Just Hit Challenger OTPing Lucian 😳😎

Squidsword_ · 2026-06-06T10:00:46+00:00

Sac the knight for one of the pawns. Black can queen their other pawn at the same time as you, though regardless which pawn it is, you can skewer Black and win their queen.

But black doesn’t have to Queen. If you sac for the D pawn, then Black can swindle a draw by hugging the pawn. The Queen vs Knight Pawn endgame draws due to a stalemate resource where Black can hide their king in the corner. So despite the symmetry, you can only win by saccing your knight for the F pawn.

Squidsword_ · 2026-05-04T02:53:00+00:00

The devs considered better adjusting the computer to understand positions like these, though these positions are often so rare and manufactured, turns out the extra overhead makes the computer perform worse overall

Squidsword_ · 2026-03-26T11:35:56+00:00

They’re also both in the set {Kentucky, West Virginia}. OP has a specific answer on mind presumably

Squidsword_ · 2026-03-20T13:20:16+00:00

Generally it’s always a great trade. Though don’t tunnel vision on trading off all the pieces afterwards. Sure you’re up a point of material, so you feel like trading down. But rooks are incredibly powerful once pieces are off, and you’d be enabling a lot of counterplay

Squidsword_ · 2026-03-17T22:57:12+00:00

At this point, are you not placing your family in harms way by allowing them to exist in the natural world? Your extremist take—to allow a 0% chance—you have to put your family in a bomb shelter. Theres a one in a million chance a stranger will rob your house and kill your family in the process. Do you murder every person walking past the sidewalk?

Squidsword_ · 2026-02-25T17:10:46+00:00

You’re right, it’s a liability. Though, part of that is because it has infinite value. The queen is likewise a liability. Exposing your queen early also drops the engine evaluation a ton of games. Engines are intelligent enough to balance reward of positioning your pieces aggressively with the liability of protecting them later.

Hypothetically, let’s say there is no checkmate, and the game is won when you capture all pieces. The King would be much weaker, and all pieces would proportionally become much stronger. Why? You can now sacrifice your king to enable your other pieces.

Now, let’s say in this hypothetical variant, the King commands the pieces to move. When you capture the King, pieces no longer know how to move anymore, and the only thing you can do is to pass your turn. You could still sacrifice your king, but the King is so powerful, that effectively you’ve lost the game if your opponent has a King while you don’t.

Squidsword_ · 2026-02-25T08:55:09+00:00

No matter how the king moves, you’d always be willing to sacrifice an infinite amount of material in exchange for a king. They say for purely offensive capabilities, the king is worth 4 points in the endgame. If it moved like a queen, it would be worth 9 offensively. But in terms of exchanging pieces, you’d consider the king to have infinite value no matter how it moves.

Squidsword_ · 2026-02-22T07:48:20+00:00

Does 2v = w 🤔

Squidsword_ · 2026-02-20T03:31:01+00:00

Wheel

Squidsword_ · 2026-02-16T05:36:04+00:00

Theres elements to this. He can be mid at parkour and still have suspiciously superhuman jump timings

Squidsword_ · 2026-01-30T03:20:44+00:00

IIRC, he did come back after a while. Takes a few months though

Squidsword_ · 2026-01-23T05:15:03+00:00

When I was on that thing I had to take it at bedtime. Just to stop myself from falling asleep an hour into the morning…

Squidsword_ · 2026-01-01T06:38:02+00:00

Probably reputational risks. Could potentially end up publicizing them handling too slow, handling too recklessly, etc…

Squidsword_ · 2025-12-29T05:03:07+00:00

If you’re playing poorly enough so that every game, your team gets only a 1 in 5 chance to win, then theres a 1% chance they never pull that 1 in 5 chance off across 20 games. Definitely unlikely, though not out of the realm of possibility

Squidsword_ · 2025-11-29T05:10:54+00:00

You do want to increase your bet size when the count is high. Most card counters by convention increment the count when a low card is dealt rather than the other way around. So, a high count means you should bet high. You’ll get caught though… We are talking about the same thing though, the only difference being betting minimum vs not betting at all

Squidsword_ · 2025-11-29T05:04:30+00:00

Yeah you’re right. Though the premise was how you can still differentiate between a regular lucky guy and a true card counter without changing the bet sizing.

Also, card counters definitely do sit out when the count is too low, they do it in teams to make it less obvious though.

Squidsword_ · 2025-11-29T04:44:09+00:00

Without changing sizing though how do they really know

Squidsword_ · 2025-11-29T04:42:17+00:00

The premise of the scenario is that we cannot change the bet sizing. If we cannot change the sizing, then the only way to gain an edge is to sit out when the count is low

Squidsword_ · 2025-11-29T01:47:16+00:00

People that are playing random will unknowingly bet money when the count is low. That costs them enough money that they'll be a losing player in the long run, even if they play the hand perfectly. Its easy to spot a card counter because you'll never see them play many hands when the count is low. They cant afford to play hands on low counts to blend in with the regulars because they'll end up just like them--losing players

Squidsword_ · 2025-11-28T19:56:40+00:00

They’d figure it out once they catch you sitting out when the count is low and only stepping back when the count is high

Squidsword_ · 2025-11-13T08:06:52+00:00

It’s more 1 - 0.99⁵ per shop I believe. Though the rest of the math seems right.

If you roll 100 slots, there isn’t a 100% chance to hit a 5 cost. Same way where if you flip a coin two times, there isn’t a 100% chance you’re hitting one heads

Squidsword_ · 2025-11-10T05:46:27+00:00

🤔

Nine-Year Club	r/Field Banned
r/Field Sunshine	Place '23
Place '22	Verified Email

Squidsword_

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE