Feel free to chat, make suggestions, or tell your scores!
02/11/01 01:26:27 PM | |
Name: | Lance Votroubek |
Best expert: | 82 |
Best intermediate: | 25 |
Best beginner: | 2 |
Comments: | I dunno... It looks like his 12 second board is doable in 12 seconds... coming from a person who can't even break 20 in intermediate. But if you are saying that he is faking it (I'm not accusing or anything), it wouldn't be so intelligent of him to claim to have a world record, ya know? I think it's probably genuine, but it's always good to be skeptical, especially because there are such easy cheats. Lance |
02/11/01 12:29:17 PM | |
Name: | matt mcginley |
Comments: | Okay, Ive been looking over Joao's 12 second board and Ive come to the conclusion that there is no possible way that anyone can complete that board in 12 seconds. At the fastest, maybe 17 or 18, but surely not 12!!!! I was wrong about Sriram's 2 sec. board and I might be wrong about his one, so respond to this if you disagree with me. But there's just no way! |
02/10/01 08:32:15 AM | |
Name: | matt mcginley |
Best expert: | 81 |
Best intermediate: | 17 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | Woohoo! Just got 4 sec. number 200. Other totals for beginner are 1x2 2x2 3x46 4x200. The way I play beginner, I always start on the same square. I have modified my playing mwthod to that now, instead of just going F2-click-F2-click-F2-click-F2-click over the same square until I get an opening (watch my 3 sec video), now, whenever I get a 1 in the first aquare, I clear around that 1. Usually I hit an opening. When you start in the same square all the time, the same boards start to pop up. I've had the same 3 second board 4 times now! |
02/10/01 04:44:50 AM | |
Name: | matt mcginley |
Best expert: | 81 |
Best intermediate: | 17 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | Hey ET, When you got the second 1 sec. time, did the board clear out like it usually does, or did it just not clear? The second 1 sec. time I got was a 1 sec. board that didn't clear. Im still counting it as a one second time, but it's kind of wierd..... Ill send you the video I took of a similar situation. |
02/10/01 03:42:07 AM | |
Name: | Khor Eng Tat |
Comments: | The most incredible thing happened to me! I got a 1 sec in beginner for the second time!!!I was actually just trying out the Camtasia recorder, and out of a sudden i got it. I was utterly stunned. Especially since my playing has been so crap nowadays. Damn, I am so happy! |
02/09/01 05:56:03 AM | |
Name: | Dan Cerveny |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 18 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Marc, We're in the same boat. Yesterday my best finish was 60, but I had a couple definite 56-58 games that I messed up and I had a game where the time said 46 with just a strip of squares across the top(Could have been a low 50's). |
02/08/01 05:44:26 PM | |
Name: | Marc Schouten |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 19 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Getting impatient here.... I got a 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68 and 69 tonight, as well as a certain 55 or 56 if I'd not have guessed wrong near the end. Of course, getting all these 60s is encouraging, so I'm not very frustrated. Yet. |
02/08/01 03:55:55 AM | |
Name: | matt mcginley |
Best expert: | 81 |
Best intermediate: | 17 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | I dont know if anybody noticed but Mike Lowder got a 53 w/o marking a single flag. |
02/07/01 11:09:05 PM | |
Name: | Lance Votroubek |
Best expert: | 82 |
Best intermediate: | 25 |
Best beginner: | 2 |
Comments: | Ryan, I think that if you look at some of the videos that people send in, you will be able to see the varying styles of the best people. Myself, I just randomly click in the middle-left, moving towards middle right, until a nice sized area clears. On beginner, I don't mark any, on intermediate, I mark as few as efficiently possible, and same on expert, where I leave 10-20 unmarked every time. As far as looking for a good board - I just take what comes up, I don't look for any particular area to clear or anything. Anyway, I hope that's helpful. Lance |
02/07/01 06:05:48 PM | |
Name: | Ryan Peckyno |
Comments: | Ok, please look at some of my previous posts (about 20 or so down) and any insight is greatly appreciated. Thanks, Ryan |
02/07/01 06:02:44 PM | |
Name: | Ryan Peckyno |
Best expert: | 85 |
Best intermediate: | 25 |
Best beginner: | 2 |
Comments: | As far as this flagging deal goes here is my insight. I've never really played this game all that much (relatively speaking that is). Personally, I used it more as a guage to see how much my analytical abilities were increasing, to force myself to make quick decisions when facing uncertainty, etc. I never even new about the flagging method until a couple of months ago when I first found this websight. I had times of 97, 29, and 2 at this point in time. I analyzed a bit and determined that the best way to approach begginner would be not to flag, for intermediate would be to flag on rare occassions, and for expert would be to flag the majority. At the time I didn't believe that really fast times (i.e. 60's) could be achieved on expert w/o flagging but I disagree. I think that it depends on the person and as for me I believe that I could probably obtain just as fast times (maybe even faster) w/o flagging on expert. Flagging requires more coordination, while non flagging requires more thought. I believe that fast times can be obtained on expert w/o flagging as long as "efficient clicks" are made. As far as % of games completed. For me it depends on the time/what I am playing for (i.e. relax, curiousity, speed, etc.). I can complete (disregarding first 2 or 3 clicks) about a third of the games when playing in the 8-12 sec beg., 35-40 sec int., and 140-150 exp. About 10% when playing in the 3-7 sec., 27-34, and 110-139 range. Finally, please look at some of my previous posts (about 10 or so down) and RESPOND. I am interested in hearing responses. |
02/07/01 05:51:18 PM | |
Name: | matt mcginley |
Best expert: | 81 |
Best intermediate: | 17 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | Wow, Joe, Good job with the 22. Your scores are starting to look like mine. |
02/07/01 04:14:18 PM | |
Name: | Joe Nuss |
Best expert: | 96 |
Best intermediate: | 22 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | ive never finished an expert game without flagging at all, though i havent really tried. in more important news, my 22 makes me very happy. interestingly, thats the second time ive complained of a dry period of mine on here only to get a record a few days later. so im going to start whining to you guys more often. now i have to attack that wretched expert time. |
02/07/01 03:51:16 PM | |
Name: | Paul Kerry |
Comments: | As there is a little discussion of this at the moment, here's my (useless) input. My non flagging record is 63, but my times slowed up somewhat, so I decided to give the double-click method a try, after only a short while, my record is 76. I think though, I've hit a plateau, so from now on, the improvements will be slower.... I just can't click or think as fast as I could! Ages ago, when I first switched to not flagging, I found I improved quite steadily to the level I was at with flagging (but not double clicking - I didn't know about it). I'd say the same thing has happened when I've switched techniques again. I wonder, that if people keep playing without flagging, if or not they'll reach similar scores as with using the double-click method given a month or two of practice? |
02/07/01 07:45:35 AM | |
Name: | Dan Cerveny |
Comments: | Marc, When playing expert without flagging I generally score from 100-120, although I am rarely able to finish games(what's new). |
02/07/01 04:10:33 AM | |
Name: | Marc Schouten |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 19 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Dan, I've just started playing expert without flagging, instead of beginner and intermediate. I find myself making tons of mistakes, which is good to know, I guess, because that means I should be able to significantly improve my efficiency. I was just wondering: when you're not flagging, what times do you get? I've only been able to finish one game so far and it was a 131. I'm going to practice this until I'm below 100 and then I'm going to go back to flagging. |
02/06/01 07:00:11 PM | |
Name: | Dan Cerveny |
Comments: | Damien, Nobody is more surprised than me that I haven't left you guys in a cloud of dust by now. I just got my 7th game of 59. It has been two months since I first got 59, so I am pretty frustrated. My average score has been steadily dropping, so that is good, but I should have at the very least a couple low 50's games by now. I do feel a breakout coming soon. Damien, I should have sent you the videos from my two almost-sub-50 games. My efficiency in those games was really something. It would be nice to be that fast more often. |
02/06/01 04:03:30 PM | |
Name: | Damien Moore |
Best expert: | 56 |
Comments: | Finally, I am no longer a fringe "sub-60" player. Got my third 50's today. I had a period of two months before getting this record where I seemed to have stalemated. I felt I was on the verge of the 50's but nothing happened. During that time my average score dropped considerably...I amassed 200+ 60's games, and I went from flagging 90 mines to 75-85. As well, I took some games really slow and worked out situations instead of guessing, and now it is paying off...my first game everyday is now in the 60's and I recongnize and solve patterns quicker and more efficienctly. My efficiency has really seemed to improve...it is now at the level Dan's video shows...I'm really surprised he hasn't left us all behind because he is such a clean player whereas I fumble around and so does Lasse. Good luck to you Dan, and the rest. |
02/06/01 03:09:38 PM | |
Name: | Dan Cerveny |
Comments: | Marc, Once in awhile, when I notice my efficiency going downhill, I play expert for a couple days without marking any bombs. I think another round of no-marking might be helpful because I've noticed myself marking too much lately. |
02/06/01 02:01:27 PM | |
Name: | Marc Schouten |
Comments: | Here's something that has helped me a lot: I used to flag a *lot* of mines. Usually more than 90 on an expert board. Of course, this slowed me down. Last week I spent a lot of time playing beginner and intermediate without flagging at all. When I started playing expert again, I noticed improved efficiency. I recognized patterns faster and didn't have to mark as many mines as a result. I've gotten as many sub-65s in the past two days as I have in the 2 previous months. I'm still marking a lot of mines in not-so-fast games, but in the really fast games, it's not unusual for me to mark just over 80. Still a lot to some people, I know, but hey - I'm a flagger ;) |
02/06/01 01:35:03 PM | |
Name: | Marc Schouten |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 19 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Don't worry, Dan, you're not alone. When I'm fired up, I play about 1 game every ten minutes that would have resulted in a sub-60 score, would I have been able to finish it. Just like you, I can't seem to get more than halfway through when I'm playing at that speed. When I'm playing slightly slower, I finish many more games. I think I'm averaging about 70 right now. When I got my 59 (my only one so far), I averaged about 75, so statistics are on my side. |
02/06/01 05:58:59 AM | |
Name: | Dan Cerveny |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 18 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Lasse, Damien, others. How often do you finish games? I find myself messing up on probably 19 out of every 20 games I play. I am embarrassed by my inability to get through the second half of games without making some stupid bad click. I am assuming that I am relaxed for the first half of games but become tense and nervous when I'm going down the homestretch. I wish I could learn your secret, Lasse. Damien, I plan on beating your 56 any day now. Every day I have a few good chances to break it and I hope to do it soon. I beat most people to 59, but now that I am being passed on a regular basis I am more motivated than ever to play like crazy. Good luck all. |
02/05/01 11:20:10 PM | |
Name: | Joe Nuss |
Comments: | thats one lonely 47 there, lasse ;) im just jokin, im sure youll get a few more sub 50s. damien! what a stud! 3rd best sweeper in the world, how does it feel? thats cool man, too bad joao or whatever came along and snuck up on all of us, you would have been second. but thats cool that he found the site, too. i cant break any damn records, so im goign to flee like the insignificant minesweeper pian that i am. good bye. |
02/05/01 03:44:49 PM | |
Name: | Damien Moore |
Best expert: | 56 |
Best intermediate: | 14 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | Got my scores mixed up... |
02/05/01 03:43:51 PM | |
Name: | Damien Moore |
Best expert: | 14 |
Best intermediate: | 56 |
Comments: | Thanks Lasse... Some people have found that Camtasia only lets you record for 30 days and then you run into problems: to buy, or to have every video labelled as "unliscened product." Well, I solved that riddle today...turn your computer clock back a month and presto! I'm now back up and recording...two 3secs today and eleven 4sec beginner games. |
E-mail Website |
02/05/01 02:27:03 PM | |
Name: | Lasse Nyholm |
Best expert: | 47 |
