If geeks love it, we’re on it

One more thing ruined by computers…

One more thing ruined by computers…

Checkers players worldwide will mourn the end of their beloved game. A team of Computer Scientists at the University of Alberta instructed one of their computers to start playing checkers 18 years ago, and finally it has finished, having played every possible game of checkers.

The decisive outcome:

The computer program, called Chinook, has determine that if both players in a game of checkers, also called ‘draughts’, play a perfect game, it will end in a draw (as opposed to some other games which result in a win for the player who played first).

What this means is that every game of checkers you play for the rest of your life you will know has already been played by that computer, rendering the actual strategies as practices of the game spiritually depressing and mentally futile. Never again can a person play a game of checkers and think to themselves that something they did in the game was new, or revolutionary. Playing the game in this strange new world would be the strategic and entertainment equivalent of running over a coffee stir with your car.

Likely, no one will ever play the game again… Good thing I’ve always hated Checkers.

Reuters

Comments

  1. shwaip
    shwaip
    CB Droege wrote:
    (as opposed to some other games, like Tic-Tac-Toe, which result in a win for the player who played first).


    wait, what? Good thing that WOPR didn't play your version of tic-tac-toe...
  2. CB
    CB Indeed, just one more flaw in a string of inaccuracies in a movie that is very good despite being very wrong.
  3. shwaip
    shwaip I guess my question is, how do you always win at tic-tac-toe? I was under the impression that regardless of who goes first, if both people play perfectly, it's always a tie (which is the same as checkers, apparently).
  4. CB
    CB Nope. It's possible to always win tic-tac-toe when going first, no matter how well the other player plays. I could digram it for you if you like, but basically the way it works:

    There is no way for player 2 to stop player 1 from getting three of the corners without giving player 1 the win on turn three, once player one has three corners, they have at least two ways to complete a line, and player two can only block one of them.

    Once a game has been 'solved' in this fashion, it becomes pointless to play.
  5. shwaip
    shwaip I would like to see this diagram. Link it if you'd rather not draw it.
  6. CB
    CB I've never seen it on the internet, but I could draw it for you later (I'm on my way out the door just now). Or you could try it yourself... Play both sides, and try to stop player one from getting three corners...
  7. shwaip
    shwaip If neither player messes up, they will always tie. I'm positive.
  8. primesuspect
  9. shwaip
    shwaip
    a NERD FIGHT!!!! :D

    at least my father doesn't smell of elderberries!
  10. Ryder
    Ryder He is right shwaip

    I will start.... Top left corner

    EDIT: Hang on....I am not sure if that is true...I just thought of 1 possiblity that would prevent me from getting 2 corners.
  11. shwaip
  12. Ryder
    Ryder That was the one ;)

    Lower Right Corner
  13. shwaip
  14. shwaip
    shwaip here's the final board:

    X O X
    X O O
    O X X

    (i'm O)
  15. Ryder
    Ryder Yep...I got 3 corners...but didn't win

    It didn't matter if I chose bottom left, you would have blocked with left mid, then I block at right mid, then you choose something and it would continue.

    CB... Player 1 can get 3 corners and not win.
  16. shwaip
    shwaip We obviously can't prove this by example (unless we want to exhaust all possible movesets)...
  17. Ryder
    Ryder
    shwaip wrote:
    We obviously can't prove this by example (unless we want to exhaust all possible movesets)...
    We already proved that player1 does not always win.

    If player2 chooses the center and like you said "doesn't mess up" then player1 will have to block thus preventing the "advantage" of being player1.
  18. Leonardo
    Leonardo
    shwaip wrote:
    at least my father doesn't smell of elderberries!
    But your mother was a hampster. :eek:
  19. CB
    CB Okay. I can admit when I'm wrong. It was something I had learned in high school, so either I'm remembering the lesson incorrectly, or the instructor was wrong (both equaly as likely). I'll remove that blurb from the article :)

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!