Subject: Seldom won winnable games.

Wow, this game was a happy surprise:

        Game: W7x4 3020-5;
Game stats: 356/10/2.8%/2127;
  Player Elo: 2210.951 ▲ 3.123.

AND, I got it on my 1st try!

AND...........we're not impressed - because your definition of "first try" doesn't fit with almost all the rest of us. 

Don't mind him, Ellie.  I AM IMPRESSED!  That was an excellent win, and a good 'Elo' reward.

I know that "1st try" means that you didn't need to redeal the cards.  Well done, !!

ALL of us know what "first try" means! And I'm impressed!

I had a 120-1 on my first try on a 7x4 streak as xeena, but had been trolled so badly my name had been blocked so I couldn't properly brag about it.

Shrug

I can find that game number in my Denny messages if anyone cares to play it. I did brag about it some time after the fact, and some other folks did beat it then.

Moral of the story. When you see a game has been lost 120 times and never won, don't assume it's unwinnable. I didn't even think it was all that hard.

10x0 32114-5 now 1/29 7:03min first try no cards.

Doesn't matter whether the cards were re-dealt or not.  If they were dealt at all, that gives the opportunity to move them around, try different openings, approaches, etc.  See which pathway does, or might, lead to a win.  EVERY SINGLE time a card or cards are moved, and then moved back, or the move altered, is a "try".  As has been repeatedly pointed out, it's the same as having unlimited re-do.  It's an unfair advantage compared to those of us who don't cheat.  You can try to convince yourself all you want that it's a "win", but you're just fooling yourself.  You beat it with brute force, by trying however many "tries" were necessary to "win" it, and most probably writing down the moves, before transferring them to the real game.  It's a charade, and you're deceiving yourself/selves to think otherwise. 

.literally eating a bowl of cherries 🍒 and lmao 

Two things pop out at me in this little conversation:

1) "First try" really is a laughable claim. That may be how the software records the win, but please. 

2) It's really funny seeing Tony and Ellie2 having a conversation. 

Game: 11x0 18522-5;..... Game stats: 40/3/7.5%/1981;..... Player Elo: 2342.535 ▲ 0.898.

        Game: 12x0 29020-6;
Game stats: 7/2/28.6%/1678;
  Player Elo: 2221.786 ▲ 0.336.

Game: 10x1 6403-6;..... Game stats: 5/2/40%/1614;..... Player Elo: 2343.646 ▲ 0.118.

This was a difficult game!

        Game: 10x0 32096-5;
Game stats: 35/2/5.7%/2097;
  Player Elo: 2219.697 ▲ 2.702.

Gosh, two in one day:

        Game: 9x1 26610-5;
Game stats: 35/2/5.7%/2014;
  Player Elo: 2221.738 ▲ 1.891.

Not that hard. Just need to watch out for the middle reds.

two games in a row,

first one solved at the end of a boring meeting about carbon consumption (my part was done already)

and second game, first column opened in the train back home

few minutes later, another one

Dang, dude.  Possibly a record??

"Moves: 329/959"

How come?

I don't think any game here in this site takes more than (I'm guessing) 300 moves.

I'm not all that great at counting...........but I'm pretty sure *I've* been involved in several up in that range!

I understand that there is a new "Weather Lady" on Brewskie's local channel. He was undoubtedly distracted and kept restarting his strategies. 

This has to be shifting cards back and forth dozens of times to create drama! We need an investigation.

I felt exhilarated in beating it...serious respect to anyone who finds it distractingly simplistic.

Of course the likelihood exists that I started it utterly wrong, thus forcing a complex set of varied moves and stacks, albeit avoidable with better, prior study of layout. (I shy away from trying it again though, that dang variant is chock full of stuff that requires deeper than average consideration, for me at least).

I may also have been influenced by various, (too) numerous pharmaceuticals at the time--but hey, respect to whoever's never been there.

And yes, dear Filthy, meteorologist and nascent mother Rebecca Schuld is aging like a fine, fine wine.

        Game: 6x4 27027-6;
Game stats: 36/3/8.3%/2041;
  Player Elo: 2225.093 ▲ 2.094.

        Game: 8x3 1119-9;
Game stats:  21/2/9.5%.

Unfortunately, this was my 2nd try.  I messed up my first try, sigh!

I was happy to get this one:

Game: 6x4 14942-5;..... Game stats: 75/5/6.7%/2043:..... Player Elo: 2342.393 ▲ 1.229.

Game: 10x0 31002-5;..... Game stats: 26/4/15.4%/1920;..... Player Elo: 2343.042 ▲ 0.650.

        Game: 10x0 1975-5;
Game stats: 37/3/8.1%/2088;
  Player Elo: 2226.393 ▲ 2.539.

Game: 6x4 15983-5;..... Game stats: 90/4/4.4%/2124;..... Player Elo: 2331.547 ▲ 1.894.

Game: 6x6 29017-7;.... Game stats: 47/4/8.5%/1929;.... Player Elo: 2337.118 ▲ 0.701.

Didn't seem that hard.....

        Game: 11x1 29977-7;
Game stats: 8/2/25%.

Unfortunately, it was my 2nd try.

After losing eight winnable games since my previous win (and a bunch of unwinnables), I'll take it!

        Game: W7x4 31957-6;
Game stats: 29/2/6.9%/2009;
  Player Elo: 2235.636 ▲ 1.734.

        Game: 10x0 28261-5;
Game stats: 17/2/11.8%/1975;
  Player Elo: 2249.249 ▲ 1.389.

You look at this game and think "faaaarrrk" but it is winnable!

Game: 10x0 2781-5;....  Game stats: 35/2/5.7%/2101;....  Player Elo: 2330.780 ▲ 1.708.

        Game: 10x1 13968-6;
Game stats: 9/2/22.2%/1789;
  Player Elo: 2256.263 ▲ 0.511.

Is the reason these games are "seldom won" winnables because players don't use external aids?

When I played years ago, I kept my own little log of what I considered "impressive" victories (the young are so much more vain); I may someday re-find it to see if some of those games are rated >2000...

@ firenze.....

Brilliant, incisive theory. 🧐  Along with the fact that some players like to hammer away at games until they say "uncle" - or they are able to smugly uphold their insouciance until the next would-be conqueror shows up.

Or...........to put it another way..........isn't it 'curious' how heavily-populated this thread is with the TT/Ellie duopoly?

The young can be so vain.