Further thoughts on Peltier-Purvis

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Josh Purinton

unread,
Dec 16, 2008, 5:39:42 AM12/16/08
to sprouts...@googlegroups.com
Inspired by Roman's note, Aunt Beast finds a mistake on move 38 of this game of the 2007-2008 WGOSA tournament:
 
21- (Purvis*-Peltier+SmallBeast) 1(22)2 1(23)1[2,3] 4(24)23 7(25)7[5,6,24] 7(26)25[8-13] 4(27)24 2(28)22 8(29)26 8(30)8[9-13] 9(31)9[10-13] 9(32@30)31 30(33)32 10(34)10[11] 14(35)14[15-17] 14(36)35[15] 16(37)36 12(38)13 16(39)16 II
 
Apparently 10(38)34[12] would have won, yielding *2 + *2 + 4 + 2L0, which is a misere P-position.
 
 

danny purvis

unread,
Dec 16, 2008, 8:26:31 AM12/16/08
to sprouts...@googlegroups.com
Thanks very much! I will look forward to playing through this, and I will publish it if you don't object.


From: Josh Purinton <josh.p...@gmail.com>
To: sprouts...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 5:39:42 AM
Subject: Further thoughts on Peltier-Purvis

Jeff Peltier

unread,
Dec 16, 2008, 9:39:54 AM12/16/08
to sprouts...@googlegroups.com
Yes this is true and really amazing as 4spots has genus 1°²·· and 0L2 has 2¹4.., how is that sum of the two has genus 3°²°·· ?
I don' remember if I was aware when I played move 37. Can you pursue the analysis one move earlier?

--
Jeff
--
--
Jean-François

Dan Hoey

unread,
Dec 16, 2008, 10:16:54 AM12/16/08
to sprouts...@googlegroups.com
Jeff Peltier wrote:
> Yes this is true and really amazing as 4spots has genus 1°²·· and 0L2 has
> 2¹4.., how is that sum of the two has genus 3°²°·· ?

2^14 is not tame. You can't tell the genus of the sum from the genus of
the addends unless all are tame.

Dan

Josh Purinton

unread,
Dec 16, 2008, 12:01:07 PM12/16/08
to sprouts...@googlegroups.com
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Jeff Peltier <jfpe...@gmail.com> wrote:
I don' remember if I was aware when I played move 37. Can you pursue the analysis one move earlier?
 
Great idea! As it happens, move 37 was also a mistake.
 
27(37)4[5] would have won, yielding *3 + 4 + 1P2 + 2L1.
 
I asked Aunt Beast to look at move 26, but steam began coming out of her ears, and I could tell it was going to take too long, so I told her not to bother.

Josh Purinton

unread,
Dec 16, 2008, 12:25:19 PM12/16/08
to sprouts...@googlegroups.com
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Josh Purinton <josh.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
I asked Aunt Beast to look at at move 26
 
I mean move 36, not 26. Yes, her powers of analysis are that limited. Shhhhh, don't tell her I said that!
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages