.net
All site revenue goes to charity

Subject: BRAGGING ! ! !


Date: Thu Jun 29 23:07:29 2017
User: CubicSprock
Message:
based on free@last's unwon count there are ~2500 more 6x4-5 games that are winnable. found 2 in a row! Game: 6x4 13998-5 Plays: 48 Wins: 1 Percentage: 2.08

Date: Thu Jun 29 23:57:11 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:
1. Great job(!), and you posted these on the correct and deserving thread. 2. Pardon us if some might still consider those two games more in their previous 'category'. 3. I sorta think you win ix's new "less than 50" thread, too.

Date: Fri Jun 30 00:37:39 2017
User: ix
Message:
i think he sort of crushes the whole "less than 50 percent" thing, i have a hard time wrapping my head around the 2 middle games he just played and won. a game that had never been won in 38 plays he gets in 2:48 and a game that had never been won in 47 plays he gets first time in 3:23. this would be hard to top and i can only imagine the person to do it would be him. .bow CS 6/29 10:58 pm 6x4 18630-5 (29/18/62.07) Streak 3:10 Won 6/29 10:53 pm 6x4 13998-5 (48/1/2.08) Streak 3:23 Won 6/29 10:33 pm 6x4 13295-5 (39/1/2.56) Streak 2:48 Won 6/29 10:23 pm 6x4 30754-5 (52/22/42.31) Streak 1:33 Won

Date: Fri Jun 30 19:08:55 2017
User: ix
Message:
if there were a contest where the game time in seconds is multiplied by the win percent, we'd have: 203 * .0208 = 4.2224 168 * .0256 = 4.3008 i bet just beating 5 in such a contest is about impossible. to do it twice in a row i know is impossible. for mortals that is.

Date: Sat Jul 1 20:59:02 2017
User: Kaos
Message:
Where is ix's unwon count (or list) of 6x4's? Going back half a decade or so, I tried to find all of the unwon winnables in the first 1,000 6x4-5 games and managed to knock off 60 or 70 getting the total of won games in the first 1,000 up to 860-ish. I'd like to know how many I left on the table.

Date: Sun Jul 2 01:01:19 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:
Is it possible that was at the hotel? I don't really know, but since I'm pretty good at 'finding things' on this site, I didn't want to go looking if'n it's not here.

Date: Sun Jul 2 13:32:09 2017
User: CubicSprock
Message:
ix, That is my kind of statistic...works well with my set of skills. :-) Kaos, Here is the unwon count, doesn't really help with specific subsets for a variants. 6x4-5 as a whole has 3506 unwon, which averages 108 per 1000...not that averages help too much for a specific 1000. So far there are 135 unwon in the first 1000.

Link: Unwon Count

Date: Sun Jul 2 14:03:10 2017
User: Kaos
Message:
So, there are currently 6035 games in 6x4-5 that have not be won so that's where the 2,500 to go that can be won comes from. And, statistically speaking, sounds like I left 20-some on the table in that first set of 1,000. Humbling but not surprising as some games fit my eye and some don't. I tired the two you won in a row and: 6/29 10:33 pm 6x4 13295-5 (39/1/2.56) Streak 2:48 Won looks impossible to me. But 6/29 10:53 pm 6x4 13998-5 (48/1/2.08) Streak 3:23 Won wasn't to bad.

Date: Sat Aug 12 13:09:19 2017
User: TitanicTony
Message:
This week I reached level 10 in all 10 winnable variants! I'm pretty sure that wasjun must have done it ahead of me, before he crashed his w6x5 streak! The only other player who might have done it is Goosey_Goosey_Gander, and his all-time best w6x5 streak is 'only' 44, so no, he never quite made it. Anybody else want to try?? I'm pretty sure that CS could do it, but currently, his best w4x10 is 'only' 26.

Date: Thu Nov 2 10:53:14 2017
User: TitanicTony
Message:
Back in: Thu Dec 4 17:39:34 2008, I wrote: "My best 8x4 streak is 218, which doesn't even get me on the top 1000 list!!! ... ... ... ... Next year I plan to try to get my 8x4 streak into the top 1000." Well, yesterday (nearly 9 years later), I FINALLY made it (lol)! I got to 293 (often using cards, of course), which is 8x tied for 988! I wonder how long it will be before I lose? I don't think any of the 8x4 games are too difficult for a player using cards, but, even with cards, it is possible (inevitable?) eventually to make a silly/stupid mistake!!! Also, it is *very* time consuming (average about 30 minutes per game for 8x4)! So, in another 350 hours (playing time), maybe I will make it to 1000???

Date: Thu Nov 2 11:01:58 2017
User: hotnurse
Message:
Good job, Tony! Personally, I don't use cards because it takes too much time and I am not a streaker...but...whether a person uses win-aides or not they are keeping their brains sharp by challenging themselves to solve a puzzle. As we get older, and we all do, it's important to do *something* everyday to make your brain work. This site is a great place to do just that. So, to each their own in how they work their neurons. At least you admit it, Tony.

Date: Thu Nov 2 11:32:41 2017
User: TitanicTony
Message:
Btw, on Mon Aug 2 18:13:09 2010, above, Gulbis wrote: "One of my current best streaks is in 9x3 - I want to see how far I can get without losing a single game (I'm currently at 396). " I'm pleased to report that she is still going strong (and still at 100%): Rank ... Name ... Current ... Best ... Today ... Played ....... Won ....... Avg. .... Idle 1. .......... fnord ..... 2041 ....... 2041 ....... 0 .......... 2168 ...... 99.95% ... 4:20 ... 2727d 2. .......... bwi .............. 92 ....... 1556 ....... 0 .......... 1649 ...... 99.94% ... 5:56 ... 1798d 3. .......... ValpoJim ...... 0 ....... 1004 ....... 0 ....... 19586 ...... 99.10% ... 2:27 ... 12:04 4. .......... BWI .............. 56 ......... 968 ....... 0 .......... 1025 ...... 99.90% ... 5:26 ... 1714d 5. .......... Gulbis ....... 797 ......... 797 ....... 0 ............. 797 ... 100.00% ... 3:08 ... 32d

Date: Thu Nov 2 11:36:06 2017
User: TitanicTony
Message:
Thanks *very* much Kathy!! I completely agree!

Date: Thu Nov 2 17:11:45 2017
User: Goosey_Goosey_Gander
Message:
You are right TT, my best winnables were all over 50 except 6x5, which is a variable that I have, let's just say, not found an enjoyable way to play. I say were, because that was when I used cards regularly. Now, I admit, I use cards but very very rarely, when I think I have the solution but I'm thinking more moves ahead than I can reasonably expect to be without a mistake, just to check out what I want to do and not blow a big streak. Maybe once a week. Only three of my current winnable streaks are above 50 now. On another subject I'm surprised you don't have a better streak in 8x4. I hit 483 once and 8th place. I might have used cards once in a while for that, but I recently got to 409 without cards. I really don't see a need for cards with 8x4, they are mostly easily winnable if you don't make a stupid mistake, and my average time is under 4 minutes. Unfortunately I did make a stupid mistake a couple of days ago and I am back to 62. I like to look at the layout and say "where are the aces, which columns are non critical, are there critical buried cards etc, and if all looks good, just bash ahead, but if it looks like a hard game, stop and think before making any decisive moves. I have fun guessing the win percentage after I finish a game and I'm usually in the ballpark.

Date: Thu Nov 2 17:33:15 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:
Interesting comments, G_G_G. I'm particularly interested in how using cards occasionally makes you feel. I was under the impression you "had left that life behind". Since it's my personal opinion that there are two apparently completely (or very, very nearly so) different populations of players on this site, you are one who has been on "both sides of the fence". Which side do you feel more comfortable on? What, in particular, drives you to make the decision to go to external aids? Like when you think you have the solution, but "want to make sure"; do you feel some guilt afterwards? I'm not trying to be judgmental here, as you've been honest about it; I really want to know your feelings about this. Thanks. And like you, I like guessing the winning percentage of a game and am very often very close - with a few that are way off.

