Subject:
|
Re: 125 years ago...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Thu, 18 Dec 2003 13:33:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
577 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> So Rosco's question is legit, although hair splitting, it's possible to get a
> draw in Checkers (both sides have a single king, for example)
Um, AND tic tac toe! I was just using checkers as an example, honest.
> However I would consider an automaton that ALWAYS draws in checkers to actually
> be a much harder problem to achieve than one that wins most of the time or even
> one that always wins..
This is also true in my view of tic tac toe but not as relatively hard.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: 125 years ago...
|
| (...) Um... { "not losing" == "winning" } == FALSE but { "not losing" & "not drawing" == "winning" } == TRUE So Rosco's question is legit, although hair splitting, it's possible to get a draw in Checkers (both sides have a single king, for example) (...) (21 years ago, 18-Dec-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
