Subject: I lost a 10x0 game with 3 open columns
Date: Mon Oct 24 16:50:27 2011
User: TNmountainman
Message:A rather unfortunate "stacking" of the cards. Someone has beaten it, though, as it's 1/10. Probably in retrospect, I could have avoided this, had I known it was a possibility.
I'm sure this is not a unique situation, but one I've never encountered.
Link: lost 10x0 game with 3 open columns
Date: Mon Oct 24 16:52:33 2011
User: TNmountainman
Message:Oh, btw, it's game #18408-5.
Date: Mon Oct 24 18:41:07 2011
User: CubicSprock
Message:TN, the game is solvable from that situation. You can clear column 9 next, the only thing i had to do was switch the 4,3,2 in columns 6 & 9 so your stack on the empty column is 5c 4h 3c 2h (so you can send them all home once you free the ace of hearts)
Date: Mon Oct 24 18:47:16 2011
User: firenzes_mother
Message:Mr. CubicSprock, has anyone ever told you that you are so sexy when you get all so freecell technical.
Date: Mon Oct 24 20:23:28 2011
User: TNmountainman
Message:Interesting that you say that, CS, because I sort of suspected that if I played with it enough I could get there. However, I simply could not clear column 9. Perhaps this was a case of losing a game because of restrictive supermove factors? One can only clear three cards from column 9 in the first supermove, then two more, leaving the 7C to be moved to the final free column, with the AH still uncovered. I know sometimes (virtually always) one can wiggle around supermove restrictions, but I couldn't find a way to do it during this game at all. Which is not to say it couldn't be done, but using Denny's programming, it didn't seem to work out that way this time. Maybe you can be more specific in how you cleared column 9 to free the ace?
Nonetheless, I must add to firenzes_mother's comments that you are worth every cent Denny pays you - maybe more.
Date: Mon Oct 24 21:43:55 2011
User: CubicSprock
Message:Once the 4,3,2's are switched.
1. Move 4,3,2 to an open column
2. Move the 3,2 to an open column
3. Move 5 to an open column
4. Move 4 onto 5.
5. Move 3,2 onto 4.
Date: Mon Oct 24 21:47:22 2011
User: CubicSprock
Message:and to firenze's mother, yes that would be a first. I'd say geeky and dorky are the more common words I hear when I talk/type technical (even if it isn't about freecell).
Date: Fri Jun 5 03:00:50 2020
User: Oded789
Message:Not to clutter the previous unwon winnables thread with a game that has been won long ago,
CS explanation what to do from the pictured position is crystal clear.
Ran in quickly in my head and I see nothing in the supermove restrictions that would prevent that from working.
Date: Fri Jun 5 03:21:16 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:I see what he, and you mean. But.........I'm not sure one can switch the 4/3/2 sequences. If one tries to move the 4/3/2 off column 9, might not more than those three cards be moved (automatically by the supermove)? But also, if that were the case, then it seems as though the remaining cards in column 9 could then be cleared to the ace. So maybe CS's method works. I sure wish I could go back in time (see the "millions dollars and a time machine" thread) and see why and how I decided it was a losing position. I'm just not sure at this point in time. *Surely* I would have weighed that sequence, as it's almost obvious? I absolutely did not give this one up easily.
From this point in time's perspective, it seems doable - but I think it's unlikely I didn't fully explore that pathway. And yet...........from this point in time's perspective, those two quantum states appear to be mutually exclusive. I can't explain it.
Date: Fri Jun 5 03:32:20 2020
User: Oded789
Message:No problem with the switch (and the following moves as far as I can see), because 3 columns are open, so exactly 3 cards will go to an open one.
Even if, hypothetically, one has too many open columns (so that too many cards go off), he can always fill one of them with some unharmful move.
Date: Fri Jun 5 04:36:12 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:I'm pretty sure, that with 3 open columns, 4 cards will move. But that's just a 'feeling'. We should know that, but we've done this enough to know we don't normally need to count them, except when doing narrows. But anyway, I do think 4 cards would move, and if that's the case, then the next two cards should be able to be moved to another empty column, only leaving the Q of hearts covering the ace, which of course could move to the last remaining open column. But for some reason not obvious just be looking at it, that didn't work. Again, I can't explain it - and I know you think that what I'm saying can't be. I understand that and don't blame you. Right now, looking at it, I'm having a hard time understanding why I couldn't/didn't win it; and yet I'm normally very thorough in such situations.
Date: Fri Jun 5 04:54:04 2020
User: Oded789
Message:Nope. With 1 open column (and no freecells), two cards move to an occupied column, but only one to an open one.
Hence with 3 open columns, it's 4 and 3 cards respectively.
But 3 to an open column are enough for the favorable 5-4-3-2 setup as described above.
Date: Fri Jun 5 08:30:09 2020
User: outskirts
Message:I can tell it's winnable with one quick glance.