Date: Fri Nov 3 06:22:49 2017
User: Goosey_Goosey_Gander
Message:
I am torn TN. On the one hand I feel good that I don't say, hah, this is a tough one, pull out the cards. I do think through as far as my feeble mind can manage, but after using cards, which I will say again is very rare, I do feel guilty. On the other hand I say to myself "how can I compete against those players who obviously use external aids, whether they admit it or not?" You've made me conflicted again, but there's no simple answer to this is there? To prove my usual honesty I looked at my approximate numbers (I keep track). In October I played 874 games, winning 835 and losing 29 winnable games and 10 games that I assume were unwinnable because no-one had won them, costing total streaks of 1,862. I actually went backwards in total streaks by a net 115 games, (I lost a streak of 434 in 8x4). (Many of the 1,862 were in the same variant). I now have streaks totaling 2,969 in the 33 variants I play. When I was using cards quite regularly I got my total streaks up to close to 4,500. Darn, counting those numbers makes me realize I spend way too much time playing. It works out to about 2 hours a day.

Date: Fri Nov 3 11:26:14 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:
Thank you very much for your response, G_G_G. For *me*, there IS a "simple answer", but obviously that's not a uniform viewpoint. When you say "how can I compete....." I get that; but to me, I just say "well, obviously I *can't* compete with the top players, so why pretend I can?" (And I'm not extrapolating that onto you, to be clear.) As I used in sports analogies in the past......what accommodations do the various regulatory authorities make so that I can play major league baseball, or basketball, etc.? I gave up my dream to play baseball at that highest level in young adulthood, when I realized it just wasn't gonna happen. Would God tweak the laws of the universe just a tad so that I could understand them on the level of Einstein or Hawking? (And again, I'm just imagining what I would say to myself; I'm not projecting.) Thank you again, G_G_G. I truly appreciate the response.

Date: Fri Nov 3 20:42:57 2017
User: hotnurse
Message:
I'm sure that for those who streak, using aides is sorta like cheating; or to those streakers who are competitive and never use aides it is for sure cheating. It would be like using a solver program during a tournament (which isn't that easy because we are timed per tournament) I would call out cheaters in a heart-beat because I am an avid tournament player and I like to win but on my own merits. I guess it's beating a dead horse, here, about using cards on the table to solve a game before solving on site. I, like TN, like to hear other's opinions, but I won't judge anyone either way. And I don't really think that TN is doing that either. Just adamant about not using cards/aides.

Date: Sat Nov 4 00:14:54 2017
User: jamesblackburn-lynch
Message:
Which players "obviously use external aids" that don't admit it? How is it obvious? By average game time? James

Date: Sat Nov 4 06:09:30 2017
User: Goosey_Goosey_Gander
Message:
I don't know how to be certain, but if a player frequently shows big gaps in time between wins, but normal average game time, it might be because they are leaving a game in progress and pulling out cards. Some players have what seems like an impossibly short average game time but no time gaps. I don't know how they do it. They are way way better than me. I don't know what "solver" programs are. It isn't possible to link some solver program to Freecell and have it play for you is it? If so, I will give up.

Date: Sat Nov 4 09:29:16 2017
User: FlyingApple
Message:
I see a huge difference in using cards and not using them. If you lose a game here, your streak reverts to zero. If you use cards, you might lose the same game 3, 4, 5, or 20 times in a row but are not penalized. Your streak of consecutive wins does not end even though it's very possible one has lost numerous times during the current streak. It would be the same if this site allowed you to keep a streak going as long as you continue playing the same game over and over until you finally win it.

Date: Sat Nov 4 11:44:45 2017
User: hotnurse
Message:
Goosey, I assume that "solver programs" are played on a separate computer and monitor. I remember conversations here about such programs existing...not here but on the net. I can't imagine one who plays tournaments would benefit in using a solver. You would have to have set the cards up to mimic the ones dealt here then watch as the solver made each move and use those moves to solve the game here. Too much trouble, imo, for either tournaments or even streaking. But, whatever...

