HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: walker@elec.uq.oz.au (Steven Walker)
Subject: Othello - Windows Reversi
Organization: Prentice Centre, University of Queensland
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 01:14:20 GMT

How good is Windows Reversi ?

I've been playing this game for about a year and I can generally
beat Master Level on this game but I haven't been able to play
any humans capable of challenging me. So I have no comparison. 
Can everybody defeat this game or what ?

I have just finished an undergraduate thesis on getting a neural
net to play Othello. With no search whatsoever the neural net
can now compete evenly with Expert level on the Windows game.

Steven Walker,
Electrical Engineering Dept.
University of Queensland,
Australia.
From: torbenm@diku.dk (Torben AEgidius Mogensen)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Re: Penrose Chess
Date: 17 Nov 92 13:41:28 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, U of Copenhagen

akessler@bernard.ma.utexas.edu (Adam Kessler) writes:

>We define a non-move called Expansion: 
>Players A and B take turns laying down 64 Penrose tiles according to
>the established Penrose rules.

>White draws a random tile from a bag places it on the table. Expansion
>occurs.  Players place their chess pieces as far from each other as they
>can. They start to play chess [modified rules would need to be made.]

I think it would be difficult to modify the chess rules to a Penrose
tiling. What is a diagonal move? What is a knights move? What is a
straight line? etc.

An easier (and more interesting?) possibility would be to make Penrose
Go. It would probably be best to use the variant of Penrose tiles that
consists of two rhombic tiles. Here is a suggestion for rules:

  1) The board is laid: The players alternately draw tiles from a bag
     and place them where they touch as many of the already placed
     tiles as possible. If that leaves several possibilities, the
     player can choose freely among those. When a certain number of
     tiles (e.g. 100) are placed, the board is complete.

  2) Then the game plays just like traditional Go, but playing pieces
     on the tiles rather than the corners. The freedoms are across
     edges, so each piece has four neighbours as usual.

The reason for the requirement of maximum connectivity in rule 1, is
to make the board more regular, i.e. reducing the number of holes etc.

I think a board of the same size as normal Go (361 nodes) is too much
for Penrose Go. The size of the board alone would be a hindrance. I
think the added complexity of the geometry is sufficient to make an
interesting game with about 100 tiles. One could make a predetermined
number of each kind of tile, e.g. 34/55 or 55/89 to make it close to
the golden ratio.

	Torben Mogensen (torbenm@diku.dk)

P.S.
Note that marketing such a game could yield copyright problems, as I
believe Penrose has copyrighted the design of the tiles. It would, of
course, be possible to make your own variant of the tiles (still
having the nonperiodic tiling property). I believe many variants are
possible using the golden ratio / multiple of 36 degree angle scheme.
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: tomf@gte.com (Tom Fawcett)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Re: World Othello Championships
Date: 14 Nov 92 16:02:48 GMT
	<TOMF.92Nov12103920@ai.gte.com> <1e2rkeINNeqn@gap.caltech.edu>
Reply-To: tomf@gte.com
Organization: GTE Laboratories, Inc.
In-reply-to: keith@cco.caltech.edu's message of 14 Nov 92 12:32:14 GMT

keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider) writes:

   Speaking of checkers, I heard (recently) that quite a number of the
   positions had been solved and that someone (somewhere) was getting pretty
   close to the end.  Hmm... is checkers a finite game?  Anyone know anything
   about any of the preliminary results?  Have there been any good articles
   written on computer Othello or checkers recently?

This sounds like Jonathan Schaeffer's group at the University of Alberta.
Yes, they've got a huge endgame database for their Chinook system.  They have
a TR on "Reviving the game of checkers" from UA, plus an article in the AI
Journal (1992, v.53) on their system.  In that article they talk about
challenging the current checkers world champion; I don't know if that's
happened yet.

Finiteness of checkers: There are endgame configurations in which you can
shuffle kings back and forth cyclically, so technically it's infinite.  Most
human opponents agree on a draw when it's obvious that this is happening and
neither has an advantage.  Because this happens far into the endgame with few
pieces left, I don't think checkers programs have difficulties dealing with
it.