Date: Fri Jun 5 10:55:51 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:Oded, do this thought experiment. With that situation, IF supermoves could be overridden..........One could move 1 card (2 of diamonds) to an empty column, then another card (3 of spades) to another empty column, right? THEN..........one could move one of those cards onto the other (the 2 onto the 3). You would now have (in this situation) in one previously-empty column, the 2 of diamonds on top of the 3 of spades, right? With again two completely open columns, into which the 5 of clubs and 4 of diamonds could be moved (in either one move, or a two-card supermove). Then you'd have still an open column, so the 2/3 could be moved onto the 4/5, leaving two open columns. What's wrong with that?
Date: Fri Jun 5 12:22:24 2020
User: cellmate
Message:CS nailed it. It works!
The main problem with supermove is that you can't tell it what card in the column you want to start the move from.
Disabling it means moving 1 card at a time which is tedious and can be error prone, but at least you can do what you want it to do
Date: Fri Jun 5 12:31:45 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:I'm not doubting you; it certainly looks like it *should* work. But how did you 'prove' it?
Date: Fri Jun 5 12:55:14 2020
User: cellmate
Message:I played it in Anonymous. Nice to have the undo. (and maybe a little trickery to setup the scenario)
Date: Fri Jun 5 13:08:02 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:Hmm.....good idea. I'll try that when I have a block of time. Thanks. Tho not sure about "the trickery".
Date: Fri Jun 5 13:12:47 2020
User: cellmate
Message:Its not easy to play it to the scenario. Easier to stack the deck
Link: lost 10x0
Date: Sun Jun 21 23:23:22 2020
User: Oded789
Message:Missed that last cellmate's pic at the time.
Even *that one* doesn't seem lost to me.
After clearing column 2, you set up the 6-5-4-3 in one of the opens ones as CS explained above.
Then K-Q from column 10 to another open one, 8-7 on 9H, 9S to the last open column, Jacks on queens, 10-9 on JC.
Now you have two opens ones again, so the 6-5-4-3 will go to column 10 and free up a 3rd.
Now again 5-4-3-2 buildup on an open column, 7-6 to a second one, QH to the third, Ace goes home, 8H on 9S and soon enough you clear three columns again.
Winnable from there.
Date: Mon Jun 22 02:57:26 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:I keep thinking about this game from time-to-time.
free@last........when you put the cards in that situation, were you under the constraint of being required to used Denny's supermoves (from that point on)?
Date: Mon Jun 22 08:00:06 2020
User: free@last
Message:Yes, of course!
Date: Mon Jun 22 13:16:23 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:Ok, thanks. It's just so hard to reconcile what appears to be nearly obvious with what was impossible 8.5 years ago. But apparently that's the case.
Date: Thu Dec 3 04:12:20 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:Ok, I may have just encountered an analogous situation to the above-described. Not sure. I know from the above discussion it's pretty clear that one was winnable, but at the time, I couldn't make the supermoves behave.
But consider this a separate case. Unfortunately, I didn't take the screen shot until one move too late. I almost did (take the screen shot when I should have), but hoped I could make it work. So.......see the linked pic. Then, go back in time (using the undo feature in your brainbones that God gave you). Put the 9H/8S/7D stack that's in column 3, and move it back over onto the QS in column 7. That gives both free cells open and one column.
So this is what I tried to make happen:
I wanted to move *only* the 8S/7D into the open column 3, but knew I couldn't do it directly. So I tried to move each up into a free cell independently. Moving the 7 was fine, but then when I moved the 8 into the other free cell, both it and the 9H appeared in that space (column 3) - and I believe that the 7 jumped down, too. It's apparently an unwinnable position as is. BUT..........if I could have 'reserved' the 9H in the free cell, then I could have moved QS into the other open free cell, then the 4D onto the 5C; then the 9H back onto the 10S, followed by the 8S/7D pair, to open the two free cells back up, and maintain an open column.
To be clear............I hadn't yet thought out every following move (but I know column 2 could have then been cleared), so I'm not certain I could have pulled it off anyway, but clearly the supermove worsened my position, and make it unwinnable (if indeed it was winnable without the supermove).
So cellmate, if you and free@last want to set it up like I described, see what would happen. And I would suspect this would happen with any similar situation: 2 free cells, one open column, and you only want to move two of them. I thought that one could move them one at a time, but that didn't work.
Link: loss caused by supermove?
Date: Thu Dec 3 10:12:33 2020
User: cellmate
Message:
7x2 23629-5
'Anonymous'ly, i loaded your position with 9H/8S/7D put back under QS.