Date: Sat Nov 4 12:21:11 2017
User: TitanicTony
Message:
Kathy, 1) I think free@last used a solver to determine which games would be excluded from the 10 "winnable variants". And, 2) I think that solvers work by trial-&-error, not logic. So, you sit there and wait for it to find and display the solution, which won't necessarily be the solution with the fewest moves. I don't know (never done it), but I expect that with today's fast computers, most solutions would be found in less than a minute. Maybe way less? Imo, free@last would know.

Date: Sat Nov 4 13:32:05 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:
hotnurse........while I *do* like to hear others' opinions, I have very strong ones on this subject, and have expressed them over and over again on this site. I wasn't wanting to go down "that road" again here. But G-G_G has a (possibly rare??) insight into this as having lived life both ways. I'm sure there may have been others, too, but he's been the most open about it. That's why I particularly wanted his feedback. But to be blunt....I *have* judged (obviously just for myself, although most other serious players seemed to have agreed - as well as Denny) the practice WHEN one is doing it to make oneself appear better in competitions. And the reason is that it "hurts" others - both in a comparative way, AND, very importantly, because it destroys the validity of the historical database. These aspects have been debated over and over again. It's not *just* someone helping themselves out because their eyes are weak, or they're getting feeble-minded or whatever. While those may be true...........the fact is, IT AFFECTS OTHERS' ENJOYMENT OF THE GAME. It's not someone acting in isolation. As I wrote back on March 18, 2016: "That's why the anonymous option is there - if you're only interested in the challenge *in itself*. When one enters the competitive aspect of this site by using a handle, then one is implicitly, if not fairly explicitly, comparing oneself to other players. And yes, I know even that's not universally true, because many are here just to enjoy playing games, and maybe use a handle to enter discussions. Nothing wrong with that, of course. But if you're going to be in these competitions, and striving to be at or near the top of either streak lists, WWC, SSC, "winnable challenge", or whatever, there's just a purity of competition that is lost with steroid use. Babe Ruth's HR record was legit. Hank Aaron's HR record was legit. Barry Bonds? I feel like I've likely wasted hundreds, or more likely thousands, of hours striving to get somewhere, only to realize that others had an extra edge, or that the "records" were in fact illusory. And yes, one can make the argument that that was my choice, which is accurate, but not knowing that the records as recorded on this site may well be illusory is a hard pill to swallow." FlyingApple sees it correctly. Using cards or other external aids is simply using unlimited undos, or re-dos. @jamesblackburn-lynch..........in the ""Winnable Challenge" thread revived?" thread, along with Tony's outrageous numbers, are wasjun's. To my knowledge or memory, he/she has never posted on this board, or certainly never "come clean" about tactics, but his/her numbers appear to simply not be likely believable prima facie. Admittedly, I do not KNOW this, only an extremely strong suspicion. That's why no other players, other than Tony and wasjun, have kept playing in the "winnable challenge" - it quickly became tainted and thus pointless. Or as dcn21 posted recently (Sept. 17, 2017) "It's too bad there's no list for those of us who don't need a huge asterisk after our scores." Tony's reply was "My goal is to "beat the dealer", not you!" ........which of course completely ignores the fact that records are kept (in fact.....HE KEEPS THEM!). That fact ipso facto shows that he does it (at least partially) for 'competitive' reasons. Several, or a few, others have admitted along the way to using cards, or whiteboards, or whatever. I'm tempted to go back and bring those up again. Anyone who has been here more than a few months is very aware of this issue, and at least some of those who have chosen to accept the dark arts.

Date: Sat Nov 4 14:18:14 2017
User: Goosey_Goosey_Gander
Message:
hotnurse: manually entering a deal into a separate computer and using a solver would not create the incredibly short game times I referred to because the actual clock time (time of day) shows no interval to allow time to enter the deal into a separate computer. They result either from a brain vastly better than mine or a computer program that actually links with Freecell and takes over. Does that exist? I hope not. TN: I am competing in the winnables streak, and in the sum 11's and sum 12's, but now without cards. OK I have given in to temptation once in awhile recently. Bad on me. I hereby recommit to using no external aids. That's the way it should be TT. I challenge myself to get back to the streaks I had using cards. I was once in first place in 22 variants at the same time and have led in 28 of the 30 variants I like to play at one time or another. I now lead in a paltry 5. I only play those three groups of variants plus 6x8, 6x7,5x10,9,and 8 and 4x10. I can't be bothered playing mindless games and don't like variants with a win percentage less than 70%. I only reluctantly play 4x8,5x6 and 4x7 for the competitions.

Date: Sat Nov 4 15:22:54 2017
User: FlyingApple
Message:
Darn. I should have bought a deck of cards

Date: Sat Nov 4 15:38:57 2017
User: TitanicTonys_deckofcards
Message:
I would offer you my services, but I'm frankly worn out, dog-eared, wearing terribly thin, and just would like to stay retired. Have you tried Wally World?

Date: Sat Nov 4 15:39:35 2017
User: TitanicTony
Message:
"To my knowledge or memory, he/she has never posted on this board,..." TN, you know VERY well that wasjun has posted on this board!!!! Date: Sun May 28 16:43:44 2017 User: Punster Message: Hey TN, wasjun did say this early in this discussion => Date: Mon May 22 02:59:07 2017 User: wasjun Message: Thanks to Titanic Tony. I just wanted to know if the game is solvable. The solution I do not need. And I do not use any programs to win. Everything comes out of the head I think you're reading too much into this....imo. :-) Imo, wasjun doesn't use cards, ever! If he did, he would have won that w6x5 game in WAY less than the 2 weeks he spent thinking about it, before finally giving up!!!

Date: Sat Nov 4 15:56:33 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:
No, Tony, I didn't remember. That's why I was particular to state "...to my knowledge or memory....". I do remember now that you bring that back up. BUT.....note that he says "I do not use any programs to win." It's *possible* he's parsing his words very carefully, and uses cards, or paper, or something else as an aid. Even tho he also says "everything comes out of the head", one *could* argue that using cards or notes "comes out of the head". I'm NOT saying that, however. Thank you for reminding me of this. Apologies to wasjun if, in fact, his numbers are totally 'honest'. Back to jamesblackburn-lynch..........there are other examples of extremely doubtful scores, some of which have been previously discussed. That was just the first one that occurred to me.

Date: Sat Nov 4 16:32:38 2017
User: TitanicTony
Message:
One of the most doubtful scores, imo, is PudongPete in 8x4 (by far the site's most popular game), and I'm pretty sure that he has admitted to using cards (I suppose I should try to find his "admission", but not now): 1. ... PudongPete ... 20000 ... 20000 ... 0 ... 20000 ... 100.00% ... 9:29 ... 1417d I admire him enormously!! I am much more interested in what has been achieved, rather than how it was achieved! Mostly I play for fun (brain exercise), and to see what I can accomplish. Occasionally I join in a competition just to increase the number of participants by 1. That is why I'm playing in the 12-sum competition. But I won't play 4x8, and I probably won't play in the 11-sum competition (not fun)! That is why I played in the SSC, which I *really* didn't like -- silly me, I sure did spoil a lot of my Saturday's, and I'm very glad that it is finished. If it ever comes back, I will remember not to join in! [And, yes, I do remember that I was the SSC score keeper for awhile.]

Date: Sat Nov 4 16:54:11 2017
User: TitanicTony
Message:
Ahhh, I found it (paras 8 & 9 below), and, as far as I am concerned, he is *not* guilty: Date: Mon May 24 15:56:23 2010 User: PudongPete Message: Hey James, You are correct. I am for real. aka QingpuKid, RollingThunder. I solve every game myself. It's part of the challenge. Can't let a 4 x 8 ; 10 beat me. Second challenge is to keep the streak alive. This is one of the reasons the avg time is so high. I can play reasonably fast -- lots of games under 90 sec -- just a few under 60 sec. Not tournament wining or Mickey fast but reasonably fast. The problem is that to build a really long streak you need to be SURE not FAST. I know you know this because you have been there. The really difficult games take me sometimes 15 - 30 mins of UNINTERUPTED concentration. So you see I'm not rgk good. I confess I have used a deck of cards a few times in complicated games to make the initial moves and then analyse. Is this cheating??? If it is I'm guilty. The second time problem is that I use Mozilla Firefox. (I don't want to totally capitulate to Bill Gates.) In Freecell Firefox times out much more slowly than Explorer at 15 mins. When I play I get frequent interruptions and I don't bother to sign out. So for instance a game that would take me 2 mins without interruption may finish at 17 mins if interrupted once or even 32 mins if interrupted twice. Many difficult games I don't get the 20 mins uninterrupted concentration I need and end up with as much as 2 hours to solve -- mostly consisting of short periods of concentration and then an interruption and then starting the thought process over when I restart. The longer the streak the more pressure to keep it alive. I don't concern my self too much with time. I could lower my time by starting the game then immediately quitting but leaving the screen up to analyze and then to sign in once I've cracked the game in my head. I can't be bothered. I was saddened to see RGK just lost his streak. I think I was kind of subconsciously dropping my games per day to let him catch up even though I know once he overtook me he probably would drop me. cheers, PP

