HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: horj@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (Eric Scheirer)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Sid Sackson paper-and-pencil(s) games
Date: 11 Dec 92 19:43:02 EST
Distribution: rec
Organization: Cornell University

Back in the dim recesses of my memory, I remember two books of games for
colored pencils and dice.  I believe they were written, or edited, by
Sid Sackson.  One was called "Beyond Solitaire" and had one-person games,
including one called Pinball, and one called Profit and Loss.  The other
was "Beyond Tic-Tac-Toe" and had a number of games with the names of 
modern artists, including one called Mondrian, and another called Klee.
These games were for two or more players.

As I recall, some of the BTTT games were based on graph coloring; others
I don't remember at all.  I was very young at the time, and would play them
with my father.  This was probably late 1970's, or early 1980's (dating
myself, I suppose...)

Does anyone remember these books; if so, are they still available?  _Books_
in_Print doesn't list them.  Barring that, if other people's memories are
better than mine, would it be possible to try to reconstruct some of the
playing boards (they were on detachable perforated sheets), and rules,
for possible adjustment into computer game form?

Replies via email, or followups if you think there's general interest in
these...

-- 
Eric Scheirer -- Cornell University, Ithaca, NY -- (607) 277-1899
"I got remote control and a color TV; I don't change channels so they
 must've changed me." -- Billy Joel

Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: barnett@mummy.agsm.unsw.OZ.AU (Glen Barnett)
Subject: Re: The game of Life
Organization: The Australian Graduate School of Management
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 05:06:49 GMT

In article <1992Dec12.194549.23653@arbi.Informatik.Uni-Oldenburg.DE> Michael.Schwuchow@arbi.informatik.uni-oldenburg.de (Michael Schwuchow) writes:
>positron@engin.umich.edu (Jonathan Scott Haas) writes:
>[declaring the rules]
>
>>Some interesting formations:
>
>>               X                  X
>>                X             X    X
>>              XXX              XXXXX
>
>>            GLIDER           SPACESHIP
>
>I have never seen the "spaceship" before, and when I checked it out on
>paper, it does not do as described above, i.e traversing without changing
>form every n cycles.
>Could you give more information or correct the design, please?
>

           Try:


                   X
                    X
                X   X
                 XXXX

That's the small spaceship. You can increase the  length of the base, e.g.:

                     X
                      X
                X     X
                 XXXXXX    

You might find William Poundstone's 'The Recursive Universe' (Oxford Press,
1985) to be worthwhile reading on this topic.

I worry, however, that this isn't really the kind of game intended for
this group, so I apologise to anyone who feels this all belongs elsewhere.

Glen
From: shrier@aramis.rutgers.edu (Shrier)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: request for old post on checker variants
Keywords: checkers, rules
Date: 18 Dec 92 04:52:02 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


	Some time ago, there was a post on all the major checker variants
and their geographic distribution. Could someone please repost or mail it
to me? Thanks!

								George Shrier
From: news@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Holger Joist)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: New Eleusis: Rules Question
Keywords: Eleusis
Date: 17 Dec 92 22:30:12 GMT
Organization: CSD., University of Erlangen, Germany
NNTP-Posting-Host: faui43.informatik.uni-erlangen.de

Hello!

If there is a prophet in 'New Eleusis' and a player  believes  he
has  no  card is play and the prophet says "right" and the dealer
"correct", will the unplayable cards count to the prophets  score
or not?

Thank you,
  Holger

-- 
Snail: Holger Joist, Neue Strasse 29, 8520 Erlangen, Germany
Email: hrjoist@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de
From: spackman@disco-sol.dfki.uni-sb.de (Stephen Spackman)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Re: Puzzle
Date: 12 Dec 1992 13:58:58 GMT
Organization: DFKI Saarbruecken GmbH, D-W 6600 Saarbruecken
Distribution: world
	<DBH.92Dec10095556@wombat.doc.ic.ac.uk>
Reply-To: stephen@acm.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: disco-sol.dfki.uni-sb.de
In-reply-to: dbh@doc.ic.ac.uk's message of 10 Dec 92 09:55:56

In article <DBH.92Dec10095556@wombat.doc.ic.ac.uk> dbh@doc.ic.ac.uk (Denis Howe) writes:
|A man (with no parachute) drops a thousand feet onto a field and walks
|away unhurt.  How come?