Best intermediate: | 16 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Hi everybody - no new records this time! Maybe some sort of a record - I've gotten my sub-60 number 500 yesterday. I've been playing for quite a few hours over the last two days and I got 55 sub-60s. Among the 500 is 1x47, 2x50, 5x51, 11x52, 13x53 and 19x54. I saw yesterday that with every 10-12 sub-60-games there is one really low - like 50-52. The last few days 90% of my finished games has been sub-60, so I guess my average finishing-time is around 56. Congratulations Damien and Sriram on your 56's - I don't think you can go much lower now - nah, just kiddin' - you'll be kicking my a.. in a few months. Good luck everybody - Lanyje |
02/04/01 10:34:38 PM | |
Name: | Lance Votroubek |
Best expert: | 82 |
Best intermediate: | 26 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | it would only count as a loss in that situation if you guessed the wrong square. As long as you finish the game, it counts as a win! Lance |
02/04/01 09:03:06 PM | |
Name: | Justice Gray |
Comments: | Quick question: It counts as a loss if I am down to 2 squares, 1 mine, with 50-50 probability of either square being the mine, correct? |
02/04/01 12:12:18 AM | |
Name: | Lance Votroubek |
Comments: | Congratulations Damien! That's awesome, to see someone at that level of excellence able to shave 3 whole seconds off! Good job! My next goal is to get to 75, or even 72 (even though I am currently at 82, and my goal for the YEAR is/was 79). I have blown two 75 or 72 games on stupid misclicks. My ultimate goal is to get on that top 40 list!!!! I want to be able to say that my total time is less than 100 seconds. Save a place for me on that list.... Lance |
02/03/01 09:58:30 PM | |
Name: | Damien Moore |
Best expert: | 56 |
Comments: | Oh ya! No more "almosts." I got 56 as of 2.44pm. I was in a bad mood playing for 7 hours yesterday and then losing a 56 that had two obvious moves left but I panicked. Same situation...I was about to panik and then remembered yesterday and I scanned the whole board first and saw the remaining click: no guesses. Yes, I feel good. Hah to you, Sriram. (He got 14, then a day later I did, and now I tied his 56.) Luck to you. |
02/03/01 12:42:20 PM | |
Name: | Dan Cerveny |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 18 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Damien, when you talk about that "almost 56" game, I feel your pain. I should have about twenty mid-50's games by now. I had a very special game going yesterday, one of those once-a-month games. I had a small area left, maybe 1/9 of the board, and my time was only on 41 seconds. Just like a game I played over a month ago, I had a very decent shot at a sub-50 score. What really irks me is that I didn't lose from a must-guess pattern, but rather just a bad click. I probably won't get another chance like that for a long time. |
02/03/01 11:11:41 AM | |
Name: | Damien Moore |
Comments: | Thanks Matt...I just went and checked and that board that Nixon and Lance got looked really familiar. That's because it is the same as Pascal Guelis' 2. Ahh! So,that's one double, the board you video'd and I got is a second, Dan got a 3rd pair, five people got a fourth on the random page, and a fifth was found recently that I'm trying to recall...Carlos Valencia and somebody I think. |
02/03/01 10:40:45 AM | |
Name: | matt mcginley |
Best expert: | 81 |
Best intermediate: | 17 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | Hey Damien, Found some more duplicate boards: Lance Votroubek's 3sec. beg. board is the same as Nixon Qian's 5 sec. board. Those are both in the records section. |
02/03/01 01:01:33 AM | |
Name: | Lance Votroubek |
Comments: | and actually, I think that all boards are actually solvable, but the extent of guessing varies. |
02/03/01 12:59:33 AM | |
Name: | Lance Votroubek |
Best expert: | 82 |
Best intermediate: | 26 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | about guessing - I guess that I don't know why I really said that! I mean, this conversation I had with my father was two years ago, back when I was having 130 and 140 times. Obviously, if you just look at my times, it would be impossible for me to have done that well without guessing on some of those non-logic areas (thanks for the email with the screen shot. It helped me realize how silly what I just said was!) What I really see as being true is that there is a lot of logic involved, even when you come to an impasse, to a certain extent. But when you come to an area where everything else around it is clear, and all there is to do is make a 50-50 guess, obviously logic doesn't play too much of a role. And my argument completely flies out the window when there are TWO such areas in a single board, which happens frequently. Oh well. Thanks for keeping my rambling in check and on the level! Lance |
02/02/01 07:56:34 PM | |
Name: | Damien Moore |
Comments: | Darn! I can't believe it. I've been playing like crazy today (7 hours) and I just lost 54 with two VERY OBVIOUS clicks left, but I was so frantic I couldn't find them and so I clicked randomly in the largest patch of mines I hadn't flagged. If I'd've calmed down, the worst I could have done was 56. I was so darn close. That only means I'll play for several morehours before bed even enters my mind. |
02/02/01 06:31:36 PM | |
Name: | matt mcginley |
Comments: | Going along with my last post and knowing where all the mines are before you get to them.... I was playing beginner today (caput mouse) and came to an opening with a corner composed of 1's and the rest of the opening was composed of these 1's also. After I marked the corner as a mine, I went in a circle around the opening and , literally, instictively, marked the rest of the mines w/o clearing a single square. When you do that, you can just double-click all the 1's and open up the rest of the board. Good luck w/sub-20.... |
02/02/01 06:28:44 PM | |
Name: | matt mcginley |
Best expert: | 81 |
Best intermediate: | 17 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | Ryan, About strategies, I think a big one is too only mark the mines that will help you clear other mines. Like if you have a 1-2-1 pattern and behind the 2 is a 5. If the 5 is up against the wall, it is unnecesarry to mark all five of the squares. If you watch Damien's 65 video, you will see exactly what I mean. He does it in the upper left corner and the bottom right corner, as well as other places I cant remember. Going along with that, If you wacth Marc Shouten's 63 game, you will see the 4-2 pattern in the far upper right corner. Marc flagged all the mines around that four, when only the bottom two were necesarry to be flagged. That, along with knowing where all the mines are in an opening before you get to that spot (Lanyje's 52 is a beautiful example) will catapult you down into the 60's, 50's and maybe even the 40's. |
02/02/01 06:11:32 PM | |
Name: | Ryan Peckyno |