Date: Sat Nov 4 17:05:45 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:
"I confess I have used a deck of cards a few times in complicated games to make the initial moves and then analyse. Is this cheating??? If it is I'm guilty." He himself says he's guilty. And of course he is. I'm befuddled as to how one could think he's not. The only reason one could claim he's not is if they've rationalized such behavior to themselves. Or so it seemeth to this observer.

Date: Sat Nov 4 18:26:42 2017
User: TitanicTony
Message:
I guess the Q is "guilty of what"? Using cards, certainly. "cheating", certainly not (for me)!! First he asks, "Is this cheating???" And then he says, "If it is I'm guilty." But since it isn't, then he's not guilty, qed! And, btw, it is not "majority rules" here -- each player gets to decide for him/her self!!! And, certainly you don't get to decide for anybody but yourself! Of course, you are completely free to argue/persuade all you want! You seem to have swayed G_G_G, but, quite possibly, he is the only one!??

Date: Sat Nov 4 19:37:35 2017
User: FlyingApple
Message:
TNmountainman's baseball steroid reference is spot on. I don't look at the numbers that Bonds, or McGuire, or Sosa, or Rodriguez, or many others put up as legitimate. Neither do the hall of fame voters.

Date: Sat Nov 4 19:52:13 2017
User: TitanicTony
Message:
There is a *big* difference between using steroids, and having the patience to use cards, imo. I do use caffein (coffee) daily, and sometimes aspirin.

Date: Sat Nov 4 20:38:18 2017
User: FlyingApple
Message:
One more question for you TT. Would it be ok to use a solver program? I believe the solver would go through sequences of moves until it hits a winning combination, same as someone using cards. It can also be argued that the player has the most important part since if they enter the game incorrectly, it would change the outcome and the streak would likely end due to player error. Same as if a sequence discovered using cards is written incorrectly. Not arguing here. Just genuinely curious. FlyingApple tosses TT a couple more aspirin.

Date: Sat Nov 4 21:16:11 2017
User: FlyingApple
Message:
What about an extra set of eyes? Or two? There us nothing written in the rules to forbid either this or a solver.

Date: Sat Nov 4 23:03:25 2017
User: free@last
Message:
The linked video shows it was (is) possible to have an autoplay bot using a solver, although it is not simple.

Link: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ux49f255Rns

Date: Sat Nov 4 23:46:40 2017
User: jamesblackburn-lynch
Message:
I remember that conversation with PudongPete (note he was speaking to me) which is funny because in an earlier incarnation of this discussion (with many of the same participants) I didn't remember that Pete had outed himself. I only remember it now because last time TN showed it to me. I still think Pete's streak is remarkable although I do have to put an asterisk by it because I feel like he has admitted to a method that most agree (myself included) is cheating. More recently CocoLoco (née Michaelangelo) suspected something funny (though he could never say what it was) because of the winning percentages of Ki's games (who turned out to be Pete again). So we've been down this road many times. TT doesn't think it's cheating but seems to be nearly on his own in that opinion. I am just curious about how GGG or TN or anyone can tell someone is using cards. I just don't buy the "average game time is too long" argument. People play at all different speeds. There are lots of folks whose best streak is unnotable with long average times. I claim they don't use cards or solvers. They just either 1) take their time or 2) walk away from a game with it still going regularly and come back to it later. But I'm not certain there aren't tell tale signs that indicate someone is using cards. I just haven't thought of them yet. I do think wasjun's comments above make it clear he/she is claiming to not use cards. Lying seems much more likely than some crazy legalese there. I guess my final point is this. CocoLoco and rgk, at least, are in the clear. They play too fast to use cards. So, it can be done. That is people can win that much and not cheat. If people play more slowly then them and win all the time that doesn't mean they are cheating either. Honestly, it's just not that hard a game. If you spend ridiculous numbers of hours on it and really don't like to lose. James