Physics. This actually happens once in a while: I can remember seeing
three reports in the serious press in the last 20 years or so, two
involving parachutists and one a mountaineer (and I'm not a great reader
of news, by any means). The trick is that terminal velocity for a human
broad way on is something under 200km/h and fields aren't as hard as
those of us bred in the city are inclined to suppose. Flat is also the
right way to hit solid surfaces, I expect. It *is* unusual not to break
a bunch of bones in the process, but I'm sure it's possible; if *snow*
fields are allowed it's foolhardy but mechnically trivial.

But what's abstract about it? Or was this post your move, and your score
based on the responses? ;-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
stephen p spackman                                       stephen@acm.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(-:         Yeah, yeah, I know. But did the original poster?         :-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: jeffe@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Jeff Erickson)
Subject: Algorithm Football
Organization: University of California, at Berkeley
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 00:28:57 GMT

dnicol@cstp.umkc.edu writes:
>I had a boxed game from that company that made Wff'n'Proof -- whoever they
>were -- which was supposed to teach the skills one used to puzzle out
>the syntax of strange languages.
[...]
>one player set up a system of rules, then the other player presented
>a series of constructions and was told if they were consistent with the rules
>or not -- like MASTERMIND and the four colored pegs, but with a different
>and more subtle object.

This reminds me of a game I played in college called Algorithm
Football(*).  Three to bignum people sit in a circle and toss a
football(**) around.  One person in the circle has an algorithm --
whenever the ball goes to him, his algorithm tells him who to throw
the ball to next.  The other players try to figure out the algorithm.
No pencil and paper allowed.  Throwing the ball to yourself is legal,
and may be required by the algorithm.  Whoever figures the algorithm
out first (you don't need the ball to announce) gets to make up the
next algorithm, and so on.

Two restrictions.  The algorithm player had to be able to follow the
algorithm correctly (honor system!) in less than ten seconds.  The
algorithm could only depend on the path of the ball through the
players -- you weren't allowed to take into account things like who
spoke last or who held the ball the longest.

A typical algorithm might be "On even turns, throw the ball to
<player>.  On odd turns, throw the ball to the person n+1 steps to my
right, not counting myself or <player>, where n is the number of times
<player> caught the ball since I threw it last."

(*) Not to be confused with John Conway's excellent game Philosopher's
Football, aka Phutball.  See _Winning Ways_ for details.

(**) or koosh ball or pillow or any other throwable object(***).  Of
course, then the name of the game is Algorithm Koosh Ball, Algorithm
Pillow, or Algorithm Any Other Throwable Object, respectively.

(***) I do not recommend Algorithm Shiruken.

-- 
    Jeff Erickson     |  They said "Well, actually, we had something a little
jeffe@cs.berkeley.edu |  bit more... ADULT in mind."  And I said "Uh... Okay!
----------------------+  Okay!  I can adapt!"
					-- Laurie Anderson, "Yankee See"
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: nicholso@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov (Melvin H. Nicholson YBH)
Subject: Re: Sid Sackson paper-and-pencil(s) games
Organization: NASA Ames Res. Ctr. Mtn Vw CA 94035
Distribution: rec
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 22:57:31 GMT

Yup.  There were three books I knew of:

	Beyond Solitaire
	Beyond Tic-Tac-Toe
	Beyond Words

The third is probably the best of the lot.  It included some very clever
word games named after famous authors (Joyce, Poe, and Tolstoy stick in
my mind for some reason)

I haven't seen any hint of them in more than a decade though other than
my personal copies, so I think you're out of luck.

Mel

Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: geoff@cs.monash.edu.au (Geoff Wong)
Subject: Internet Nomic.
Summary: nomic game
Keywords: nomic
Organization: Computer Science, Monash University, Australia
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 01:04:34 GMT

For thoses interested; we'd still like new players
to join the Internet Nomic game. 
The address is 130.194.67.16 5000

Use telnet to connect. Apply to register (at the entrance location)
if you're interested in playing.

geoff
From: jpvidas@soc13.acpub.duke.edu (James Vidas)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Re: use your MIND>>>
Date: 18 Dec 92 03:59:38 GMT
Reply-To: jpvidas@soc13.acpub.duke.edu (James Vidas)


Agreed, Sven. ;)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: cet1@cus.cam.ac.uk (C.E. Thompson)
Subject: Re: The game of Life
Organization: U of Cambridge, England
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 17:41:52 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.050649.19850@usage.csd.unsw.OZ.AU>, 
barnett@mummy.agsm.unsw.OZ.AU (Glen Barnett) writes:
|> 
|> I worry, however, that this isn't really the kind of game intended for
|> this group, so I apologise to anyone who feels this all belongs elsewhere.