Comments: | In reference to Lance's question: There are times (even beyond the initial clicks) when guessing must occur. These patterns occur mostly along the bottom or side of the board you are playing on. Yet, there is very little guessing involved. Situations where several people would think that they have to guess can usually be solved by "working a different area of the board", determinining how many mines are left,etc.-I have encountered several situations where I would have had to guess if I did not know the number of mines left...by adding this extra variable I could determine where the mines were-though it can become very complex and it is not the way to go if u want fast scores. Bottom line: there is guessing but it less often then several would claim. |
02/02/01 03:52:48 PM | |
Name: | Ryan Peckyno |
Best expert: | 85 |
Best intermediate: | 25 |
Best beginner: | 2 |
Comments: | I am also very interested in figuring out how this solver works. I think that I have it 90% figured out based on several patterns that I have noticed and consistent observations that I have noted. If anyone has any reports or insight on this could you please send them to me at x13248@exmail.usma.army.mil or pettco4@penn.com. Thanks, Ryan. One of the things that I think about the game is that times are extremely relative to the board that you are given so it is hard to compare times, as different boards have different levels of difficulty (and a different number of minimum clicks are required per board). Also, I would like to hear people's strategies (if they desire to give them away) to get a fast time. I realize that theoretically there are a vast number of possible boards that can appear on each level and it is not very likely that you will get the same board again (actually, I have my own thoughts on this one). But there are only a few boards where it is really feasible to get "really fast times." Having said this, does anyone have the strategy of memorizing these boards and making strategic "entry clicks" (the first 2-5 clicks) so that could increase the probability of getting one of these boards and they could tell right off the bat if they got one????? It seems as though this strategy would have the potential to give the fastest times (if used along side sound/predetermined methodology). I would never personally use this strategy but I am curious. I don't memorize patterns, nor do I do anything along these lines as it would defeat the purpose of playing the game. Again, any info on how the solver works...x13248@exmail.usma.army.mil. |
02/02/01 03:47:30 PM | |
Name: | Marc Schouten |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 19 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Hi Ryan, I don't think the computer speed has anything to do with it. I'm not entirely sure, but I think the minesweeper clock is related to the system timer. When the system timer increases 1 sec, then the minesweeper clock does too. This means that when you start a game just after the system timer has increased, your first "second" will be much longer than when you start a game just before the system timer increases. In this last case, the minesweeper clock will jump to 2 almost instantly. A major annoyance among minesweepers, especially when you're playing beginner. I know I've played a couple of 3s beg. boards that should have been 2's. Of course, the system timer runs equally fast on all systems, fast and slow, so the speed of your computer shouldn't influence your times. |
02/02/01 03:37:10 PM | |
Name: | Ryan Peckyno |
Best expert: | 85 |
Best intermediate: | 25 |
Best beginner: | 2 |
Comments: | My best times are 2, 25, 85. My previous best times were 2, 29, 97 when I soley used the left mouse button to play the game. The double-click method makes a significant difference when playing this game, while the mouse, speed of the computer, continuous playing experience, etc. contribute as well. Over Christmas I was playing this game consistently (every day) and I noticed that it becomes much more second nature. Whereas, I've played it off and on the past couple of weeks and my scores are about 10-15% slower. Also, I'm not a big fan of the microsoft mouse as often times it causes me to click on something I don't mean to click on or it does a "single" when I want a "double"...but that is all that I have available now. Actually, I have been playing more so to "figure out how the program works" then I have been to get good times. Though I do not believe that my times are excellent, I am content with them for the time being, and I do believe that they have the potential to get much better as I can improve a lot on intermixing the two techniques and making clicks that eliminate more of the board. That aside, I find this game interesting. I want to ask a question though...because one of the things that I noticed about my scores is that I get good times for intermediate and expert on fast computers but my 2 sec time on beginner was on a slow computer. I was able to click several times before 1 sec came off the clock (286/386). I believe that I could have got 1 sec. on this board, given the computer speed. But I do not believe that I could have got under 3 sec. on a "really fast" computer. Agree?????????? |
02/02/01 02:54:50 PM | |
Name: | Marc Schouten |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 19 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Lance: I don't think that you're right when you say that every board is solvable, if started in the right position. If there are two area's on a board that leave you no other option than guessing and that are not adjacent, then no matter where you start the game, you will always have to guess at least once. Once if you click inside of one of the "guessing areas", because that leaves one other guessing area. Twice if you click outside one of the guessing areas. Of course, this is only true if there are 1) boards with more than one "guessing area" 2) "guessing areas" that can't be solved logically, no matter from what side you approach them in the game. I think every expert player (and probably a lot of others as well) will agree with me that both are true. I've emailed you a board that shows that what I've just stated is true. I hope this doesn't depress the hell out of you... If it does: join the club :) |
02/02/01 12:25:46 PM | |
Name: | matt mcginley |
Best expert: | 81 |
Best intermediate: | 17 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | Whoa!!!!! Where the hell did João Livramento come from?!?!?!?!?!? Sweet Jebus! |
02/02/01 10:03:51 AM | |
Name: | Lance Votroubek |
Best expert: | 82 |
Best intermediate: | 26 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | I was also just thinking about a conversation I had with my dad about the randomness of minesweeper boards. In the end of the conversation, we kind of came to the conclusion that all minesweeper boards are solvable, just like freecell or those kinds of games, it just depends on where you start clicking. So if you blow a mine on the second click, you obviously just clicked in the wrong place, but if you started in just the right place, I think that all boards have at least one possible path to completion. Lance |
