Posts:
1,091
Registered:
Mar 7, 2006
From:
Philadelphia, PA
Age:
38
Re: Copying p2 openings in high profile tourney
Posted:
Oct 22, 2026, 12:21 AM
I think we can all agree on one sufficient (but not necessary) criterion: if p1's 1st and 3rd move (edit: meant to say 2nd and 3rd move) are 7 intersections apart (6 vertically and 1 horizontally), it's an ugly opening.
But ugly doesn't necessarily mean bad--I just take it to mean that you have violated some opening principle. Sometimes this may be necessary. And if you can win with it, you have at least proven it has value, even if it's not optimal. And you win some respect in the process.
It's no use going back to yesterday, because I was a different person then.
Posts:
2,384
Registered:
Mar 4, 2007
From:
San Francisco
Age:
45 Home page
Re: Copying p2 openings in high profile tourney
Posted:
Oct 22, 2026, 7:54 AM
Thank you karl. Perfectly said. What i meant, but articulated way better. Hopefully that satisfies as clarity to Owen. Knowing Owen probably not. But one can dream.
Scire hostis animum - Intelligere ludum - Nosce te ipsum - Prima moventur conciliat - Nolite errare
Re: Copying p2 openings in high profile tourney
Posted:
Oct 23, 2026, 3:54 AM
> if p1's 1st and 3rd move are 7 intersections apart (6 vertically and 1 horizontally), it's an ugly opening.
Probably you meant "any of 1st, 2nd, 3rd are ..." because the distance from 1st to 3rd is 3. Don't get the idea why you use Manhattan metric instead of Chebyshev on the square board where diagonals work in the same way as rows and columns but OK.
Any more criteria? Distance between 1st and 2nd - is 5 already ugly? Or maybe 6? Max distance within 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th?
Posts:
2,384
Registered:
Mar 4, 2007
From:
San Francisco
Age:
45 Home page
Re: Copying p2 openings in high profile tourney
Posted:
Oct 23, 2026, 7:59 AM
Yeah Karl, kind of shocking you used the Manhattan system over the Chevrolet one. Duhhh Owen what, did you pump our posts into chat gpt and ask it how to make a smart sounding argumentative reply? Sorry for being ad hominem here but, You must be fun at parties. But ok. Let's try that, here's what chat gpt thinks of your post:
Owen, I think you're trying to turn a subjective aesthetic observation into a mathematical formula that nobody was proposing in the first place.
The point was never that an opening becomes ugly at some precise number of intersections, or that we need to establish an official metric for ugliness.
It's about the visual and strategic relationship between the stones. An opening can appear disconnected, awkward, and lacking obvious coordination, yet through skillful play develop into something cohesive and beautiful.
That's what I was complimenting. The player's ability to transform a seemingly unpromising position into something impressive.
Not every observation about Pente requires a formal definition, a distance metric, and a list of numerical thresholds to be meaningful.
But since you've introduced the subject, let's humor the mathematical approach for a moment.
You're correct that Chebyshev distance has a certain geometric relevance on a square grid where horizontal, vertical, and diagonal movement are all possible. Manhattan distance, by contrast, measures the sum of horizontal and vertical displacement. So yes, if we're discussing the minimum number of king-like moves required to travel between two intersections, Chebyshev is the more appropriate metric.
But here's where your reasoning becomes less persuasive.
Pente isn't a game of moving pieces between intersections. It's a game of forming and disrupting linear relationships between stationary stones. Two stones can have the same Chebyshev distance while possessing dramatically different strategic relationships.
For example, consider two stones separated by six columns and six rows versus two stones separated by six columns and one row. Both have a Chebyshev distance of six. Yet the first pair lies on a perfect diagonal, while the second pair shares no horizontal, vertical, or diagonal line.
That distinction matters enormously in Pente. A distance metric that treats those configurations identically cannot, by itself, describe their potential structural relationship.
And Manhattan distance isn't a complete solution either. Neither metric captures alignment, intervening stones, tactical threats, capture vulnerabilities, or the ability to develop multiple lines of attack.
So while your mathematical observation has merit, it doesn't establish that Chebyshev distance is inherently the correct way to evaluate the aesthetics or strategic cohesion of a Pente opening.
As for your request for additional criteria and exact numerical thresholds: why should there be any?
Aesthetic judgment doesn't suddenly become invalid because it cannot be reduced to an equation. We can recognize an awkward arrangement of stones without first calculating the maximum permissible separation between every pair.
And that's precisely what made the original game interesting. The opening looked structurally unpromising, yet the player managed to create something impressive from it.
In other words, you seem determined to measure the distance between the trees while missing the beauty of the forest.
Scire hostis animum - Intelligere ludum - Nosce te ipsum - Prima moventur conciliat - Nolite errare
Posts:
2,384
Registered:
Mar 4, 2007
From:
San Francisco
Age:
45 Home page
Re: Copying p2 openings in high profile tourney
Posted:
Oct 23, 2026, 8:26 AM
I will ad, the opening is every stone placed before the first forcing move is played. Which next you will say, define forcing move. Which would be the most trolling question. Let's just say a threat that if unanswered wins by force in 2 to 3 moves, depending if a open 3 of some sort or a fukumi. And yes it is possible to have 6 white stones that are also ugly.
Can i ask tho. Aside from arguing to argue. What is the purpose of your question? What is your goal here and why. To remove my ability to award Noah a point? To use my logic to demand points for your self in openings you have done? Because it irks you that i complimented another player rather than focusing all the accolades on you? Im just trying to understand what is going on here. To prove that im a unfair and biased point awarding tyrant? Thanks.
Scire hostis animum - Intelligere ludum - Nosce te ipsum - Prima moventur conciliat - Nolite errare
Posts:
1,091
Registered:
Mar 7, 2006
From:
Philadelphia, PA
Age:
38
Re: Copying p2 openings in high profile tourney
Posted:
Oct 23, 2026, 10:40 AM
Chat gpt showing a surprising depth of knowledge about pente. I love it.
As for Manhattan vs. Chebyshev metric, I think Zoey summed it up well. Whether we call it a Manhattan distance of 7 or a Chebyshev distance of 6 couldn't be less relevant to my argument.
We see yet more evidence that your motivation is less about discussing pente than it is about demonstrating your intellectual superiority.
(This post was 100% human-generated)
It's no use going back to yesterday, because I was a different person then.