Computer Othello: The US Othello Association occasionally mentions Othello
programs.  The Computer Olympiad books that I've seen have sections devoted to
various games including Othello, so you can get an idea of what new techniques
are being used.  But my impression is that it's hard to find out details about
the current top Othello programs because (obviously) the programs are still in
competition and the authors don't want to give away any secrets.
From: palmerd@holst.cs.unc.edu (Daniel Palmer)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Posted Abalone Puzzle
Date: 16 Nov 92 16:58:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: borg.17574

A while ago, someone posted this Abalone puzzle:

===============================================================================
The Challenge which the newsletter printed this system for is as follows:

1) White must win within three of its own moves regardless of Black's
moves.

2) White Moves first.

            # . . # .
           # # . # # .
O         . O O . O # .         @ <- I think these are really #'s
O        . . . . O . . .        @
O       . . . O . O . . .       @
O        . . O O . . . .        @
O         . . . O . . .         @
           . . # . . .
            . # . . .

(O = white, # = black)

White move #1:                  Black move #1:
White move #2:                  Black move #2:
        White's final ejection #3:

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

I've played around with this for a while and I can find a forced win for 
white in four moves, but not in three.  Is the original puzzle correct?
If so I'm anxiously awaiting the solution.

-Dan @ UNC
From: CBURMAN@finabo.abo.fi
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Re: Mornington Crescent
Date: 17 Nov 92 00:04:41 GMT
Organization: The Clam of Reason Ltd.
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.23

In <MJD.92Nov16101510@saul.cis.upenn.edu> mjd@saul.cis.upenn.edu writes:

> In article <1e4sppINNp74@agate.berkeley.edu> goldfarb@ocf.berkeley.edu (David Goldfarb) writes:
>    Mornington Crescent is limited by the finite number
>    of stations on the London Underground.
> 
> Under American rules, you are correct, but the standard rules have no
> prohibition against naming a station that's already been named.

Don't know the American rules, but you're of course quite right about the 
SRs. However, the points are likely to be quite low - at least if you 
are playing against an accomplished gamer. (In my first game I actually 
named Embankment twice in a row - nobody knew about doubling the lower 
levels, so I got fair points on both.)

BTW, has anybody done the RCCs in .INF format? I'd love to have them 
on-line.


Chris Burman, cburman@abo.fi
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: baljeual@uther.calvin.edu (Alan Baljeu)
Subject: Re: Okay, Folks, Here is the FAQ
Organization: Calvin College
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 17:24:41 GMT

>okay, Everyone, sorry for the delAy, buT at laSt,
> Here Is hopefully The Answer to all your questioNs.

>this incluDes the faq anD purpose of thIs usErgroup.

>thiS information will be in several segments. 
>this first one is jUst to give you...an abstraCt outline
>for this usergroup. 
>KnowlEdge acquisition.  logic.  fun!  useR-input.
>next post to follow Soon! a capital idea!

Beware the subliminal message in the above post.

	Alan Baljeu
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: baljeual@uther.calvin.edu (Alan Baljeu)
Subject: Re: Ramsey Theory Games (Was: New Old Paper and Pencil Game (Sim))
Organization: Calvin College
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 14:38:07 GMT

jens@chemeng.ed.ac.uk (Jens Krabbe) writes:

>keith@majestix.cs.uoregon.edu (Keith Steiger) writes:

>>>No, let's call it misere tic-tac-toe, numbered:
>>>	1 2 3
>>>	4 5 6
>>>	7 8 9
>>>Eot cat cit.

>>No, (2 4 6) would be a losing sequence in `van', although not in `misere
>>tic-tac-toe'.  Other examples: (2 3 4) (3 4 5) (5 6 7) (6 7 8) (1 3 5) (4 6 8)
>>(5 7 9).  That may be all, but don't quote me--I don't jump to conclusions
>>without giving the matter some thought.  ;-)

>How about (1 4 7) (2 5 8) (3 6 9) (1 5 9) ?
Sorry, already included in misere.


Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: Alexx@world.std.com (Alexx S Kay)
Subject: Re: E-mail Hnefatafl
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 22:45:15 GMT

smith@pell.anu.edu.au (Michael Smith) writes:

>Two simple questions:

>(1) Is the King treated as a normal black piece from the point of view of
>capturing white pieces?  i.e. is this a legitimate capture: 
>      .....        .....  
>      K.OX.   ->   .K.X.      (X black, O white, K King)
>      .....        .....

Yes.

>(2) Can capturing against the throne occur when the King is on the throne?
>If the King is on the throne, is the following a legitimate capture?
>      .....        .....  
>      ..KX.   ->   ..K.O      (X black, O white, K King)
>      ....O        .....

Not sure on this one.

>Thanks,
>Michael.

