That was a bit brutal, Malacandra - in a friendly game like this, but I can’t fault your logic.
I’m dropping to Embankment - be careful now - a single wrong move could tip us straight into Grelby’s endgame.
Hasty addendum for spectators: Grelby’s endgame is a bit of a misnomer, as it involves a triple loop paradox - in which gameplay is unresolvable, yet stalemate cannot be declared. When Grelby’s occurred at the congress of Edinburgh in '67, the twelve players all starved to death.
It’s not as brutal as all that, though. The five-minute penalty is the real killer as it throws all your connections out as well. Even in friendly play you can’t be too lax - it’s like when George Gunn (Senior) was playing in a charity match and they said there was to be no lbws in the game, and he said “Right, and if middle stump gets knocked out it’s just a nusty incident, and we knock 'er in again and carry on.”
As I don’t want anyone starving to death, I’ll play Pimlico - a bit down-market, but what can you do?
I know, I know. “Wigs!”. Consider the forfeit paid. 
Counter with Liverpool Street, of course- not forgetting the Parker Grant which will award the player £200, provided he can make a complete circuit of the Circle Line without being blocked with a Wibble-On originating at either Notting Hill Gate or Cannon Street.
Of course, the last time anyone managed this Cecil Rhodes was still trying to connect Cairo and Cape Town by rail, and so a number of commentators (notably Weaving and Macquarie) are of the opinion that the Parker Grant has been effectively removed from play by the doctrine of nonusage.
Alas, it was not to be. East Ham.
Quite so, my friend, quite so. However, I think you might possibly be overlooking the fact that Tower Gateway has already been played by a player with a double vowel (Blue Mood). So the alternate/standard distinction is not quite so trivial. (If you doubt me, try something like Earl’s Court and see just how many nanoseconds it takes for someone to declare Hassocks and get to MC!!)
A couple of minor corrections for you, my friend. I suspect you were writing somewhat ‘tongue in cheek’ since you are perfectly well aware that the so-called ‘doctrine of non-usage’, although it enjoys much currency among amateurs and has had a good run for its apocryphal money, does not exist and never has. Only official rulings by the IMCC can determine whether a rule, grant, manoeuvre or anything else is, or is not, part of official Tournament Play. That having been said, the Parker Grant has been removed from official play. If you recall the unseemly row following Kryzecki’s upset win in the quarter finals of the '05 World Championship, there were three adjucations that were subsequently ratified for inclusion in the next edition of Hobson’s (whenever it sees the light of day). One of them struck out the Parker Grant and any moves that were contingent upon it. Another revoked the ‘Parallel Equivalence’ principle, and good riddance to bad rubbish in my opinion. I leave the third as a minor puzzle for my fellow enthusiasts!
I was going to say Edgware, but as a yank I have not been able to keep up with the latest rules clarificatations. Having checked the internets I think that such a move, in the past would have been considered dodgy at best, as allowing a three way reversal and allowed for calling of Left-Rights. It seems however that The test Simpson-Quail Amendment to rule 17F would make such a maneuver ill advised due to the ability of the next player to demand remuneration (figuratively, of course) and allow one to skip past the usual chips requirement and move straight to Diligence.
Since that is the case I propose Charing Cross again.
I apologize if my my American sensibilites have missed some crucial details.
Welcome to the game, Gangster Octopus. I take your point with regard to the Simpson-Quail Amendment, but may I just point out that in this particular case it’s somewhat irrelevant. Edgware would have been ill-advised anyway, since we have already had laterals declared on motion east. Hence if you had gone for Edgware, any opponent would have been entitled to declare Stubbocks and move smartly to Ealing Broadway!
Charing Cross is a very nice move. For Lynne-42 and any other newcomers playing along, note that Gangster Octopus’s move is technically considered to be a ply move, one of the class of moves generally (if not always accurately!) referred to when explaining the Latchworth’s Defence. It’s a lot cleverer even than it seems, as you’ll soon find out if you explore possible responses involving either Chalk Farm or Southfields! (Hint: refer to your rule book and have a look at ‘Contravention of End Line Reversals’).
