Black Hole Variant

Rather than have the previous thread Hijacked I thought I would start a new thread for black hole LOA discussion.

The rules of black hole are not listed here AFAIK.

Apparently from what Carroll has told me the only effect of the black hole is that it is a dead square.

Correct. The line, row, colum or diagonal where the black hole is treated like a common line (all stones in the line count for the available moves of the stones in that line).

A stone can jump over the black hole.

A stone can also jump into the black hole - and the stone disappears (as in EinStein black hole variant.

So, the only difference from normal rules (besides the 9x9 size) is that when a stone lands exactly on the black hole, it disappears.

Thanks for the clarification

what if my last stone goes down the drain? Won or lost?

ok, that was stupid :-( - I'd have won the move before already

golf, anyone?

Should we have a LOA black hole championship?

Should we have a LOA black hole championship?

BlackHole variant in championship instead of standard 8x8 ??

As well as 8x8, but if we can only have one I'd choose black hole sadly for obvious reasons.

Yes I agree!

I agree too.

The blackhole variant in LoA is not very different in startegy from normal LoA but if it prevents some cheaters, then yes, absolutely!

What ypercube said.

The Same rationale would go for monthly cups as well.

Post by in "there is no delicate way to word this" thread.

Richard wrote:

> Therefore I create Black Hole variant on 9x9, where

> central field is Black Hole field.

I just saw it - and replayed a few games from a

user tournament. My impression: on 9x9 LOA is a bit

like a race of slow caterpillars.

So, what about 7x7 with a black hole in the center?

Ingo.

My longest game in that tournament was only forty ply that is shorter than the opening often is in a game of chess and the auctions for GWG, not to mention Go and breakthrough who also longer on average.

If it is like a race of slow caterpillar I don't see the problem it doesn't take too many moves, it might actually be faster than the normal variant.

Thx, KingoftheBesl,

for shifting my posting to this thread.

Richard M. wrote:

> Therefore I create Black Hole variant on 9x9, where

> central field is Black Hole field.

Ingo wrote:

> I just saw it - and replayed a few games from a

> user tournament. My impression: on 9x9 LOA is a bit

> like a race of slow caterpillars.

>

> So, what about 7x7 with a black hole in the center?

KingoftheBesl wrote:

> My longest game in that tournament was only forty ply

> that is shorter than the opening often is in a game of ...

Agreed. Perhaps my impressions were sort of unbalanced,

because the players had such different strengths (KotB

is classes stronger than all other players in that

user tournament ut.loa.154.1.1 )

> chess

In my eyes chess is boring. (I had a different opinion

when I was young.)

> ... not to mention Go and

> breakthrough who also longer on average.

For Breakthrough I also think that board size 8x8

is too large for fun play.

> If it is like a race of slow caterpillar I don't see

> the problem it doesn't take too many moves, it might

> actually be faster than the normal variant.

Maybe, or maybe the style of the players in the games

which I replayed made it looking like caterpillars.

By the way: What are in your (KotB) eyes the most

amazing games of LOA and LOA with Black Hole which

you played on LG?

Would do you think on LOA on 7x7 (with or without Black

Hole)?

Ingo.

Amazing can mean a dominant crushing game (this might be a fairly long game but there is no danger because the position is so dominant), a fast miniature or high level strategic battle where both player are very close to victory at the end.

http://www.littlegolem.net/jsp/game/game.jsp?gid=1164716 that was pretty spectacularly quick.

http://www.littlegolem.net/jsp/game/game.jsp?gid=1183977 This game at the end depends on me being able to use the black hole to dispose of my last unconnected piece.

This game was against Carroll who is the best player who I have had to face here.

7x7 LOA has been solved, even if the solution isn't published, I can foresee black once enough games have been played produced a fairly devastating strategy. This variant could even be slower if both players are able to blockade well.

7x7 black hole I would have to play, but I think the larger board size allows for a more varied gameplay!

If the game is too small then someone will kill the game by working out how to win from the start and then everyone will copy that strategy!!

> http://www.littlegolem.net/jsp/game/game.jsp?gid=1164716 that was

> pretty spectacularly quick.

>

> http://www.littlegolem.net/jsp/game/game.jsp?gid=1183977 This game at

> the end depends on me being able to use the black hole to dispose of my

> last unconnected piece. This game was against Carroll who is the best

> player who I have had to face here.

Thx for the interesting examples!

> 7x7 LOA has been solved, even if the solution isn't published

Can you tell how much computing resources it took to solve 7x7?

Has 6x6 been solved, and with how many resources?

Is LOA 8x8 in danger of being solved earlier or later?

> If the game is too small then someone will kill the game by

> working out how to win from the start ...

Indeed. By the way, this kind of thinking was my original reason

to make "EinStein wurfelt nicht" on 5x5 and not on 5x4.

Cheers, Ingo.

I was not involved in solving LOA 7x7 I just remembered reading that it had been claimed as solved by the maker of the strongest program.

3x3,4x4,5x5,6x6,7x7 were all claimed solved by a moderately powerful computer.

8x8 is could be solved fairly soon, if someone with the skill desired.

The fact that the superstrong computer makes mistake albeit subtle mistakes show the game is difficult enough to be play over the board whatever happens. Draughts/checkers is solved but is still playable by humans.

Computers are a double edged sword since they can ruin a game with cheating, but they can also help players learn the game.

Correction 6x6 is solved Not 7x7.