Interestingly, Redbridge is a perfectly valid – and I dare I say, very wise – move from Sudbury Town. I believe we can continue from there, adjusting only the move count and the token substitution.
Very neat, Bricker, but I see the trap. Sudbury Town > Redbridge means that split plays are inverted, hence I can play
Osterley
and invoke the parallel shunt rule.
Several have already congratulated Panurge on that brilliant ‘Harlesden’ move, and I’d like to add my own congratulations. It’s moments like this that really bring out the sublime beauty of the game. At first I thought it was rather a bland move, to be honest, and it looked like a fairly routine Bakerloo Shift pattern. But then I realised that, given the earlier Theydon Bois play, the skew for non-directional names was tricked one level, so flange plays crossing water would be wild if not declared. This would have led most players, myself included, to try Willesden Junction and rely on the national rail element to get me out of snit. To go one station further, realising that the three vowels were each separated by two letters, was just brilliant.
Clever clever, especially since I tossed out Osterly as an example of a quick-finish route had Tower Gateway been played. Playing it now, under parallel shunts, is going to cause problems as we close in.
But… that’s at least four or five moves hence. To answer Osterly, the textbook response is quite old, and credited to no less a player than Robert Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury, in 1885. Of course, his response was “Gower Street,” and the station thus named is now called Euston Square, but the move, and the logic behind it, remain in force to this very day, although obviously the topological complexity involved is vastly increased.
Indeed, which is why it’s known informally as the Marquis Manoevre. Remarkable to think that he worked it out all that time ago, and yet it’s still a perfectly good move, even with today’s greater complexities and so on. If you’re interested, dear old Jemima Joyce-Janner (yes, she’s still around!) wrote a charming article about the move, and its historic use in tournament play, for the recent reprint of Wesketh’s Classics of MC Tournament Play, Past & Present. Lovely little book, by the way, well worth a look.
Great move, I agree. Victorian plays always brings back a certain dignity to the game that I thought we would never see again after the tactical token plays and rock-hard south-of-river gambits of the Ilusja vs. Johnson 1967-69 series.
Euston Square is always difficult one to follow, but allow me to invoke Sanjay Rao (specifically his Carnatic Series) and open up for a bit of tongue-in-cheek post-colonial District line play with
Whitechapel
which in this context allows me to declare Purple Flags at all ends.
Sorry, Panurge, but Whitechapel is also on the H&C line. Given that you would technically be achieving alignment with a previous play (Surrey Quays), this isn’t strictly legal. I know it’s a friendly, but even so…
Allright - I conceit that this isn’t a case of Purple Flags exclusive as it might have appeared from my post. Crimson and burgundy are - of course - allowed as well since Whitechapel rightly is doubly represented. I would, however, like to point out that this play was indeed accepted as late as the British Isles GM Summit in Dover, August '89 (O’Neill vs. Smythe). I always attempt to be as ethically sound as possible in my plays, but admittedly I can seldom resist a little fun.
Nice eye, ianzin. I guess that leaves me to play Stepney Green which should let me declare purple flags instead.
East Acton, with a wink and a nod to a blind bat, eh?
Huh. I’m not up on my JLE finishes, as those endgame plays are considered unsporting under Preakness rules in social settings. (Even at Preakness, “unsporting” doesn’t matter in ranked matches – you do what you got to do to win.)
Now I see it. Austerlitz technique all over again. (Tower Gateway -> foo -> LCA is covered very well at the MC wiki, at least when the Germanic technique articles aren’t caught up in revert wars.) Da FACE! Da :smack:!
I think with Purple Flags declared and parallel shunts I can fork Leyton Midland Road and Leyton High Road and close the Central line in zones 4 and outward.
ETA: Curse you Wargamer! My fork stands but without closing the Central; I was just a minute too quick with my play, and should have previewed! All I did was force peak-hour fares.
Oh fie! If I hadn’t pre-empted Scuba_Ben I could have used a Bismarck Reversal and gone straight for MC!
Rarely seen since the Pre-Crimean War days, this play first brought the young Otto von Bismarck to the attention of King Wilhelm the First of Prussia during the mid 1850’s. Bismarck regularly confounded the Hohenzollern monarch over the nightly MC matches during shooting trips in the Harz mountains with this slick option. Fortunately, the King was quite the sport and didn’t have Bismarck assigned to mucking out stalls, as his grandson, Kaiser Wilhelm the Second did after the Kaiser fell for the Iron Chancellor’s play for the fifth time in one hunting trip.
After being embarassed by his ineptitude - especially as Wilhelm was convinced of his superior MC skills due to his relationship to Queen Victoria - Wilhelm replaced the Chancellor with the unimaginative Leo von Caprivi, who was content to allow the Kaiser to continually ride roughshod over the Imperial MC matches with an deeply flawed Elephant&Castle - Waterloo combination. After Caprivi was finally forced to resign in 1894 due to ill health, the Reichskanzler fell to Prince Chlodwig zu Hohenloe-Schillingsfurst, who slept through the Imperial matches.
This, of course, angered Wilhelm, who wanted his Chancellor to display some sign of animation as he fell to the Imperial play. So, in 1900, Wilhelm called upon the synchophantic Bernard von Bulow to take up the Chancellory and bring back life and verve to the Imperial yachting outings and shooting parties.
Bulow, as the astute reader will surely know, was the second most accomplished MC player to ever hold the Chancellorship, after only Bismarck himself. Unfortunately, this would lead to the outbreak of World War I itself.
Now, many of you will be saying, ‘But Wargamer, I thought the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand was the cause of WW I.’ And, as far as that goes, is the simple answer. But the deeper, darker truth, known only to a select few, is that Bulow was responsible for the rupture between Wilhelm II and Nicholas II which lead to Russia supporting the Serbs.
For, in 1911, at the Grand Imperial Ball hosted in Konigsberg in honor of the Silver Jubilee of the Tsar, Bulow arranged a MC game for the Emporers prior to the Grand Ball. Determined to throw the game to Wilhelm, as his continued position as Reichskanzler depended upon retention of Imperial Favor, Bulow was called upon to rule on Nicholas II’s outstanding play of Hammersmith in response to Wilhelm’s Monument off a Bank reversal. Even though clearly legal under ANY interpretation of Brathewaite&Scheely 1909 MC Internationale (The Red Edition as it was commonly called), Bulow ruled Nicholas Out Of Bounds. This decision lead to the inevitable Wilhelm win in 67 more moves. Nicholas II never forgave the German Emporer, and vowed to never cooperate with his cousin ever again, with tragic results three years later.
Anyway, I digress.
Bank
Nice analysis, Wargamer, very nice. Not for the first time in a game of MC, you live up to your name. However, you have overlooked one tiny, little, thing: Leicester Square. For those confused by this, all I can say is: Boondocks!
Oh wow, Dead Cat! That is just brilliant. How easy it is to overlook the triple vowel in ‘Leicester’!!
‘Bank’ was a strong move, and I thought Wargamer had this one pretty much locked, but now it’s wide open again. What a fascinating game this is turning out to be!
I would feel more confident in my play if I understood the problems with playing Paddington that fourth time. My grasp of the rules of this game is much like Tantalus and his food and drink. Yet, like Tantalus, I must continue to reach for that understanding. Therefore,
Finsbury Park
Robb - the Paddington x 4 problem was really a simple reductio ad absurdum.
Lynne had played 3 Paddingtons at a point in the game when, as she correctly pointed out, there had been no play of Buckhurst Hill and, for that matter, no parallel shunts featuring ‘compass’ plays with stirrups. However, my snit occurred after her third Paddington, but before Wargamer’s rather elegant Bermondsey, which is of course an odd number of stops from either Canada Water or Waterloo. Thus, applying the normal ‘water’ rule, you would conclude that Lynne could - so long as she hasn’t visited a trumped Park - play Paddington again, right? So far, so good.
However, if you check back, I had already played Hounslow East, which friend Red Skeezix had rather nimbly followed with West Ham. Note that (a) this happened between Lynne’s first and second plays of Paddington, and (b) West Ham is also a Jubilee play and © I had already invoked ‘signification of direction’. So, applying the standard ‘direction’ rule, you would conclude that unless Lynne’s next move either accepted or declined direction, it would be disallowed. Since it didn’t do either (by virtue of stasis) it was technically a foul.
So there you have it: if we had allowed the fourth Paddington, it would have been the case that the move was both legal and non-legal at the same time. This is a contradiction, ergo we can’t say it is either legal or illegal, but we can say it is disallowed and invite the player to suggest an alternative move.
We’re at Finsbury Park. Nibs, snits and tokens all assessed, none deemed.
This is a Friendly, right? So may I ask advice? The obvious call is Canary Wharf and declare 10 step triple-a. But it seems so obvious, and some of the plays here so clever, that I suspect I am being trapped and I’ll end up in an extended Delay. So may I call Canary Wharf, but if that really is a trap, ask for Friendly consideration and allow me to recall?
Canary Wharf.
The last move seems fine to me, but I’d like to see ianzin’s analysis before giving a definitive answer as to its validity. In the meantime, I will play Charing Cross (assuming Canary Wharf stands). If not, then no matter what lynne-42 chooses instead, I wish to follow up with Morden - unless she cunningly foresees this and plays Colindale, in which case my reply is Amersham. I trust that’s all clear?
Robb - A good source for the beginner is The Hoyles Guide to Mornington Crescent. At only 500 pages, it’s a pretty light read, and is considered good enough for light play.
Be warned: Many dopers are very serious players, and abide by a lot of rules not covered by Hoyles. These include:[ul]
[li]Flags, including purple, red and the most common orange.[/li][li]Rounders[/li][li]Inside stirrups[/li][li]The anti-clockwise exception.[/li][li]The Thursday morning peaktime pricing bound rule.[/ul][/li]And many, many more. Oddly enough, it does cover the Green Token exchange, which will allow me to play High Street Kensington, regardless of Dead Cat’s move above.
Canary Wharf is fine, as far as I can tell. It allows for sound strategic advancement, wards off some possible aggressive lines (such as one of Wargamer’s celebrated W&C punt reversals!) and allows Lynne to sacrifice a small amount of positional advantage for greater diversity of options in the end-game.
Shadwell would have obviously looked a stronger, more robust play, but would have confined Lynne to either a fairly standard H&C bi-lateral ending (and I think we’ve all seen plenty enough of those), or some rather ghastly Fairlop loops waiting for someone to make a mistake or place a token on a British Rail connection.
My only problem with CW is that it obviously leaves Lynne vulernable to some subtle DLR tactical plays, such as a Tamika Switchback via Heron Quays, which is exactly the sort of thing Maus could make work, or (more precariously) a straight bludgeon based on Lynne’s inability to move past Island Gardens without consecutive compass nominations declined (given her earlier triple play). Neither is a serious threat at this stage, but they are complications Lynne may have to consider half a dozen moves or so from now.
For these reasons, I might perhaps have advised Canning Town. More cautious, I grant you, but I think it lends strength to Lynne’s long-term strategic ambitions, and of course frees up Cannon Street if she fancies a trip West.
But all in all, a perfectly sound move, given the flow of the game and Lynne’s preference for broader end-game opportunities.
I hate to butt in, but you did ask for advice.
Don’t you mean 12-step double-A ?