Alex's Sixth;
The many innovations being thrown up by the leading computer programs such as KingsRow.
The 25000+ indexed newspaper columns I purchased from W T Jenkins, featuring all manner of openings moves.
As will be shown, Ed's work shows that 3-move has even more scope than we previously thought possible!
No need to go further
As Derek Oldbury argues on Page 74 of Volume One of his great Ency, it is neither desirable nor necessary to enter into the realms of the 4-move restriction. However, studying sound 4 and 5-move sequences is another matter entirely!
Early innovation
On Page 112 of the same DEO book we find the following: 'In a 3-move ballot, the best cooks come in on the 4th move!!!' (Willie Ryan)
Thus, after all the preamble, I finally come to the meat of my post. In order to make it manageable, I have only looked at Ed's list of sound 4-move ballots, although similar arguments will by extension apply to the 5-move list. I have divided them into 3 categories: Void, Mainstream and Esoteric.
The three categories
In all, 542 sound 4-move ballots are listed. (As an aside, for Ed to designate them sound is, to my mind, to effectively state that at a decent time limit KingsRow is effectively unbeatable when using these ballots. I don't doubt that he is correct.) If, in 90 years time (I'll be 150 by then!), anyone were to put forward a serious case for a 4-move restriction, I would argue that 54 of these ballots aren't actually wholly sound. That is, they feature unsound 3rd and 4th moves. One example will suffice: 9-13 22-18; 5-9??? 18-14??? If the future of the game ever depended upon the inclusion of such ballots - it never will - then it would be better to allow it to die an honourable death.
I designate such ballots as being Void. There are 54 in total (I think) which, according to Ed's system are numbered as follows: 46, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 198, 200, 239, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 341, 343, 344, 345, 346, 405, 437, 440, 441, 470, 471, 472, 473, 474, 476, 477, 479, 505, 506, 507, 508, 510, 511, 544, 573, 574, 577, 579, 580, 594, 595, 596, 597, 599, 754, 763, 765, 775, 779 and 787. (Apologies for any typos.) Even if players consider these ballots to be sound, they certainly have nothing to say to the 3-move fan.
We then enter woolly territory. I am fully aware that, given enough research, we will discover that every one of the 488 remaining ballots (and some of the unsound ones!) will have been played by someone at some time. Indeed, several of them are relatively popular. For example, 9-13 22-17; 13-22 26-17 (Everett Fuller) & 9-13 23-18; 5-9 24-20 (Willie Ryan) & 9-14 24-19; 6-9 22-17 (Huggins v Chamberlain) & 11-15 24-19; 15-24 27-20 (many). However, to stay sane, I have designated a ballot as being Mainstream if it meets one of the following criteria: it forms one of the 2200 numbered variations in Complete Checkers; is covered substantially by a note in the same work; is covered by transpositions in the same work. This gives rise to 332 Mainstream 4-move ballots. The remaining 156 4-move ballots have been designated Esoteric and are addressed in the following post.
-
Richard Pask
- Posts: 306
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:15 pm
- What do you like about checkers?: Much!
Re: 4-move and 5-move ballots
Players hoping to find 4th moves which are as strong or even stronger than the popular options will of course be disappointed: every one of the 156 Esoteric 4-move ballots necessarily involves a definite sacrifice of playing strength: either adopting a weaker defence or a weaker 'attack'.
This is hardly the point however. All 156 of these 4-move ballots now have the stamp of soundness, and at least in some cases are quite likely to be adopted by the creative player who has made a serious study of them. (As mentioned in the previous post some already have been.) Moreover, attacking these ballots correctly is often very difficult if you have never looked at them before. Try a few games against KingsRow yourself and see! Finally, discovering what makes many of them inferior (although sound) can only serve to enhance a player's understanding of the game.
What is critical is that many of these ballots, living in the twilight zone, are available as valuable weapons precisely because they remain largely neglected. Publishing reams of analysis on them will only serve to hinder the surprise element which makes WCMs in particular so exciting. As Capablanca, the great chess legend wrote: 'Balloting for the opening, as is done in draughts, would be a great improvement for a short period, but ... [would] in a very short number of years bring about a worse situation than at present, as we should then have practically eliminated the few mysteries now left in chess for the leading players.' Therefore, let's stop at 3-move and let things evolve naturally.