02/02/01 09:39:40 AM | |
Name: | Lance Votroubek |
Best expert: | 82 |
Best intermediate: | 26 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Ha! I was just looking back at old postings on this message board, seeing peoples' old times, their comments, and then comparing their new times. Best example: Matt McGinley. Had something like a 210 expert. He now is in the top 40, with an expert record of 81. This proves that your site has helped many players, and pushes the limits by adding competition. When I found your site, I was exuberantly happy with my records of 7, 35, and 101, and thought that sub 100 was a fantasy. Then in december, I shaved 4 seconds from beginner, 9 from intermediate, and 19 seconds off of my expert! Unbelieveable. You should be proud, Damien! Keep up the great work. Lance |
02/02/01 07:33:57 AM | |
Name: | Damien Moore |
Best expert: | 1 |
Best intermediate: | 14 |
Best beginner: | 59 |
Comments: | Last night I watched Matt's 3 sec video, and then I started my playing for the day (ok, night). After 45 min of expert I decided to try begineer. Guess what! A shock in store: two clicks into the game I recognized it; it was the game I had just watched Matt play! I did the last three clicks from memory and finished in 3 secs. Wow. If I'd recognized it one click sooner I would have got 2 secs. |
02/01/01 04:22:53 PM | |
Name: | Marc Schouten |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 19 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | No. Not breaking any records. Thanks for reminding me..... ;) I'm just not good at finishing fast games, it seems. Whenever I'm going fast, I'm always making mistakes around halfway through. Just now I played a game in which I cleared the first 27 mines in 11 seconds. A schedule of 41. Of course, this was due to the fact that I opened up a pretty large area in the beginning, but still... It would have been nice to finish a game like that. Hope to be back soon... With a new record, of course. |
02/01/01 02:50:00 PM | |
Name: | Dan Cerveny |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 18 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Getting a bit quiet around here. Nobody breaking records anymore? |
01/30/01 09:06:31 PM | |
Name: | matt mcginley |
Comments: | Sllllllllloooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwww time for minesweeper.................... |
01/27/01 09:41:40 PM | |
Name: | steve daugherty |
Best expert: | mid 160's |
Comments: | What a kick to find your site! I've been playing the game for about 2 years and have worked my why down through several plateaus. Curently I'm stuck in the mid 160's, but I'm working on it! Sincerely, Steve Daugherty |
01/27/01 01:43:32 AM | |
Name: | philip culp |
Best expert: | 71 |
Best intermediate: | 20 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | I am almost 16 years old and i started playing when i was about ten i guess. my dad taught me how to play and my two brothers play. My older and I have wars backk and forth with the best times on the computer and we keep on getting better I will update when i get better times |
01/25/01 07:23:36 PM | |
Name: | Paul Kerry |
Best expert: | 63 |
Best intermediate: | 17 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Long time since I've signed this thing! Mostly because I've had very little to talk about. A wondrous course of tranquilizers killed my sweeping times :( A good while ago (months) I was 10-15 clicks away from what looked like a sub-50 second game (agonizing screen shot!). Anyway, since I slowed down somewhat, I've decided to see if I can make a success of starting to mark and double click. I've had an intermediate of about 24 or so, and an expert of mid-80's. That's on about 10 days sparse playing. Averages at the moment: Beginner ~7, Intermediate ~30, Expert ~95 |
01/24/01 04:16:13 AM | |
Name: | et |
Best expert: | 66 |
Best intermediate: | 20 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | I average about 5-7 (B), 25-30 (I) and 80-95 (E) nowadays, after having warmed up. Not that good really due to very little practice lately.
Usually i don't go over 8(B), 35(I) and 100(E). If i do, i practically curse myself for doing so badly. One thing I really hate is when my hands are cold. Fingers get numb, and can't click properly. Still sometimes, can't stop playing but perform really, really badly. And i get so pissed off at myself. Many times I wonder why I'm doing it, cause it gets me so mad. |
01/23/01 08:52:47 PM | |
Name: | Damien Moore |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 14 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | Int is my best level...I average 23, and am guarenteed to go under 20 within 20 minutes, and once there, I can get several a day, but I've been switching my focus to expert this week, and I'd say I average 67. (Typically, I get 75, then 72 as warm-ups, and then I'm in the 60's for the rest of the day). Beg averages 5, no games over 9 for several months now, rarely above 6. (I'm at 438 4sec games currently and 86 3secs). |
01/23/01 05:04:30 PM | |
Name: | Joe Nuss |
Best expert: | 96 |
Best intermediate: | 25 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | my averages are pretty crummy. i'd say around 6-12 on beginner, 32-40 on intermediate, 110-120 on expert. that's for when i play serious, and im at my peak. lately i havent been able to get into any grooves, so those are all probably higher. ive only gone under 30 and 100 twice each. ive gone under 6 maybe 4 or 5 times. |
01/23/01 02:47:19 PM | |
Name: | matt mcginley |
Best expert: | 81 |
Best intermediate: | 17 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | Man I feel so dirty typing that 81. I hate that I know I CAN break 80 but I just dont finish enough games...... My average times are about like so: Beg-5(I get one every other game almost) Int-23-26 Exp-84-95 |
01/23/01 02:19:16 PM | |
Name: | Lance Votroubek |
Best expert: | 83 |
Best intermediate: | 26 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | My average beginner is 6 seconds or so when I am warmed up, average intermediate is 29-31, and average expert is 98 when cold, and ~93 when warmed up. I have had the same problem with record paces and then messing up badly recently. The other day, I had two games in a twenty minute period that would have been mid-70's scores, but I just misclicked. On one, I died at 55 seconds with only 29 bombs left. I figure at my pace of about 1.5 bombs/second, I was heading toward at least a 75, and the rest of the board looked beautiful, believe me. That is a big step, from my record of 83 to cut at least 8 seconds off, but maybe sometime soon I'll be able to do it. Lance |
01/23/01 01:48:30 PM | |