I would also like to say that the more experienced players are taking it easy on the newcomers. I have spotted at least 3 winning moves that have not been taken. This game is primarily for the newcomers to learn the game and “dodgy” moves by beginners will be forgiven. Only the experienced players will be treated harshly (I am looking at you, Malacandra :p). So the newcomers shouldn’t feel shy about joining in.
I think we shall go Hanger Lane, let’s see if we can lose someone in the gyratory system.
I got my MA in the UK but admit to being pretty rusty. Still, I’ll contribute with
Ruislip Manor
I’m going to go out on a limb and play St. Mary’s, using Smith’s Indeterminance Rule.
I believe playing this station after Ruislip Manor means I have unvoided diagonals, but of that I am not sure.
I realize that I am the newcomer here, ianzin, and you the senior veteran of the MC circuits, however, did you really say “declare Stubbocks” !?!?!?! :eek: I mean for Christ’s sweet sake. “Stubbocks” to my understanding is what we allow kindergarteners to use so they can stay in the game against experienced adults. When Morton Billingselly suggested that BG (Ret) Herman Atous declare Stubbocks in the Zaire semi-qualification of 1984, a duel was fought. A duel! Are you meaning to be inflammatory, are you trying to imply that those of us on the SDMB need the protections afforded children, or do you think we are that dumb? Dammit, now I have gone and burned up my initial rant without the proper introduction. I understand I will be penalized for this, but since we have been playing hot and fast with the rules, I should hope the penalty would be suspended until the next edition of Thomas Cook Overseas Timetable is published.
On with the game, however, and in response to rayh’s passive move, I will take the act of pushing ahead with…
Tywyn
Sgt Schwartz
Sgt. Schwarz, I think you are right that playing Edgware would have caused a ruckus, but it would not have been ianzin’s fault. And anyway it was not played.
As for Tywyn, I think you have boxed me in a bit here, being new to this round of the game, I haven’t yet played an Oliver Twist and I don’t think I have to explain how badly that handicaps me after Tywyn. Hopefully someone else can come take a turn that will remove me from the restrictions your move has put upon me (damn it all, you never play Charing Cross if you haven’t created an Oliver Twist on your behalf. Amatuer mistake!).
I see Sgt fell into my trap and got lost in the gyratory system, while two other people made their moves. I believe this means Sgt is in knidd for his next move.
Ickenham.
Acton Town.
I have spent the last several minutes perusing my options, rayh. I am attempting the Callahan gambit. I understand that Hobson-Forbe’s would advise against doing anything rash at this point, but I must remember to be aggressive when given the opportunity. I also must remove myself from knidd. IIRC from previous plays (afraid I may not have time to look it up before someone else makes a play) former colonies are fair game for play when using the Bohnam option. If that is the case I will play Tazara as my station of convenience. If not then I must push.
Sgt Schwartz
ETA: **Matt_McL ** beat me as I figured someone would. Officially, then my turn is to push and await another opportunity.
But, Sgt. Schwartz, some of us are kindergartners! I hesitate to make this move, but if my reading of the Ianzin/Dumbledore maneuver is correct, it will allow me to declare MC in three moves! That is, if no one sees fit to declare all stations with working lifts void until the first player has a glass of wine. Given the time, I think I am safe, however.
Pontoon Dock!
Indeed, but that ruleset can’t be played through to absolute completion due to planned maintenence work on the Bakerloo line on Sunday 24 June - services are suspended between Queens Park and Harrow & Wealdstone due to planned engineering works, which means Hassocks on Earls Court would lay the game wide open to inversions and cyclic slides. There might be other exceptions, however, so what say we split the difference?
I do not understood the moves involving St. Mary’s, Tywyn, Tazara or Pontoon Dock. None of these stations exist, so none are legal moves.