I herewith present the 156 Esoteric 4-move ballots - all available from 3-move - for your consideration. For ease, I have presented them under their regular move orders.
9-13s (43 ballots):
9-13 21-17; 5-9 22-18 or 23-18
9-13 21-17; 6-9 24-20
9-13 22-17; 13-22 26-17
9-13 22-18; 10-15 24-20
9-13 22-18; 11-16 18-15 or 23-19 or 24-20
9-13 22-18; 12-16 18-15 or 23-19 or 26-22
9-13 23-18; 5-9 24-20
9-13 23-18; 6-9 22-17
9-13 23-18; 10-15 22-17 or 24-19
9-13 23-18; 11-16 18-15 or 22-17 or 24-20
9-13 23-18; 12-16 18-15
9-13 23-19; 5-9 22-17 or 24-20
9-13 23-19; 6-9 22-17 or 24-20 or 26-23
9-13 23-19; 10-14 22-18 or 24-20
9-13 23-19; 11-16 22-17 or 24-20
9-13 24-19; 5-9 22-17
9-13 24-19; 10-14 22-17 or 23-18
9-13 24-19; 11-15 22-17 or 22-18 or 23-18
9-13 24-19; 11-16 22-17
9-13 24-20; 5-9 22-17 or 27-24
9-13 24-20; 6-9 22-17 (13-22) same as 10-15 24-20; 6-10 22-18 (15-22) which I missed!
9-13 24-20; 10-14 23-18; or 27-24
9-13 24-20; 10-15 22-17 or 23-19
9-13 24-20; 11-15 27-24
9-14s (20 ballots):
9-14 22-17; 5-9 24-19
9-14 22-17; 6-9 23-18
9-14 22-17; 11-15 17-13 or 24-19 or 24-20 or 26-22
9-14 22-17; 11-16 17-13 or 23-19 or 24-20
9-14 22-18; 5-9 18-15 or 21-17
9-14 23-19; 5-9 24-20
9-14 23-19; 11-16 19-15 or 24-20
9-14 24-20; 5-9 23-18
9-14 24-20; 10-15 23-18 or 23-19 or 27-24
9-14 24-20; 11-15 23-18 or 27-24
10-14s (17 ballots):
10-14 22-17; 7-10 23-18
10-14 22-18; 6-10 23-19
10-14 22-18; 7-10 23-19
10-14 23-18; 14-23 26-19
10-14 23-19; 6-10 24-20 or 26-23
10-14 23-19; 11-16 24-20
10-14 24-19; 6-10 23-18
10-14 24-19; 7-10 19-15 or 23-18
10-14 24-19; 11-16 19-15
10-14 24-20; 6-10 23-18 or 27-24
10-14 24-20; 7-10 23-18
10-14 24-20; 11-15 23-18 or 23-19 or 27-24
10-15s (34 ballots):
10-15 21-17; 6-10 24-19 or 24-20
10-15 21-17; 7-10 24-19
10-15 21-17; 9-13 22-18 or 23-18 or 25-21
10-15 21-17; 11-16 23-19 or 25-21
10-15 22-17; 6-10 17-13 or 23-18 or 24-19 or 24-20 or 26-22
10-15 22-17; 7-10 23-18 or 24-19 or 26-22
10-15 22-17; 9-13 23-19 or 24-19
10-15 22-17; 11-16 17-13 or 23-19 or 24-19 or 24-20 or 26-22
10-15 22-17; 15-19 23-16
10-15 22-18; 15-22 26-17
10-15 23-18; 6-10 24-19
10-15 23-18; 7-10 24-19
10-15 23-18; 12-16 24-19 or 27-23
10-15 23-19; 6-10 26-23
10-15 23-19; 7-10 24-20
10-15 24-19; 15-24 27-20
10-15 24-20; 6-10 27-24
10-15 24-20; 7-10 22-18
11-15s (14 ballots):
11-15 21-17; 9-13 23-18 (Wiswell v Fraser)
11-15 21-17; 9-14 17-13
11-15 22-17; 8-11 24-20 or 26-22
11-15 22-17; 9-13 26-22
11-15 22-18; 15-22 26-17
11-15 23-18; 8-11 18-14 or 24-20
11-15 23-19; 9-13 24-20
11-15 23-19; 9-14 22-18 or 26-23
11-15 24-19; 15-24 27-20
11-15 24-20; 8-11 22-18 or 27-24
11-16s (19 ballots):
11-16 21-17; 8-11 24-20
11-16 21-17; 9-13 22-18 or 24-20
11-16 21-17; 9-14 17-13
11-16 22-17; 8-11 23-19 or 24-20
11-16 22-17; 16-20 23-19
11-16 22-18; 7-11 23-19
11-16 22-18; 16-20 18-15 or 23-19
11-16 23-18; 7-11 24-19 or 27-23
11-16 23-18; 8-11 18-15 or 27-23
11-16 23-18; 10-14 22-17
11-16 23-18; 16-20 18-15
11-16 24-19; 7-11 27-24
11-16 24-19; 16-20 28-24
11-16 24-20; 7-11 27-24
12-16 (9 ballots):
12-16 21-17; 9-13 23-18
12-16 22-17; 16-20 26-22
12-16 22-18; 16-20 23-19
12-16 23-18; 16-20 18-15
12-16 24-19; 16-20 19-16 or 28-24
12-16 24-20; 8-12 27-24
12-16 24-20; 10-15 23-19 or 27-24
Phew! There will be typos!!!