Date: Sun Nov 5 04:00:53 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:
Tony, your assertion that PudongPete's cheating wasn't exactly that ("But since it isn't.") - *even after* he long ago self-admitted that it was, is laughable. And no, it's not "majority rules", and thus you've had license to run roughshod over everyone else who chose to play honestly. Even when Denny said that it was "against the spirit of the game". BUT............it *should* matter that such cheating offends virtually all the rest of us, AND greatly detracts from our enjoyment of the site. That's what gets me about your attitude. I'm sure you're a fine fellow in person, but this apparent lack of caring how it affects others is, well..........you know what I think it is. free@last - I watched the video. It is a "replay" of a previously played game. Meaning that the game # and difficulty are known (and then entered into the solver). What I've never understood (and I probably don't want to know) is how a solver solves a game without knowing what game it is? Does one hand-enter each card into some sort of matrix or array? And really, I'm just asking rhetorically, as I don't want people to be tempted to explore this tactic (as if.......). jamesblackburn-lynch - since I don't remember you playing in the WWC (Wednesday Winnable Contest), you may not have noticed the game behavior during those days. It was very frequently easy to observe certain players taking very long times to play games, but then the elapsed game time would be 'normal' - like only a few minutes. This happened over and over. Certainly, there are explanations for some of that, and we all know what those are. But when you observed it repeatedly, and with certain players, it just was extremely suspicious, to put it mildly. As I've theorized before, since winnables are by definition known to be "winnable", it tends to attract, in a greatly disproportionate manner, those who would employ the dark arts - as they know before beginning a game that with enough patience, persistence, and whatever external aids they choose, they CAN solve that game. I think wasjun is an excellent player, but I really don't know *how* great. Is it any accident, that, for example the top 3 streaks in W4x10 are wasjun, Tony, and G_G_G - and that then there's a big gap before 4th? And that wasjun has won over 99% of those games - more than 3% ahead of #2 (Punster), and more than 5.5% ahead of CubicSprock, who was playing fewer climate 5 games? Further, Tony and wasjun hold the #1 and #2 spots in W5x8 streak length, with wasjun again besting #2 Punster in winning percentage, with again an over 99% winning percentage. wasjun also holds the streak record in W6x5, as well as winning percentage (using Denny's formula). I could go on, but you get the idea. And yet NOTHING therein is necessarily indicative of cheating. It just makes one wonder. I *really* didn't want to get into all this again, but it just seems to be the topic that can't die - and that's good because I consider it integral to the integrity of the site. I'll close with the words of joeygray: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon Aug 31 17:20:20 2015 User: joeygray Message: What a Streak Win Is: "A streak counts the number of consecutive times, presented with a freecell deal, you solved that deal on your first try. It is obvious to me, and even stronger I assert it should be obvious to anybody, that dealing out the hand with cards and playing and replaying to any depth searching for a solution, after which reeling off the solution in the 'official' play, is not solving the game on the first try and such a win should not count as a win in a streak. What a Streak Win is Not: Anything that convinces Denny's record-keeping apparatus that you did solve the game on the first try when you did not. I am convinced that any external apparatus, from using a solver through using systematic white board notes all the way to scribbling things on a scrap of paper, is equivalent to dealing and replaying for the solution. Denny's system allows you to replay a game as many times as you want, easily. It just doesn't credit you with a streak win for these retries. So all these apparatuses are doing is fooling the system. You TELL everybody you won it on the first try. Maybe you even tell yourself."