Your planned moves worked as you expected (except leaves only one free cell. QS is still there).
i suspect this explains it...
i tried a 'misclick' on intended 8S to freecell. Clicked col 7 (for 8S), but then col 3 by mistake. This resulted in the unintended supermove
Date: Thu Dec 3 11:47:17 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:Ok, so to be clear...............you were able to separately move the 7 and 8 to the free cells, leaving column 3 blank? Then move them down onto column 3? Then the next step was to move the 9H and QS up to the two free cells, then the rest as described above.....
Do you beyond a doubt that 'your' supermove works *exactly* like Denny's?
Date: Thu Dec 3 13:50:18 2020
User: free@last
Message:TN. without doubt, you can make the move you want manually. 7 to FC, 8 to FC, 8 to col 3, 7 to col 3.
The question is, if instead of 2 FC you had 2 more empty columns, what would happen. Well, you'd be stuck with the super move 9/8/7 to empty column. But then you can move 8/7 to another empty, Q to last empty, 4 to col 2. then the 9 to col 7 and so forth.
Date: Thu Dec 3 14:11:30 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:Thanks for your all's efforts. I may try to re-start the game and try to remember how I got to that point. Maybe later on..........
If what you aver is correct, then the only explanation, it seems, is that I somehow mis-clicked with the 8 - as cellmate theorized. Altho I'm not normally bad at that, anything can happen, of course.
Date: Thu Dec 3 15:16:10 2020
User: free@last
Message:If you clicked col 7 then col 3, it'll supermove all three cards. The supermove can be avoided (as described) but only if you realize ahead that you'll have a problem with the supermove. There was much discussion in another thread about whether the supermove can ever prevent you from winning and nobody could come up with even a contrived scenario where that was the case. (And I spent WAY too much time thinking about it. :D )
Date: Thu Dec 3 18:58:14 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:Yes, I knew I couldn't move all 3 via the supermove without getting into a losing state. Which is why I was moving them one at a time. And yes, I remember the earlier discussion(s) - one of which was of course earlier in this thread.
And I'm not claiming *this* supermove caused a loss, but it clearly resulted in a less favorable, apparently losing position - even as I was attempting to *avoid* said supermove. If one of you all can show the game was winnable before that move, then it will indeed be a case of a supermove causing a loss.
Date: Thu Dec 3 19:11:12 2020
User: Kaos
Message:What game # is this?
Date: Thu Dec 3 19:21:21 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:See cellmate's note above. Since I've still got the game frozen, I can't independently verify that. (And I've not yet completed the outcome; not due to trying to somehow salvage the game - but just for discussion purposes here.)
Date: Thu Dec 3 19:57:35 2020
User: WRAC
Message:I agree with free's assessment.
Also, playing anonymously, I tried to win the game from the pre-supermove position, but was unable to do so. I'm not saying that definitively though.
Date: Thu Dec 3 22:44:09 2020
User: cellmate
Message:
i ran it thru the solver
winnable from pre-supermove position
it couldn't solve it after the supermove
Date: Thu Dec 3 22:51:41 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:Aha. So........thanks.....
Date: Fri Dec 4 04:30:14 2020
User: Oded789
Message:For a non zero-fc deal, I don't see what's the revelation here.
Of course clogging up an open column, whether it's by moving 1 card, 2 or 3 over there, can lead to a lost position.
Date: Fri Dec 4 06:33:12 2020
User: cellmate
Message:
TN, i neglected to do one important test
winnable from pre-supermove position
it couldn't solve it after the supermove
it couldn't solve it after the intended moves
from the pre-supermove it moves 6 cards from col 6 to col 1, then 5 cards from col 5 to col 7, then a bunch more moves
Date: Fri Dec 4 15:58:18 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:Actually............looking back at it now from my still-frozen game state..........moving those six cards from col 6 to col 1 was what I was going to do *after* I dealt with col 7 as described above - which would have still left me with both free cells open and one column open. So I'm surprised to learn it's not winnable from that state - but yet IS winnable from the pre-move state. And so something isn't jibing here.
I really hope I can find my way back to that pre-move state when I get around to trying it again. Maybe I'll try it as anonymous to be able to so things better.
Date: Fri Dec 4 16:37:41 2020
User: cellmate
Message:
what about the QS ?
Date: Fri Dec 4 17:20:48 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:Just killed it, and as cellmate noted, it's 23629-5. Now 0/20. I can also confirm what he theorized about it possibly being a mis-click, because I *can* do what I was trying to do - one card at a time. So, it looks like I was already in a losing position.
Date: Fri Dec 4 17:31:49 2020
User: TNmountainman
Message:I'm not sure what you mean. Are you trying to give a hint or something? If I correctly move that stack (including the QS) in col. 7, freeing the ace, but that still doesn't get it under the J and 10 in col. 7.
Date: Fri Dec 4 18:33:42 2020
User: cellmate
Message:
from your original msg your intended moves would " open the two free cells back up, and maintain an open column."
but i still see the QS in a freecell
Post follow-up