It really is just a game (WAY too long)

[OrangeKing]

[ QUOTE ]
One of my favourite posts Owen... very nice!

Where do you (and everyone else) but go/bridge/backgammon in this continuum?

[/ QUOTE ]

All three of these games are around chess, as a less-skilled player has a very low chance of winning against a much more skilled player.

If I had to rank them, I would do it in the following tiers, from biggest edge to smallest:

1(t) Chess/Go: Both games without a random element, and both very taxing in their own ways to the human brain. Arguments would be made for either: in both games, a very strong player can beat even a skilled amateur time and time again without any difficulty.

2) Backgammon/Bridge: Both with random elements, but where it's still nearly impossible to beat a much stronger player over any meaningful time frame (admittedly, I know a lot less about these two games than the first two).

[27offsooot]

Stratego is the [censored]. You are greatly underestimating the skill involved.

What a way to make my 1000th post.

Edit - Crap, Bobbyi already said the same thing.

[JoshuaD]

[ QUOTE ]
2) Backgammon/Bridge: Both with random elements, but where it's still nearly impossible to beat a much stronger player over any meaningful time frame (admittedly, I know a lot less about these two games than the first two).

[/ QUOTE ]

I think with backgammon part of the luck is not getting into situations that are very difficult. A decent player can appear to be a top pro for a couple of games, IIRC.

edit: Hey sup 27, this is my 2000th.

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One of my favourite posts Owen... very nice!

Where do you (and everyone else) but go/bridge/backgammon in this continuum?

[/ QUOTE ]

All three of these games are around chess, as a less-skilled player has a very low chance of winning against a much more skilled player.

If I had to rank them, I would do it in the following tiers, from biggest edge to smallest:

1(t) Chess/Go: Both games without a random element, and both very taxing in their own ways to the human brain. Arguments would be made for either: in both games, a very strong player can beat even a skilled amateur time and time again without any difficulty.

2) Backgammon/Bridge: Both with random elements, but where it's still nearly impossible to beat a much stronger player over any meaningful time frame (admittedly, I know a lot less about these two games than the first two).

[/ QUOTE ]

In terms of how much I know, I would rank them: Chess, bridge, backgammon, go. (I know like nothing about the last two, and not that much about bridge).

But... I pretty much agree with your thoughts.

Though, I would say duplicate bridge is probably a lot closer to chess/go than backgammon.


I bet there would be a way to set up a duplicate poker tournament [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]. That sounds fun in theory.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you sure about those oranges beating my beloved greens? [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] Don't have board in front of me, but I would think the greens would be likely to getting landed on given your in the orange zone - i.e. 13-15 spaces away = 2*(most likely dice rolls). Plus, you're getting paid off more obviously.

[/ QUOTE ]

Greens are one of the worst properties in Monopoly. The return on investment is poor since they're so expensive to build up and don't get landed on frequently. The Go to Jail space right before it has something to do with it.

Oranges are the best, then Boardwalk/Parkplace, then the Reds.

[JoshuaD]

[ QUOTE ]
Greens are one of the worst properties in Monopoly. The return on investment is poor since they're so expensive to build up and don't get landed on frequently. The Go to Jail space right before it has something to do with it.

Oranges are the best, then Boardwalk/Parkplace, then the Reds.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've always liked the light blues. They're not very good late-game, but if you can nail them early, they really give you a nice lead. In a big multi-way game I'd often make uneven trades to someone who can't afford to build, and get hotels on the blues, see if I can't rent them out for some new property.

[pokerstudAA]

Good post. Looks lie the chapter of a book.

I have played in an annual monopoly charity tournament for the past two years. They have about 150 people show up and it is win your table and move up. Usually 3-4 rounds. Good prizes - airplane tickets, tv's, cool stuff.


Oh, yeah Pente is a good game also.

[rmarotti]

I think dup. bridge approaches the complete information games of chess and go as far as skill goes. My bridge teacher could usually read off everyones holdings to them after about 4 tricks. I'm an atrocious backgammon player, but it seems that luck is more involved in that game than in either chess, bridge, or go. Awesome post, Q!

[private joker]

Don't forget about Connect 4. Like Chess and Pente, it is 100% skill. There isn't a single factor in the game that relies on luck -- no cards, dice, wheels, whatever. If you lose, it's your fault.

Connect 4 rules.

[rmarotti]

Pente is teh sh[/i]it. I havent played in years, now I have to go buy a board.