This is hardly the point however. All 156 of these 4-move ballots now have the stamp of soundness, and at least in some cases are quite likely to be adopted by the creative player who has made a serious study of them. (As mentioned in the previous post some already have been.) Moreover, attacking these ballots correctly is often very difficult if you have never looked at them before. Try a few games against KingsRow yourself and see! Finally, discovering what makes many of them inferior (although sound) can only serve to enhance a player's understanding of the game.
What is critical is that many of these ballots, living in the twilight zone, are available as valuable weapons precisely because they remain largely neglected. Publishing reams of analysis on them will only serve to hinder the surprise element which makes WCMs in particular so exciting. As Capablanca, the great chess legend wrote: 'Balloting for the opening, as is done in draughts, would be a great improvement for a short period, but ... [would] in a very short number of years bring about a worse situation than at present, as we should then have practically eliminated the few mysteries now left in chess for the leading players.' Therefore, let's stop at 3-move and let things evolve naturally.
I herewith present the 156 Esoteric 4-move ballots - all available from 3-move - for your consideration. For ease, I have presented them under their regular move orders.
9-13s (43 ballots):
9-13 21-17; 5-9 22-18 or 23-18
9-13 21-17; 6-9 24-20
9-13 22-17; 13-22 26-17
9-13 22-18; 10-15 24-20
9-13 22-18; 11-16 18-15 or 23-19 or 24-20
9-13 22-18; 12-16 18-15 or 23-19 or 26-22
9-13 23-18; 5-9 24-20
9-13 23-18; 6-9 22-17
9-13 23-18; 10-15 22-17 or 24-19
9-13 23-18; 11-16 18-15 or 22-17 or 24-20
9-13 23-18; 12-16 18-15
9-13 23-19; 5-9 22-17 or 24-20
9-13 23-19; 6-9 22-17 or 24-20 or 26-23
9-13 23-19; 10-14 22-18 or 24-20
9-13 23-19; 11-16 22-17 or 24-20
9-13 24-19; 5-9 22-17
9-13 24-19; 10-14 22-17 or 23-18
9-13 24-19; 11-15 22-17 or 22-18 or 23-18
9-13 24-19; 11-16 22-17
9-13 24-20; 5-9 22-17 or 27-24
9-13 24-20; 6-9 22-17 (13-22) same as 10-15 24-20; 6-10 22-18 (15-22) which I missed!