Name: | Dan Cerveny |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 18 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Andrew, I don't play intermediate much, probably average mid 20's. My typical expert score is in the mid 60's. |
01/23/01 12:48:49 PM | |
Name: | Marc Schouten |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 19 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Hi Andrew, I'd say I average about 25 on int and 70-75 on expert. This is, of course, when I'm warmed up. |
01/23/01 10:00:11 AM | |
Name: | Andrew Washburn |
Best expert: | 74 |
Best intermediate: | 21 |
Best beginner: | 4 |
Comments: | I know what I'm gonna do...I'm gonna play nothing but beginner 'til I get real lucky and get a 1 or 2. Then I'm gonna get sub 70 expert. Then I'm gonna join the elite ranks of the sub-20 intermediates...when I equalled my 21, my eye caught the timer going from 20 to 21 JUST as I made the last click...believe me I was mad. Just curious...we all know each other's records, but how does everyone par? I par about a 27-32 sec. int., and am happy to simply finish expert, but a normal time for meund 80-100. Small irony: my expert record is Lasse's, with the numbers switched around. All this almost exactly one year after starting to play minesweeper. |
01/23/01 08:08:49 AM | |
Name: | Marc Schouten |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 19 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Hey Dan, We seem to be going through the same phase... I played like a madman too, yesterday, but was unable to break my record. I've been on pace for several low 50s scores, but I've never gotten past about 2/3 of the game. Maybe I need to focus more on accuracy than speed. Of course, I've only gotten one 59 so far, so it's slightly less frustrating for me ;) Hope you beat your record soon. Maybe it'll inspire me... Marc |
01/22/01 08:56:33 PM | |
Name: | Dan Cerveny |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 18 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Man, just got my 6th game of 59. I cannot believe how much of a magnet 59 has been for me. What sucks is that today was probably the fastest I've ever played but was unable to break my record. I was almost finished with about 10 games that would most certainly have been in the mid 50's, but I just seem to have a knack for screwing up near the end. Maybe I just lose concentration when I feel myself near the end of fast games. |
01/22/01 08:46:00 PM | |
Name: | Lance Votroubek |
Best expert: | 84 |
Best intermediate: | 26 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Sergio, Welcome to the minesweeper world! It does seem nearly impossible that these times can be reached, but the most fun ways to prove that they are achieveable are to see the videos that prove it and to actually get them yourself! Check out the helpful pages on this website, I'm sure you're name will be posted before you know it... Lance |
01/22/01 02:52:14 PM | |
Name: | matt mcginley |
Best expert: | 81 |
Best intermediate: | 17 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | Hey Sergio, My first intermediate game was around 93. My goal was to get below a minute. I looked for minesweeper one the web and found the old expert world records page. On the home page, he talked about people breaking the minute barrier. I was shocked that someone had gone a sub-60 game in intermediate. A couple months later, I had an intermedaite score below 20. I thought it was impossible too. Right now I have a hard time conceiving the speed it takes to sub-60 an expert game. Someday I know, I will have a sub-60 expert game and can look back at chuckle. However it is a little better believable with the videos. Watch those, especially Lanyje' 52, and you'll see. Good luck and keep sweeping. |
01/22/01 12:41:39 PM | |
Name: | Sergio |
Best expert: | 500 |
Best intermediate: | 120 |
Best beginner: | 4 |
Comments: | hello, I'm 13 years old, and my uncle taught me how to play minesweeper just yesterday he got 200 on expert and we both thought he was the best in the world, so i went to google and saw this page. I dont believe that you guys got 47 seconds. Is it really possible. I don't think ill ever get below 100 on intermediate it's just impossible |
E-mail Website |
01/21/01 09:26:13 AM | |
Name: | Marc Schouten |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 19 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Well, I always thought that the world record was still quite far beyond my reach, especially since Lasse got his 47. I knew I was able to get a mid-50, but that should be about it. Then, today, I played a game about halfway through. I had to guess and guessed wrong, but when I looked at the time and bombs, I realized I had been on schedule for a 47 second game. Then, two games later, I played a similar game that would have resulted in a 51s time, had I continued at the same pace. After getting my 59, I had my usual post-record relapse, but these games have put me right back on track. I won't be satisfied until I've gotten at least a low 50's score. I'll be back.... Marc |
01/19/01 05:15:17 PM | |
Name: | matt mcginley |
Best expert: | soon.... |
Best intermediate: | 17 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | Ooooooooooooooh! Just missed a 75 by one click! I am so on pace to beat my expert time. I had a 52 sec. board with about 20 squares left to clear. I know that doesnt say much, but I know that sub-70 is possible for me now. The description of the person who never finishes any games on the patterns page is just like me. My best times are basically my only finishes! Seriously, I probably have only finished expert less than ten times not including my record times! Now Im just working on beating Washburn's 74.... |
01/19/01 12:56:30 PM | |
Name: | Lance Votroubek |
Best expert: | 85 |
Best intermediate: | 26 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Congratulations Andrew, on a 74! My goal for the year is to get my time on expert below 80, and my intermediate below 20, and to get lucky enough to have a 1 second board. That would be fantastic. About Solitare... I see where you're coming from, saying that it might be kinda boring. All I'm curious about is times. It would be difficult to do a Solitare site correctly, because of the various ways you can play the game (Vegas, etc). I imagine that SOMEONE out there probably has a 46 board or better... My 67 had a bonus of 10430, and a final score of 11033. I've gotten this score twice. Anyway, if it doesn't happen, whatever. Have a great sweeping day, all! Lance |
01/19/01 06:12:29 AM | |
Name: | Andrew Washburn |
Best expert: | 74 hellyeah! |
Best intermediate: | 21 |
Best beginner: | 4 |
Comments: | Well, Matt, looks like I'm back in aren't I? I finally made the top player's list with my 74 in expert. I play expert a lot more now, since I have a lot more room for improvement there. Maybe someday I'll bust a 46 and hold the record? |
01/18/01 09:11:48 PM | |
Name: | Andy Stuart |