Date: Sun Nov 5 04:18:36 2017
User: TitanicTony
Message:
James, I think your long note above deserves some sort of response: "TT doesn't think it's cheating but seems to be nearly on his own in that opinion." Apparently, I'm not "nearly on my own". Others either 1) don't think it's "cheating", or 2) think of themselves as "cheaters"!?? Option 1) seems more likely to me. But, most will probably never comment on this db. Imo, it's only "cheating" if it is "against the (written) rules". And, even then, it has to be a "good" rule. Apparently adultery (bad rule?) is rampant in our world, and "gay relationships" were illegal in lots of places -- maybe they still are? I think that "speeding" is also rampant, but that (most) posted speed limits are reasonable. Taxes?? I will *never* lose any sleep over using cards to play freecell -- it is what I enjoy!! Also, I believe that using cards causes *far* fewer headaches than staring at my laptop screen, and causes *far* less (nearly zero) eyesight deterioration! Imo, cards are healthier.

Date: Sun Nov 5 04:37:24 2017
User: TitanicTony
Message:
And to TN: all (?) thinking players use "re-plays", but for a lot of players (probably most), it is purely mental. Since I am not nearly as smart as many of the players on this site, I "level the playing field" by using cards. BUT, that is *not* why I do it. I do it because it is what I enjoy, and also it is healthier! If it upsets some players, as you assert, then that is their problem. The "competitive" types can always play the tournaments -- probably no cards in use there.

Date: Sun Nov 5 04:42:41 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:
So *you* get to decide what rules are bad vs. good? Oh my. Imagine if we all thought like that. No accounting for how our actions may affect others. Libertarianism run amok.

Date: Sun Nov 5 04:49:44 2017
User: TNmountainman
Message:
No, Tony, you *don't* level the playing field by using cards. You do exactly the opposite. To the detriment of all others. You "non-competitive" types (LOL) can play anonymously, as has been pointed out several times. Should be just as enjoyable. Why not do it that way?

Date: Sun Nov 5 06:15:11 2017
User: TitanicTony
Message:
Clearly (lol) we see things differently. At least nobody is dying, like when people drive too fast. Speed kills.

Date: Sun Nov 5 07:27:35 2017
User: free@last
Message:
TN, the video was a demo but in many tournaments you do know the game number. The alt I used as a proof-of-concept Dr.SethBrundle won a small tourny. But there is no need to have the have number. Anyone can just type in the cards. The solver software is now online and has been for a while. Anyone with some reasonable programming skills could build browser plug-in that could extract the dealt cards, feed that to the online solver and display it or even play the solution.

Date: Sun Nov 5 08:35:27 2017
User: TitanicTony
Message:
Thanks, free, but I don't think I (we?) wanted to know that! Fortunately, probably *very few* of us have "reasonable programming skills", so I guess that it is not a big threat. I have occasionally wished that I had a solver -- not to find a solution, but just to know if a game was winnable, before I spent an hour trying to solve it. These days I rarely play variants that have un-winnable games, just some of the 12-sum variants (but not 4x8), and for all of the 12-sum games, except 8x4, I don't much care if I win or lose. Needless to say, I like the winnable variants (except for w4x10, and w6x5)! Thank you very much!!!

Date: Sun Nov 5 10:01:21 2017
User: FlyingApple
Message:
Who is the super competitive type. One who you feel should go to tournaments, or one who must win a deal at any cost?

Date: Sun Nov 5 10:39:53 2017
User: TitanicTonys_deckofcards
Message:
"I have occasionally wished that I had a solver...." What about me?!??!!? Duh! Some thanks I get!

Date: Sun Nov 5 12:04:08 2017
User: Blythe_Yet_Lusty
Message:
Remember when this was a thread about accomplishments? arrrggghhhhh


Post follow-up
Username: New user? Create a free account here
Password: Note: username and password are case-sensitive
Message:
Editor by summernote.org
Email notification:

All content copyright ©2024 Freecell.net
By using our games you consent to our minimal use of cookies to maintain basic state.
Maintained by Dennis Cronin