Re: New Game: Torus

On Feb 10, 12:38 pm, Harald Korneliussen <vinterm...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> o just saves the bridge again, and wins.
>
> > > .   .   o  .
> > >   .   o   x   .
> > > .   .   o  .
> > >   .   x   o   .
>

Ok, that's fine.  What you've demonstrated is that NS has an automatic
win when given a two point lead on a 16 point board.  Whoop-de-doo.
The same could be said for EW.

Did you happen to notice my proof?  It's been abundantly clear from
the outset that NS loops are not 90 degree rotations of EW loops.
That wouldn't even make sense.

What I demonstrated in my proof is that there are the same *number* of
winning permutations for NS as there are for EW.  If the board is
randomly filled with 8 black stones (NS) and 8 white stones (EW), both
players have exactly 50% chance of winning.

Helices aside, Black has to form an NS loop and White has to form an
EW loop.  Both players have *equal op****tunities* to achieve their
*equal goals* of forming loops around the board in their given
directions.  There's no need whatsoever for the pie rule.  I can't
imagine any game being more fair than the game of Torus.

Now you want to make a big point out of the fact that the two players'
winning paths don't look exactly alike?  I never said they did.

I think what matters here is that Torus is an extremely fair game.  If
you want to get hung up on some little baby technicality, fine.
That's your prerogative.