Best expert: | 164 |
Best intermediate: | 47 |
Best beginner: | 8 |
Comments: | This is a very nice site. I can't believe how fast some times are. |
E-mail Website |
01/18/01 09:06:09 PM | |
Name: | Marc Schouten |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 19 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Hey Lance, Although it would be nice to have a Solitaire page, I don't think it would be very interesting. Unlike Minesweeper, there isn't a lot of strategy involved with Solitaire. There's usually one obvious move and for the rest it's luck (well, maybe it's not so different from Minesweeper in that aspect) Of course, it would be interesting to know how fast people finish their games. Has anyone finished Solitaire faster than Lasse finished Minesweeper? :) Oh, by the way, I looked up my record. It's 57s and 12933 points. |
01/18/01 07:44:11 PM | |
Name: | Lance Votroubek |
Best expert: | 85 |
Best intermediate: | 26 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Yeah, I think someone should start a site, whether it's busy Damien or someone else. My best score is 67,and I forget the bonus... somewhere around 10k maybe? My brother's best is 63, and I think it'd be neat to see a good site about it. Thanks a lot! Lance |
01/18/01 04:15:05 PM | |
Name: | Damien Moore |
Comments: | Hey, Lance. I've spent the last while looking for solitair sites and there is not a single one. I was debating if I should start one as well. The only list I found was when I stumbled across when looking for minesweeper...it was like #200 on a minesweeper query and he also listed some solitaire scores. My best is 86sec with 8799, and my sister's is 87 with 8612. Should i start a site? |
01/18/01 05:36:38 AM | |
Name: | Marc Schouten |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 19 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Hi Lance, I've never seen a site like that. I've looked for one a few years ago, 'cause I played the game a lot back then. Maybe there is one out there today, I don't know. You want to know how you stack up? I think my best score is somewhere between 12000 and 13000 points. 57 seconds, I believe. I'm not sure about this, so if you'd like the exact values, let me know and I'll look them up (not at home right now). |
01/17/01 09:41:05 PM | |
Name: | Lance Votroubek |
Best expert: | 85 |
Best intermediate: | 26 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Hello all, Just writing for a couple of reasons. First, congratulations on a 47 second board Lasse! Unbelieveable. Secondly, I was wondering if anyone knows of a world-records site for Windows Solitare. I have some pretty decent games on there, and I was wondering how I stack up vs. other people. I figure this may be a good forum to ask. Anyway, email me, or post here! Thanks! Lance Votroubek 3-26-85 |
01/17/01 05:32:27 PM | |
Name: | Marc Schouten |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 19 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Hey Lanyje, Thanks for laying off a bit and giving us the chance to catch up :) It's very frustrating when you've finally gotten within respectable distance of the world record, only to be put back in your place shortly afterwards... But seriously, I think it's great you've finally managed to break 50 and I'm sure it'll encourage others to try and break their records. I have one question for you: how many hours a day do you play on average? And how do the hours vary? Just wondering... Marc |
01/17/01 05:19:01 PM | |
Name: | Lasse Nyholm |
Best expert: | 47 |
Best intermediate: | 16 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | As some of you predicted, I think it's time to slow down on my sweeping and pay a little more attention to my education (I'm going to study to be a furniture-architect, starting this summer). Getting below fifty was always the biggest goal for my minesweeping, and I don't think I will get below 47 any time soon. It's sort of an ambivalent feeling - it's a big joy to the first known sweeper to sub 50, but at the same time it gives me an empty feeling inside to have gotten there now. I think I'll keep playing till I get a 49 and a 48 so it doesn't seem to be all luck that I got that 47, but I will definetely lay back now and let the rest of you try to beat me. Offcourse I will be back when there's money in it :) Good luck everybody - I'll check in here as often as I do these days - feel free to ask me about anything. - I'll be back with a new record one on these days - I guess you all know I can't stop playing this game, right! Lanyje |
01/17/01 04:39:13 AM | |
Name: | Georg Kanellos |
Best expert: | 159 |
Best intermediate: | 35 |
Best beginner: | 9 |
Comments: | As you maybe can see I'm not an expert in this...but I'm getting better, my intermediate result is wuite good. This game is just great!!! |
E-mail Website |
01/16/01 04:45:54 PM | |
Name: | David Chan |
Best expert: | 81 |
Best intermediate: | 29 |
Best beginner: | 5 |
Comments: | As you can see my int time is now below 30 sec and I had also get another 29 and a 30 sec shortly after I got the origional 29. |
01/16/01 03:48:27 PM | |
Name: | David Chan |
Best expert: | 81 |
Best intermediate: | 30 |
Best beginner: | 5 |
Comments: | Am I the only one who can beat 85sec in expert and can't beat 30sec in int |
01/16/01 02:04:01 AM | |
Name: | Joe Nuss |
Best expert: | 96 |
Best intermediate: | 25 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | i remember having a similar reaction to lasse's when i first broke 50. on intermediate. that's crazy, man, good job. after something like that, ive got to ask...where will the wall finally show up? what do you guys think will be the ultimate minesweeper records for intermediate and expert? im not playing at anywhere near your levels, so i cant really say. do you feel like you can shave more time off of 47, lasse? does anyone really feel like 9 is in reach in intermediate? and when will we reach these walls? congratulations, lasse. before you retire, i do have a suggestion - hone your other times down so you have a total time of under a minute. that would be pretty cool. |
01/15/01 09:05:00 PM | |
Name: | matt mcginley |
Best expert: | 81 |
Best intermediate: | 17 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | Wow, Lanyje, you must have been ecstatic! Did you let out a big yell or just sit there in silent disbelief? Another question, are you going to be playing any less now that you've broken 50? I think that would be a thought decision....to keep playing or to retire (somewhat) like Mike Lowder |
01/15/01 10:53:07 AM | |
Name: | Dan Cerveny |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 18 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Lasse, you da man. It is great that you and several others are smoking your records, but at the same time I am getting very impatient because I am stuck at 59. I think I'm even getting a bit slower lately. I am noticing myself become less efficient with my clicks, so I'm frantically trying to get back on track. |