Alexx

Alexx@world.std.com
"My *God*! He's eating that man's *head*!"
    "It's *okay*, it's *okay*! I'm a *senator*!"
		-- Our Hero, Tenzil Kem, from LSH
From: jens@chemeng.ed.ac.uk (Jens Krabbe)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Re: Ramsey Theory Games (Was: New Old Paper and Pencil Game (Sim))
Date: 17 Nov 92 12:20:02 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University Chemical Engineering Department

keith@majestix.cs.uoregon.edu (Keith Steiger) writes:

>In article <11079@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> warwick@cs.uq.oz.au writes:
>>mjd@saul.cis.upenn.edu ("[*] Fan of the Efts") writes:
>>>So when (C) two players take turns
>>>choosing the numbers 1 through 9, and no number may be chosen more than
>>>once, and the player who choses three numbers in arithmetic sequence
>>>loses, there can be no draws.
>>>This game has no name yet, so far I know,
>>>so let's call it `van'.
>>No, let's call it misere tic-tac-toe, numbered:
>>	1 2 3
>>	4 5 6
>>	7 8 9
>>Eot cat cit.

>No, (2 4 6) would be a losing sequence in `van', although not in `misere
>tic-tac-toe'.  Other examples: (2 3 4) (3 4 5) (5 6 7) (6 7 8) (1 3 5) (4 6 8)
>(5 7 9).  That may be all, but don't quote me--I don't jump to conclusions
>without giving the matter some thought.  ;-)

How about (1 4 7) (2 5 8) (3 6 9) (1 5 9) ?

Jens@chemeng.ed.ac.uk
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: veatch@cs.toronto.edu (Tim Veatch)
Subject: Re: Anonymous FTP Archive for rec.games.abstract
Organization: University of Toronto
Distribution: na
Date: 19 Nov 92 23:30:47 GMT

neilb@scs.leeds.ac.uk (Neil Bowers) writes:

>The anonymous FTP archive for rec.games.abstract is now available.  This

Whenever I read about a new game I'd like to play,
I create the game board in xfig format.

I have the following 5 boards:
   backgammon (not an `abstract' game?)
   chinese checkers
   focus (Sid Sackson's)
   19x19 grid for go, pente, etc
   peg solitaire

Do people feel that these "soft" versions of the game boards would be useful?
Should they be part of the archive?

If xfig is not an acceptable format, they can be converted to postscript.
However, they couldn't be edited (very easily).

I guess the only problem I've had with these "soft" game boards
is that they get printed out on 8.5x11" paper which is too small
for chinese checkers, go, etc.  So I take it to a photo copier
to copy it onto larger paper.  The 8.5x11 paper is fine for
backgammon and peg solitaire, tho'.
From: john@gu.uwa.edu.au (John West)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Re: Othello Puzzle for MSDOS Windows
Date: 19 Nov 1992 04:36:13 GMT
Organization: The University of Western Australia
NNTP-Posting-Host: mackerel.gu.uwa.edu.au

tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (Tim Dunn) writes:

>>Well, WINDOWS ships with an Othello called "reversi".
>>It has four levels of difficulty.
>>It is possible to win ALL 64 pieces at the first three levels.
>>What are the moves ?

>It's possible to do it on the last level as well.  As for the moves, I dunno,
>I play when I see it.

>Is it me, or is the Expert level quite a ways less competent than the Master
>level?  

I don't know if they've improved it since then, but a few years ago I
played a C64 version (can't remember what it was called) against the
Windows player. The C64 was on level 3 (out of 8). Windows was on its
highest level. Can you guess who won?
I wasn't very impressed by that Windows player.

John West
--
For the humour impaired: Insert a :-) after every third word
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: peter@techbook.com (Peter Sarrett)
Subject: Gale's Game
Organization: TECHbooks --- Public Access UNIX --- (503) 220-0636
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 08:13:50 GMT

From dxcern.cern.ch!ydavid Thu Nov 19 23:58:44 1992

The following is from Yann David, who asked me to post this on hid behalf.

			GALE'S GAME


Gale was a mathematician of the 19th century who invented
and studied a number of funny games, amongst which the one
discussed in this message, that I will refer to as "Gale's Game".

Gale's Game is a pretty simple paper and pencil game that involves
2 players and an ordinary (rectangular, m*n squares) grid.

The players play in turns; the one who plays last has lost.
Playing consists in choosing a free square and then colouring
the squares which are above and/or right of the chosen square.
The coloured squares cannot be chosen again.
Quite abviously, the last move consists in choosing the lower
leftmost square.