9-13 24-20; 10-14 23-18; or 27-24
9-13 24-20; 10-15 22-17 or 23-19
9-13 24-20; 11-15 27-24
9-14s (20 ballots):
9-14 22-17; 5-9 24-19
9-14 22-17; 6-9 23-18
9-14 22-17; 11-15 17-13 or 24-19 or 24-20 or 26-22
9-14 22-17; 11-16 17-13 or 23-19 or 24-20
9-14 22-18; 5-9 18-15 or 21-17
9-14 23-19; 5-9 24-20
9-14 23-19; 11-16 19-15 or 24-20
9-14 24-20; 5-9 23-18
9-14 24-20; 10-15 23-18 or 23-19 or 27-24
9-14 24-20; 11-15 23-18 or 27-24
10-14s (17 ballots):
10-14 22-17; 7-10 23-18
10-14 22-18; 6-10 23-19
10-14 22-18; 7-10 23-19
10-14 23-18; 14-23 26-19
10-14 23-19; 6-10 24-20 or 26-23
10-14 23-19; 11-16 24-20
10-14 24-19; 6-10 23-18
10-14 24-19; 7-10 19-15 or 23-18
10-14 24-19; 11-16 19-15
10-14 24-20; 6-10 23-18 or 27-24
10-14 24-20; 7-10 23-18
10-14 24-20; 11-15 23-18 or 23-19 or 27-24
10-15s (34 ballots):
10-15 21-17; 6-10 24-19 or 24-20
10-15 21-17; 7-10 24-19
10-15 21-17; 9-13 22-18 or 23-18 or 25-21
10-15 21-17; 11-16 23-19 or 25-21
10-15 22-17; 6-10 17-13 or 23-18 or 24-19 or 24-20 or 26-22
10-15 22-17; 7-10 23-18 or 24-19 or 26-22
10-15 22-17; 9-13 23-19 or 24-19
10-15 22-17; 11-16 17-13 or 23-19 or 24-19 or 24-20 or 26-22
10-15 22-17; 15-19 23-16
10-15 22-18; 15-22 26-17
10-15 23-18; 6-10 24-19
10-15 23-18; 7-10 24-19
10-15 23-18; 12-16 24-19 or 27-23
10-15 23-19; 6-10 26-23
10-15 23-19; 7-10 24-20
10-15 24-19; 15-24 27-20
10-15 24-20; 6-10 27-24
10-15 24-20; 7-10 22-18
11-15s (14 ballots):
11-15 21-17; 9-13 23-18 (Wiswell v Fraser)
11-15 21-17; 9-14 17-13
11-15 22-17; 8-11 24-20 or 26-22
11-15 22-17; 9-13 26-22
11-15 22-18; 15-22 26-17
11-15 23-18; 8-11 18-14 or 24-20
11-15 23-19; 9-13 24-20
11-15 23-19; 9-14 22-18 or 26-23
11-15 24-19; 15-24 27-20
11-15 24-20; 8-11 22-18 or 27-24
11-16s (19 ballots):
11-16 21-17; 8-11 24-20
11-16 21-17; 9-13 22-18 or 24-20
11-16 21-17; 9-14 17-13
11-16 22-17; 8-11 23-19 or 24-20
11-16 22-17; 16-20 23-19
11-16 22-18; 7-11 23-19
11-16 22-18; 16-20 18-15 or 23-19
11-16 23-18; 7-11 24-19 or 27-23
11-16 23-18; 8-11 18-15 or 27-23
11-16 23-18; 10-14 22-17
11-16 23-18; 16-20 18-15
11-16 24-19; 7-11 27-24
11-16 24-19; 16-20 28-24
11-16 24-20; 7-11 27-24
12-16 (9 ballots):
12-16 21-17; 9-13 23-18
12-16 22-17; 16-20 26-22
12-16 22-18; 16-20 23-19
12-16 23-18; 16-20 18-15
12-16 24-19; 16-20 19-16 or 28-24
12-16 24-20; 8-12 27-24
12-16 24-20; 10-15 23-19 or 27-24
Phew! There will be typos!!!
-
Alex_Moiseyev
- Posts: 4349
- Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:03 pm
- What do you like about checkers?: .....
Re: 4-move and 5-move ballots
I am mainly conservative man and stick with old champions. So - my choice is 542 ballots for 4 moves.
Back to end of 20's - beginning od 30's when 3 moves restrictions style was introduced, established and moved ahead, W. Hellman and A. Long stated that "ALL SOUNDS BALLOTS SHALL BE PLAYED". This is how we come-up finally with 156 3-moves ballots and IMHO same principle must be apply to 4- and any other restrictions move.
If we have 4-moves ballot like "9-13, 22-18, 5-9, 18-14" I don't break it down to each specific move. 9-13 for me looks the same as 5-9 - both are not best but at the end generate unique ballot position which is sound and playable ... so be it !
Regards,
'
ALM
Back to end of 20's - beginning od 30's when 3 moves restrictions style was introduced, established and moved ahead, W. Hellman and A. Long stated that "ALL SOUNDS BALLOTS SHALL BE PLAYED". This is how we come-up finally with 156 3-moves ballots and IMHO same principle must be apply to 4- and any other restrictions move.