Well, Life is discussed in `Winning Ways', and probably many of us think that
anything in WW ought to be suitable material for rec.games.abstract. However, I
think you can find more specialist stuff about Life in comp.theory.cell-automata.

Chris Thompson
JANET:    cet1@uk.ac.cam.phx
Internet: cet1@phx.cam.ac.uk
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: hoey@AIC.NRL.Navy.Mil (Dan Hoey)
Subject: Re: Sid Sackson, corrections
Organization: Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 16:45:02 GMT

Yesterday I wrote about Sid Sackson's 1969 book _A_Gamut_of_Games_
from memory.  From looking in the book (``You can observe a lot just
by watching.''  Stengel or Berra?) I've got a few additions and
corrections.

He got Martin Gardner to write some pretty ripe cover blurbs, calling
Sackson ``the country's leading game inventor, collector, and expert
on game history'' and _Gamut_ ``the most important book on games to
appear in decades.''  Personally, I think Gardner is being too modest
about his own books.

The organization that Sackson was president of is called ``New York
Game Associates.''  While I had assumed it was a fan club, I suppose
it could be a trade association or a private company.  Does anyone
know what it was, or what's become of it?

I pretty badly misremembered the game ``Hold That Line'' yesterday.  I
was right about board being a rectangular array of points, and players
take turns drawing a straight line from one point to another, possibly
going through other points.  The difference is that each line but the
first must share just one endpoint with the path formed by the
previous lines.  No line may otherwise intersect a previous line, even
at an endpoint.  Play continues until no more moves are possible.

As I mentioned, oblique lines are allowed, but it is _not_ made clear
whether oblique lines are restricted to forty-five degree angles.  I
extend this to three versions of the game: n.o.l., r.o.l., and u.o.l.,
in which oblique lines are respectively not allowed, restricted, and
unrestricted.

I was right that in normal play (last player to move wins), an obvious
first-player win exists in the r.o.l. and u.o.l. versions, and in the
n.o.l. version on all boards with an odd side (if you don't see how
send email; if you do don't spoil it), but I do not know who wins in
normal play n.o.l. on 2Nx2M boards.  Are there any takers on this last
problem, or on the misere version?  Sackson apparently noticed that
the misere version is the hard one, for he says ``the player who was
forced to make the last line is the loser!''

Dan Hoey
Hoey@AIC.NRL.Navy.Mil
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: baljeual@uther.calvin.edu (Alan Baljeu)
Subject: Re: Shortest othello complete victory
Organization: Calvin College
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 19:04:23 GMT

Sorry, I goofed. Here's the correction.


baljeual@uther.calvin.edu (Alan Baljeu) writes:

>wms@ssd.intel.com (William Shubert) writes:

>>   A while back somebody was discussing this:
>>  What is the fewest number of moves in an Othello game that will leave
>>  one player with mo pieces on the board?
>>   Somebody else amnwered with (as I remember) an 18 move solution.
>>   I have found a solution involving 14 moves; 7 by each player.

>>    . . . . . . . .   O goes first
>>    . . . . . . . .
>>    . . d g i j . .
>>    . . c # O f . .
>>    . . h O # a . .
>>    . . l k e b . .
>>    . . . . . . m .
>>    . . . . . . . n

>>   Well, do I win?  Can anybody beat this?
>>   I expect that a computer could search all shorter combinations to see if
>>this is THE shortest.
>>        -Bill (wms@ssd.intel.com)

>Nope. I didn't track the moves, but this figure is possible.  It only requires
>12 moves:

>          x 
>       xx 
>       xx  x
>   /----xxxx 
>  /-----xxx  
> /      xxx
>/
>I believe the center is here, on the left.



>--
>  Alan Baljeu
--
	Alan Baljeu
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: albeaj@jima.b17d.ingr.com (Jim Albea)
Subject: Plateau game List and FTP site.
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 22:10:11 GMT


There is a mailing list for the game Plateau.  For information
and to subscribe to the list contact:

                 plateau@plateau.com

                         or

              ...uunet!plateau!plateau


An electronic version of the game (called "Honor Plateau") that
facilitates email play is available via anonymous FTP at:

                ftp.cd.chalmers.se

                 Name: anonymous
             password: <your address here>

            directory: pub/plateu
                 file: plateu.tar.Z.uu

                 Then: $ uudecode plateu.tar.Z.uu
          This yields: plateau.tar.Z
                 Next: $ uncompress plateau.tar.Z
                 Then: tar xvf plateau.tar
          This yields: several items including information files.
              Finally: make
  
-- 
Jim Albea                     albeaj@jima.b17d.ingr.com

Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: kassover@rumsey.crd.ge.com (David Kassover)
Subject: Re: The game of Life
Organization: nope
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 23:44:57 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.050649.19850@usage.csd.unsw.OZ.AU> barnett@mummy.agsm.unsw.OZ.AU (Glen Barnett) writes:
...
>You might find William Poundstone's 'The Recursive Universe' (Oxford Press,
>1985) to be worthwhile reading on this topic.