Here are the moves of a (rather silly) game on a 3*2 grid:

     1   2   3
     --- --- ---
 A  |           |
    
 B  |___ ___ ___|

(original state)
    

Player1 plays B2:

     1   2   3
     --- --- ---
 A  |    *** ***|
    
 B  |___ *** ***|



Player2 plays A1:

     1   2   3
     --- --- ---
 A  |*** *** ***|
    
 B  |___ *** ***|



Player1 plays B1 (and loses...):

     1   2   3
     --- --- ---
 A  |*** *** ***|
    
 B  |*** *** ***|


I have been told that Gale had published a simple general winning 
strategy for this game, but was unable myself to find neither the
publication nor the strategy. Has someone any idea about either 
one of them?


Regards.

Yann David,
Student at CERN.      ydavid@dxcern.cern.ch
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Subject: Re: Commercial Abstract Games
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, NH.
	<BxyFIv.8tE@techbook.com> <1992Nov19.195713.5242@bmerh85.bnr.ca>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 00:49:28 GMT

basestu@bmerh691.bnr.ca (Jean Giblin) writes:
>Could somebody please post the rules to Timeline?

*sigh* - people, please!  This is another copyrighted game!  We cannot
legally post the rules to it.

I'll give a brief description, though, so you can tell if it's close to
your version:

There are, I think, only four pieces per side: two rooks and two
bishops (that ought to tell you right there if yours is close or
not...).  The board has, I think, sixteen small boards on it that you
move on.  Each board is a four by four square, but they are shown as
diamonds, "in perspective" as if they were stacked above each other and
next to each other.  You can move from the upper left corner of one
board to the upper left corner of the board below or above or to the
left or to the right - if you are moving your rook, that is.  A bishop
must stay on its own color, of course - it would move one square in
from the corner as it moved to the next board.

As you move your pieces, you leave a trail of chits in every space you
pass through.  (Each side has four different colored pieces, and four
different colored chits, making eight colors in all.  You can always
tell where each piece has travelled throughout the game.)  These chits
represent the fourth dimension in the game - the timeline, if you
will.  If you land on an enemy's chit, you captured him in the past.
If he had captured one of your pieces earlier in the game, but later on
his chit trail than you just captured him (this is obvious from
intersecting chit trails), then he never really captured your other
piece, and it is returned to the board where it had been taken!  It
gets messy . . .  but is a fun game.

-- 
  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
From: keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Re: Othello Puzzle #3
Date: 18 Nov 1992 09:41:29 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: punisher.caltech.edu

desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins) writes:

>Colin Springer <cmspring@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> writes:
>> Note: it has been suggested that there be a "silent period" during
>> which solutions are not posted.  I suggest that in future I will post
>> a puzzle each weekend, and that people can begin posting their solutions
>> on the Wednesday of that week.

>I think that this is a terrible idea and will really diminish discussion
>of the problems.

>I have a not particularly novel suggestion: Don't read followups if you
>don't want to see them!!!  It's not like this is a test, and if we give
>the answers away then we will distort the scoring.  We are supposed to
>be grown-ups who can judge for ourselves what we do or don't want to
>see.

>I personally am not going to be bound by such silly restrictions.  Fair
>warning if you want to put me into your kill file.  (Your loss!)

Well, in most other groups, people are concerned about these things as
well.  The general solution is to include "*spoiler*" somewhere in the
subject, and/or to include a redraw (^L) like that somewhere before you
give anything away...

keith
From: eeb1@panix.com (Elizabeth Bartley)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Re: New Topic
Date: 15 Nov 92 20:28:00 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC

In article <1992Nov10.051058.15154@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> npalmer@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Nicholas P Palmer) writes:
>
>New Topic New Topic
>
>You know, Maybe it's about conceptual role playing games, or playing
>darts on pieces of modern art?
>
>In any case.  Have any of ya'll played
>conceptual type games of any sorts?
>(Not like Amber, no dice..)
>We're talking no paper, no dice, just a GM and some people starting
>a story and interacting and seeing what's what???

Of course. it is called make-believe. Most of us did it when we
were younger; some of us saw no reason to ever give it up. I play
a few conventional RPGs as well, but whenever a friend and I both
like the same novel or something our first instinct is "hey, let's
start up a game in that world" and we pick it up and go.
>
>Nik

	-Naomi (not Elizabeth, regardless of what it says up there.)
t
From: mjensen@cs.utexas.edu (Marc S. Jensen)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Shogi
Date: 18 Nov 1992 12:07:14 -0600
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
NNTP-Posting-Host: grit.cs.utexas.edu

Greetings...