If we have 4-moves ballot like "9-13, 22-18, 5-9, 18-14" I don't break it down to each specific move. 9-13 for me looks the same as 5-9 - both are not best but at the end generate unique ballot position which is sound and playable ... so be it !
Regards,
'
ALM
I am playing checkers, not chess.
-
Richard Pask
- Posts: 306
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:15 pm
- What do you like about checkers?: Much!
Re: 4-move and 5-move ballots
Dear Alex,
Happy Christmas and New Year!
This, of course, is the other way of looking at things, and coming from you is certainly to be respected.
From my standpoint I'm mainly interested to see if Ed's list results in more unusual 4th moves being played under 3-move in the future. Perhaps one or two will be on show in the your forthcoming WCM?!
Happy Christmas and New Year!
This, of course, is the other way of looking at things, and coming from you is certainly to be respected.
From my standpoint I'm mainly interested to see if Ed's list results in more unusual 4th moves being played under 3-move in the future. Perhaps one or two will be on show in the your forthcoming WCM?!
-
Alex_Moiseyev
- Posts: 4349
- Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:03 pm
- What do you like about checkers?: .....
Re: 4-move and 5-move ballots
Dear Richard, Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and your family!Perhaps one or two will be on show in the your forthcoming WCM?!
Regarding my upcoming match with Sergio, two things can contribute to testing new lines:
1) Sergio came to English Draughts from Italian Checkers where published play differs slightly from English Draughts published play. If there are two moves even in strength, but one of them was played by Hellman or Long back to 1930-1950, this may have adopted by American checkers community, published in books and cemented for decades as main line.
I already experienced this in the past, when I played my matches with Michelle Borghetti.
2) if both of us (me and Sergio) respect opponent and believes that opponent is well familiar with main line, then alternate paths can be try. I am ready for this challenge!
There is only one way to prove pudding - eat it!
Respectfully,
ALM
I am playing checkers, not chess.
-
George Hay
- Posts: 1044
- Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 7:41 am
- What do you like about checkers?: Checkers is a game of pure logic.
- Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
Re: 4-move and 5-move ballots
"All Sound Ballots Shall Be Played" yet there is no way in Hell, Michigan (or Hell, Iowa) that 9-13, 22-18, 5-9?? is sound. To put a blunder move for the fourth move to even the playing field is like putting lipstick on a pig!...On a positive note, the 26-17 Single Corner is listed as a draw (Ballot #604: 11-15 22-18 15x22 26x17).
--George Hay
--George Hay
-
chipschap
- Posts: 230
- Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 12:54 pm
- What do you like about checkers?: Everything.
- Location: Honolulu, Hawai'i
- Contact:
Re: 4-move and 5-move ballots
I think the point that is being missed here is that there are two ways to look at this based on two different objectives.
If you are trying to achieve a 4-move position that might reasonbly arise (i.e., in Richard's terms, having something to offer to the 3-move player) then the approximately 488 ballots that Richard singles out are appropriate.
If as Alex discusses, you are looking for a playable starting position, then the 524 non-losing ballots should be considered. How is this any different or any more or less artificial than an 11 move ballot starting position? The point is that it's playable, nothing more.
If instead of the usual ballot cards, we had a large deck (or random computer drawing) from 524 different positions in FEN notation, without the run-up, would that be objectionable? Probably not, and yet it would be the same thing.
If you are trying to achieve a 4-move position that might reasonbly arise (i.e., in Richard's terms, having something to offer to the 3-move player) then the approximately 488 ballots that Richard singles out are appropriate.
If as Alex discusses, you are looking for a playable starting position, then the 524 non-losing ballots should be considered. How is this any different or any more or less artificial than an 11 move ballot starting position? The point is that it's playable, nothing more.
If instead of the usual ballot cards, we had a large deck (or random computer drawing) from 524 different positions in FEN notation, without the run-up, would that be objectionable? Probably not, and yet it would be the same thing.
-
Richard Pask
- Posts: 306
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:15 pm
- What do you like about checkers?: Much!
Re: 4-move and 5-move ballots
As I've pointed out on several occasions, for the foreseeable future - literally 50 years or more - I believe the 3-move ballot system will prove to be more than adequate. However, Ed's list can only be a positive thing as it encourages even more originality from the creative players such as our leading crop of grandmasters. (Incidentally, why on earth did Wyllie and Martins feel obliged to play Martins' Rest over and over when, at that time, there were such enormous virgin fields to explore?)