01/15/01 06:37:22 AM | |
Name: | Andrew Washburn |
Best expert: | 80 |
Best intermediate: | 21 |
Best beginner: | 4 |
Comments: | I equalled my 21 in int. yesterday...Seems like everyone but me is improving by leaps and bounds. Then, how awesome, I broke my expert record by 3 sec. I need to take off 6 more seconds total to be on that list. Maybe if I play beginner enough, I'll get lucky like some and get a 1. I agree that some day someone will get in the single digits in int. That is the last major barrier that will ever be broken in the game though. 30's in expert is too much. 0 in beginner is impossible, so...you get the idea. |
01/14/01 08:30:13 PM | |
Name: | Lasse Nyholm |
Best expert: | see below |
Comments: | So, my dear minesweeper-brothers. I just took a 5 kilometre bikeride in minus 3 degrees celsius to find a computer with internet-access to tell you that the 50s-barrier has been defeated. It's been a strange minesweeper-day for me. I struggled with cold hands a could hardly get a sub-60, but after some hours and after getting a 51 I thought I would go to bed. Offcourse it was to tempting to keep playing and then a good board showed up. I started in the left side and went down to the corner, turned right and up, and when the lower part of the field was done I looked briefly at the clock that showed somewhere in the 20s. At this point my heart started dancing tapdance in my chest and I did my best not to get overexcited and miss a great score. So I took as few chances as possible and the white window showed with a new record. Here it is everybody - wait ....... Here it comes ..... fourty - freakin - seven 47 - 47 - 47 - 47 - 47 - 47 - 47 - 47 - 47 |
01/13/01 03:18:24 PM | |
Name: | matt mcginley |
Comments: | Thanks, just wanted to mention that just today, I broke my first mouse from too much sweeping :) |
01/13/01 02:59:38 PM | |
Name: | Damien Moore |
Comments: | Sorry 'bout that Matt. When you download you should rename the .exe part to .scr and save in WINDOWS/SYSTEM where the other screensavers are. Since it's only 62KB, redownloading will only take 5secs. Thanks for bringing that up...I'll mention it in he next update. |
01/13/01 10:49:47 AM | |
Name: | matt mcginley |
Best expert: | 81 |
Best intermediate: | 17 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | Can anyone tell me how to set that minesweeper screensaver on the home page to an actual screensaver in the screen saver menu? It works fine, but I want it to come up as a screen saver, not just when I double click on it, and then it goes away when I move the mouse. |
01/11/01 09:06:07 AM | |
Name: | jaguarz |
Comments: | Good Work!Moore! Hope you beat 12 in the near future! |
01/10/01 06:37:34 PM | |
Name: | Damien Moore |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 14!! |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | YES! I have a new int score of 14 secs...it's been four months since I got my last record. Sriram and I have been battling it out...he told me a few months ago that I was his next victim (he has been moving from the 20's down at a phenomenal speed). I didn't think 16 was beatable, but he wrote me yesterday with a 14, so I hit the game hard again and, oops, we're neck and neck now. (Wasn't pure fluke; I got two dozen 18's and 19's this week in my frenzy). Best of luck to you, Sriram, and the rest of you guys. |
01/10/01 09:34:42 AM | |
Name: | Marc Schouten |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 19 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Hey Lasse, Well done! I hope you beat 50 soon and give us all a reason to play even harder. ET: Maybe you should take a break from sweeping for a while. I hadn't played for a year when I started again last november and in less than 2 months I've taken off 6 seconds from my expert time. Of course, not playing for a while will be very hard. Maybe even harder than beating your records :) |
01/10/01 03:48:00 AM | |
Name: | et |
Best expert: | 66 |
Best intermediate: | 20 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | Gosh Matt, you must have played a damn lot of minesweeper for the past 7 months! I've been playing for years now, and progress is slow. Well, practically nil compared to you! Nice work there. |
01/09/01 04:09:23 PM | |
Name: | matt mcginley |
Best expert: | 81 |
Best intermediate: | 17 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | Hmmm, Joe, Im not sure of the exact dates and such, but I started playing around June 1, 2000, and as of November, I had 1-18-101. You're ahead of me in expert, but Im an intermediate player anyways. Hope to get 15 soon..... |
01/09/01 02:20:12 PM | |
Name: | Dan Cerveny |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 18 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Way to go, Lasse. You have been kicking some major expert caboose, lately. 40's can't be too far away if you keep up the pace of improvement. |
01/09/01 02:04:21 PM | |
Name: | Lasse Nyholm |
Best expert: | 50 |
Best intermediate: | 16 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Broke my record again - now it's 50 - it feels a little unreal. I've never broken my records as fast as I've done these last months. |
01/09/01 12:43:59 PM | |
Name: | Dan Cerveny |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 18 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Darnit, just got my fourth 59. I thought for sure I was going faster than that, but 59 just seems to be a wall for me right now. Argh. |
01/09/01 05:58:42 AM | |
Name: | Joe Nuss |
Best expert: | 96 |
Best intermediate: | 25 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | i hate to interrupt the string of immortal sweepers, but id like to post my merely human times. im pretty damn happy about these scores. now that i took 3 more off intermediate, back to expert. ive been playing seriosuly for only 5 months, too. hey matt, what were your times after 5 months? |
01/08/01 10:16:52 PM | |
Name: | Damien Moore |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 16 |
Best beginner: | 1 |
Comments: | Congrats Marc on joining the sub-minute club! Seems like 5 new people made it the last few weeks (including me). I recommend the F2 method...it lets you play more games per time, but yes, it is hypnotizing and I often click F2 on a good opening as a reflex action... |
01/08/01 08:28:31 PM | |
Name: | Marc Schouten |
Best expert: | 59 |
Best intermediate: | 19 |
Best beginner: | 3 |
Comments: | Oops... Sorry about that... Here's what I meant: Thanks, Matt. I have noticed that I'm getting more 4's and the occasional 3 now. I tried that F2-click method you mentioned, but I found that when I got a "promising" opening, I wasn't able to react quickly enough for me to get a really fast time. The constant clicking and pressing F2 is kinda hypnotizing... |