This seems like the best newsgroup to ask this in...

Does anyone out there play Shogi (Japanese Chess)?  I have heard vague rumors
that there's a Shogi server "in someplace like Finland", but haven't been 
able to get details.  Anyone know?

If you haven't tried Shogi, and if you're the type who likes to do really 
twisted things to chess, you ought to try it.  Requires a *lot* more careful
thought than chess.  There is a SHOGI-L mailing list at LISTSER@TECHNION.BITNET
which has details like rules, board setup, etc.

Later,
		-Marc

Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: dagibbs@quantum.on.ca (David Gibbs)
Subject: Re: Think Small: Game 1 Results
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 02:59:52 GMT
Organization: Quantum Software Systems

In article <1992Nov13.203016.12189@u.washington.edu> mkkuhner@phylo.genetics.washington.edu (Mary K. Kuhner) writes:
>As I take it, the actual rules state that the lowest number with only
>one person chosing it is the winning number, so there will always be a
>winner for any finite number of players--a more reasonable, though less
>puzzling game.

Actually, this is incorrect, there is no guarantee that there will be
a winner in this game.  Try, for instance, a game of this with two
players who both submit 4.  There is in this case no winner.

-David
(dagibbs@quantum.qnx.com)

Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: acgoldis@athena.mit.edu (Andrew C Goldish)
Subject: Re: Othello - Windows Reversi
Followup-To: Neural net Othello
Keywords: Othello, genetic algorithms
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 14:35:18 GMT

  I myself am considering writing an Othello game which learns not by neural
nets but by genetic algorithms or hill climbing.  Which parameters did you train
the computer on?  Number of pieces on the board?  Number of pieces in the corners?

						-A. Goldish
						acgoldis@athena.mit.edu
From: tomf@gte.com (Tom Fawcett)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Stability in Othello
Date: 17 Nov 92 23:32:00 GMT
Reply-To: tomf@gte.com
Organization: GTE Laboratories, Inc.


Do Othello programs use features measuring general stability, ie the stability
of interior discs?  Most programs do some checking for stable configurations
of edge pieces, but I don't know of any that calculate interior stability.  
I am aware that Rosenbloom's IAGO used an interior stability feature.  It
sounds like it was pretty expensive, and he concluded that because of the
approximation involved (IAGO scanned the axes of each piece) it was only
marginally useful.  

Is anyone aware of any (good) Othello program that measures internal
stability?

-Tom
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: ninja@halcyon.com (Jonathan Roy)
Subject: Abalone server, and other things...
Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 18:06:59 GMT

The FAF will be starting up it's first site sometime early
next year. We've already decided to support Galactic
Bloodshed as much as is possible, with year-round games,
code enhancements, etc. We had condiered also running a chess/Go
server, but now we have a better idea. :) 

Once we are online, if anyone would like to code up servers for
Abalone, Checkers, Go-Muko (sp?), Twixt, etc, we'll be willing
to get them a permament home to live at. Go ahead and send
me some email if you are interested, and I'll keep your address
saved.

See ya all later. (And remember, the more abstract the game,
the better the game!)

-- 
  F F  Jonathan Roy, Vice President, Free Access Foundation.    GEnie: J.ROY18
   A   Mail faf@halcyon.com for information, or FTP to halcyon.com:  /pub/faf/
  F F  "A server is a terrible thing to waste."    Internet: ninja@halcyon.com
 "Everything that has transpired has done so according to my design." - _RotJ_
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Re: 2-d Nim (Re: anybody know this game?)
From: wft@math.canterbury.ac.nz (Bill Taylor)
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1992 03:17:17 GMT
Organization: Department of Mathematics, University of Canterbury

|>   nim-value XX...X   = n (the number of Xs)
|> 
|>   nim-value XX...X   = n
|>             X
|> 
|>   nim-value XX...X   = n - 2, when n - 2 = 2 ** k
|>              X         n,     otherwise 
 
I hope this is a typo. Shouldn't this last one just be

n-2  when  n = 2*k
 n   otherwise.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Bill Taylor              wft@math.canterbury.ac.nz
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Doctors report that they have discovered a cure for apathy.
            However nobody has shown the slightest interest in it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------