Interestingly, beyond 3-move, Derek Oldbury always proposed balloting those interesting developments, such as 11-15 23-19 8-11 22-17; 15-18 (the Centre), which afforded winning opportunities for both sides, rather than simply extending the number of moves to be balloted.
Only time will tell. Meanwhile, I look forward to the forthcoming WCM, between 2 genuine greats (RLF thought such matches were a thing of the past), and predict a titanic struggle featuring a good deal of new play!
Interestingly, beyond 3-move, Derek Oldbury always proposed balloting those interesting developments, such as 11-15 23-19 8-11 22-17; 15-18 (the Centre), which afforded winning opportunities for both sides, rather than simply extending the number of moves to be balloted.
Only time will tell. Meanwhile, I look forward to the forthcoming WCM, between 2 genuine greats (RLF thought such matches were a thing of the past), and predict a titanic struggle featuring a good deal of new play!
-
Richard Pask
- Posts: 306
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:15 pm
- What do you like about checkers?: Much!
Re: 4-move and 5-move ballots
Dear all,
I don't think the full value of Ed's amazing lists will be appreciated for some time - nor their implications for the 3-move enthusiast.
For example, to select just 2 examples:
We learn that 10-15 21-17; 7-10 17-14; 9-18? is definitely a loss for Black!
We also learn that 11-15 22-17; 8-11 23-19; 10-14? is also a loss for Black.
Also, to my delight, apart from the example cited by Brian Hinkle, my examples of faulty early bridges (Lesson 234 in CC: I) all hold up.
Additionally, we learn that 10-14 24-19; 6-10 22-17; 2-6? loses for Black (add this to lesson 234!).
Finally, if only to impress the lay person, the fact that there are 2700 unique 5-move ballots is impressive in its own right.
Definitely something to study and enjoy in 2022!
I don't think the full value of Ed's amazing lists will be appreciated for some time - nor their implications for the 3-move enthusiast.
For example, to select just 2 examples:
We learn that 10-15 21-17; 7-10 17-14; 9-18? is definitely a loss for Black!
We also learn that 11-15 22-17; 8-11 23-19; 10-14? is also a loss for Black.
Also, to my delight, apart from the example cited by Brian Hinkle, my examples of faulty early bridges (Lesson 234 in CC: I) all hold up.
Additionally, we learn that 10-14 24-19; 6-10 22-17; 2-6? loses for Black (add this to lesson 234!).
Finally, if only to impress the lay person, the fact that there are 2700 unique 5-move ballots is impressive in its own right.
Definitely something to study and enjoy in 2022!
-
Alex_Moiseyev
- Posts: 4349
- Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:03 pm
- What do you like about checkers?: .....
Re: 4-move and 5-move ballots
Maybe it’s a bit later, but never too late 
to say “Many thanks” to Ed Gilbert for his tremendous, countless amount of work and outstanding accomplishments by computing lists of legal 4- and 5 moves restrictions openings.
Absolutely amazing. This along with 11 man ballot opening books make 2021 very special year for English Draughts which put our game on another level!
Respectfully,
ALM
to say “Many thanks” to Ed Gilbert for his tremendous, countless amount of work and outstanding accomplishments by computing lists of legal 4- and 5 moves restrictions openings. Absolutely amazing. This along with 11 man ballot opening books make 2021 very special year for English Draughts which put our game on another level!
Respectfully,
ALM
I am playing checkers, not chess.
-
Richard Pask
- Posts: 306
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:15 pm
- What do you like about checkers?: Much!
Re: 4-move and 5-move ballots
And 11-16 21-17; 8-11 17-14; 9-18? is a definite loss.
Too many interesting points to mention them all here.
Too many interesting points to mention them all here.
-
Richard Pask
- Posts: 306
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:15 pm
- What do you like about checkers?: Much!
Re: 4-move and 5-move ballots
Of course both
9-13 23-18; 11-16 18-15 same as 9-13 23-19; 11-16 19-15
and
9-13 23-19; 6-9 26-23 11-15 same as 11-15 23-19; 9-13 26-23; 6-9
may fairly be described as mainstream.
9-13 23-18; 11-16 18-15 same as 9-13 23-19; 11-16 19-15
and
9-13 23-19; 6-9 26-23 11-15 same as 11-15 23-19; 9-13 26-23; 6-9
may fairly be described as mainstream.