This was the book to which an earlier post of mine referred.  (My
copy is either in the trunk of my car under the summer tires and
.75" drive socket set, or in the attic, neither of which place I
want to visit in a hurry 8-)
>
>I worry, however, that this isn't really the kind of game intended for
>this group, so I apologise to anyone who feels this all belongs elsewhere.

comp.theory.cell-automata, probably.

But I just conceived of a game based on abstract mathematics and
Life:  Sort of like Empire, or Risk, in which players take turns
dropping finite state machines into the universe, and see whose
survive best...


-- 
David Kassover             "Proper technique helps protect you against
uupsi!khazad!kassover	          sharp weapons and dull judges."
kassover@aule-tek.com                   F. Collins
kassover@ra.crd.ge.com
From: torbenm@diku.dk (Torben AEgidius Mogensen)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Re: Othello Puzzle #4
Date: 11 Dec 92 17:18:06 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, U of Copenhagen

cmspring@cayley.uwaterloo.ca (Colin Springer) writes:


> Othello Puzzle #4:
>  . . o o o o o .
>  x . o x o o . o
>  . x x x x o o o
>  o o x x x x o o
>  o x . x x x x o
>  o . x x x x o o
>  o . x . x x . .
>  . . . x . . . . 

>White (o) to play and win decisively ...

Here is the position with coordinates.

    a b c d e f g h
  1 . . o o o o o .
  2 x . o x o o . o
  3 . x x x x o o o
  4 o o x x x x o o
  5 o x . x x x x o
  6 o . x x x x o o
  7 o . x . x x . .
  8 . . . x . . . . 

Note that white must avoid c5 being filled before he has the left
edge, otherwise a black move to b1 or a3 will give him either the top
row or the left edge. If c5 is empty white can respond to b1 by a1 as
black is unable to play a3 to get the left edge. Black has one safe
move: b2, as white can't play the corner without losing the top row.
Nor can white play b1. Any white move must consider the position after
a black move to b2 in addition to the new openings.

Whites possibilities are b2, a3, c5, b6, b7, d7, b8, e8 and f8. B2
gives black two edges. A3 gives him one edge. C5, b6, b7, d7 and b8
either fills c5 or allows black to do so. This leaves e8 and f8. E8
yields

    a b c d e f g h
  1 . . o o o o o .
  2 x . o x o o . o
  3 . x x x o o o o
  4 o o x x o x o o
  5 o x . x o x x o
  6 o . x x o x o o
  7 o . x . o o . .
  8 . . . x o . . . 

Black can now play d7, f8 and g8 in addition to the moves from before.
D7 and g8 are safe, so this gives no advantage to white.
Furthermore, g7 is now safe for black, and g8 is no disaster.

So by exclusion F8 must be the winning move for white ;-).

	Torben Mogensen (torbenm@diku.dk)
From: joslin@pogo.isp.pitt.edu (David Joslin)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Re: Life
Date: 11 Dec 92 18:56:06 GMT
Organization: Intelligent Systems Program

kassover@rumsey.crd.ge.com (David Kassover) writes:
>>People have theorized that it would be possible to make a
>>*computer* that operated on Life, with streams of gliders
>>instead of streams of data. It could be done. This is important,
>>because the rules of Life could actually be the rules of
>>growth of some kind of bacteria or something. And if so, an
>>actual *living* computer could be constructed.
>
>Actually, I think it was Conway himself who put forth this idea.

Conway suggested that a computer (Turing machine) could be
constructed in the Life world, and someone (I don't remember
who) later proved that he was right.  But the number of cells
required could be very, very large.

But I've never heard anyone suggest that some kind of actual,
living bacteria might reproduce according to the rules of
Conway's Life.  Bacteria just don't behave that way. 

David
From: pierce@asc.slb.com (Edward Pierce)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Win/Win Games
Followup-To: rec.games.abstract
Date: 19 Dec 1992 03:09:24 GMT
Organization: Schlumberger
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: asc801.asc.slb.com

I'd like to gather a collection of game ideas that demonstrate
teamwork skills, cooperative risk-taking, and win-win principles.
They should have minimal rules (best if rules are self-revealing) and
be able to start up in a group in only a couple of minutes (require
very little explanation).

I'm not looking for commercial products (but I'm willing to hear
from you that have favorites; the UnGame is mine), but rather folksy
game concepts such as (these are my names):
   --- Frog-1, Frog-2:  A game where the starter does something subtle in
the
             midst of several other actions, and others in the group
attempt
             to discover the subtlty.  To "get it" a player uses the key in
             the same way as the starter so the starter can verify. 
Neither
             discloses the key by description or excessive attention.  The
             game continues until everyone discovers the key.  It has a
nice
             "end-game" since the folks catching on latest in the game have
             several folks to model the key.
   --- I Love / I Hate:  Similar to above, this is a word game where the
key
             is some feature of the words (usually repeated letters, etc.)
             that are "loved" and lacking in words that are "hated."  For
             example, "I love apples, but I hate fruit."
   --- Going on a Picnic:  Similar to above, but key is, for example, the
             first letter of the word matches the first letter of your
name.
             Example, "I'm going on a picnic, and I'm taking eggs," said
Ed,
             the starter.  Other players don't know the key, and they
attempt
             with, "I'm going on a picnic, and I'm taking cheese," says
Jill.
             "No, you can't bring cheese, Jill.  But I do want you to come
on
             my picnic.  Keep trying," says Ed.

Now, I know these are pretty weak (kindergarten) examples, and that's why
I'm
asking "rec.games" for some ideas.  They are simple, though, and that's a
plus.

If anyone has a good reference I'd like that also.  And, if you think I
should
post to some other newsgroup, please redirect me.

Thank you,
Edward
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: cs021045@cs.brown.edu (Andrew Brecher)
Subject: Re: Shortest othello complete victory
Organization: Brown Computer Science Dept.
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 18:02:12 GMT

In article <Bz20B0.MBu@SSD.intel.com>, wms@ssd.intel.com (William Shubert) writes:
|>    A while back somebody was discussing this:
|> 	What is the fewest number of moves in an Othello game that will leave
|> 	one player with mo pieces on the board?
|>    Somebody else amnwered with (as I remember) an 18 move solution.
|>    I have found a solution involving 14 moves; 7 by each player.
|> 
|>    Well, do I win?  Can anybody beat this?
|>    I expect that a computer could search all shorter combinations to see if
|> this is THE shortest.

Sorry.  Here's a nine-mover I was involved in (on the positive end,
fortunately....   |:^)

/--------\
|        |
| 9      |
|  8765  |
|   OX4  |
|   XO1  |
|     2  |
|     3  |
|        |
\--------/
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: bine@betty.gmd.de (Sabine Hubrig-Schaumburg)
Subject: Re: Sid Sackson paper-and-pencil(s) games
Organization: GMD, Sankt Augustin, Germany
Distribution: rec
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 13:10:47 GMT

nicholso@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov (Melvin H. Nicholson YBH) writes:

>Yup.  There were three books I knew of:

>	Beyond Solitaire
>	Beyond Tic-Tac-Toe
>	Beyond Words

what about
	Beyond Competition
?

that's no solitaire but for 2-4 people, but I don't think, that's a
contradiction to the subject? The games are to play "together", cooperative,
instead of "against each other", as far as I remember.

I remember I played some space-flight-game from that book where you had to
visit all planets with restricted fuel (simulated by cards or dice) very often
with my former-boyfriend-now-husband, when we were on vacation in italy (well,
what can you do there after swimming, eating pasta and doing *it* ? :-)))))
ANNA (Sa)bine
--
******   "The goal of science is to build better mousetraps.           ******
******               The goal of nature is to build better mice."      ******
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: pgh@cs.brown.edu (Paul Howard)
Subject: Re: Life
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Brown University
	<538@blue.cis.pitt.edu>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 21:00:39 GMT

In article <538@blue.cis.pitt.edu> joslin@pogo.isp.pitt.edu (David Joslin) writes:

   Conway suggested that a computer (Turing machine) could be
   constructed in the Life world, and someone (I don't remember
   who) later proved that he was right.  But the number of cells
   required could be very, very large.

   David

In Winning Ways for Your Mathematical Plays, Volume 2, Berlekamp,
Conway, and Guy, devote the last chapter to Life, and show that it can
simulate a computer.  Incidentally, that two-volume set would be of
general interest to readers of this group.

-- Paul
--
Paul G. Howard    Dept. of Comp. Sci.   Brown Univ.   Providence RI 02912-1910
email pgh@cs.brown.edu    phone 401-863-7672    FAX 401-863-7657    ham KA1YNE
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract