The Authoritative Minesweeper Guestbook

Feel free to chat, make suggestions, or tell your scores!


10/08/02 12:00:37 PM  
Name: Manu
Best expert: 59
Best intermediate: 12
Best beginner: 1
Comments: I’d like to let you know my opinion about what happened. I think that the way Roli played his 9 is in the logical evolution of the intermediate. First, all boards were played normally ( that’s what we suppose ). Then Matt made a record that wouldn’t have been possible without memorizing. He took advantage of the “cycles bug” to analyse in detail how to play a particular board in order to play it faster next time. He KNEW it would come one day or another, and knew how to play it then. Other people like Jon broke their record thanks to memorizing this board. Now, Roli made this 9 not only by memorizing the board but also by adapting his style to this particular board. Next step would be someone that would wait for the board BEFORE the DB. Once he knows that the following board is the DB, he could take all his time to concentrate and remember the clicks to do. After that, we could imagine that someone could put the 2 or 3 strategic mines in advance ( or even the 40 mines… ), before the timer starts, it would help not to hesitate and would allow efficient double-clicks. To avoid the “1 sec jump” that could make you miss the next WR, why not pressing “esc” before to play the game and playing it only once it’s restored ? Sorin even said that he has a program that could generate the DB. He can train to play this board 100 times or 1000 times and get a 4 or 5 sec game. The day when he will get the DB and get such a time, who will tell him he cheated ? All that would be the logical evolution of inter. The problem is that most of us would like a ranking where the first would be the most talented player, and not the more patient or the best in writing training-programs for playing the DB. I have already written my opinion about how to determine the best player in Matt’s guestbook ( follow the link ) 1 or 2 years ago. Some of what I’ve written has changed since then, but the idea of the “m” ( you’ll understand if you read ) is still the best thing to do I think. Let
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 10:47:08 AM  
Name: Jon S
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: I got the URL wrong, but this one should work.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 10:43:37 AM  
Name: Jon S
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: I'm not very good at juggling. I think I've made three or four contacts with three pieces of candy (Don't exactly know when to start the counting). I think I've got about 300 contacts with a football without using my hands. But I came here to tell you about the article I wrote yesterday. I put it up on my homepage. The contents includes something on the randomization of boards, and a "few" words that everyone that takes part in the debate about Rolands sub-10 should find interesting. I've even tried to write some constructive (?) suggestions about the future of minesweeper and the rankings in the conclusion. If you read it, feel free to write about it in the (this)guestbook. You could send me a mail too. If you do not have anything better to do, you could try to count how often I use the word "dreamboard" in the text. -Jon
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 10:19:19 AM  
Name: Elmar Zimmermann
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: that's right roli! you should read the guestbook more carefully, steffen. could have saved youself some time. by the way roli, i guess we have another hobby in common. i started juggling about two months ago. i'm pretyy good with 3 balls by now (over 1500 contacts). i began with for balls yesterday(24 contacts so far). juggling with 6 balls sounds amazing, maybe i'll be there someday Elmar
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 09:19:46 AM  
Name: Roli
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: I suppose itīs rather called the "Elmar Generator Effect"! Sorry, Steffen!
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 09:17:41 AM  
Name: Marc Schouten
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Roland: You're missing the point. The minesweeper community, since its beginnings, was built on integrity. Before vids, the only way to prove a score was by screenshot. We all know how to forge one, so basically, all we had was someone's word. Then came videos. This gave much better proof, but it's still not impossible to fake one. I think there's a fake 1-beg around and I'm sure someone that's good at video editing could slow down a video and replace the original timer with a slower one. But that's not important. What's important is that people are honest about their scores. At times, fakers were discovered and perhaps there still are some amongst us. But the overwhelming majority is honest about their scores. Of course, someone could memorize a specific board. A board different from the dream board. And he could practice it like you have. And get a very fast time. And he could probably get away with it. But that's entirely beside the point of this discussion: whether or not we should accept your record. We have always regulated ourselves. There are no rules from Microsoft, dictating what records to accept. We only have ourselves to go by. And right now, there's a division between those who think your record should be accepted and those who feel it should not because it goes against the nature of the game. If you want to convince the latter group, I suggest you don't use arguments like "anyone could do it", because you know what? We won't. Ever. I understand you want your record to count. Of course you do. And I feel for you, because I'm sure this is not how you pictured breaking the world record would be. But you have to understand that you're up against people that love this game and the competition it provides. And right now that competition is starting to fall apart.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 09:15:53 AM  
Name: Steffen Stachna
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Same with Lasses 12...
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 09:04:36 AM  
Name: Steffen Stachna
Best expert: 56
Best intermediate: 14
Best beginner: 2
Comments: Its unbelievable! I just found out, that the game just before the Dreamboard might be always the same! If you compare the 9 of Roli and Matts 10 you see exactly that! Iīll call it the "Stachna Generator Effect" *g - just kiddin! But that can say a lot. Think about it!
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 08:55:28 AM  
Name: Elmar Zimmermann
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: i just took a closer look at matt's 10s vid. the one that can be downloaded at this side(i assume that's the one that was recognized as wr). 8s after the start of the vid, he did the exact same thing that roli did. he marked a mine before he could've known it was one without knowledge of the board. he flags the mine between the two pairs of threes, which could've been just as well below the right three at that point. then he doubleclicks on the one. please, correct me if i'm wrong. but if it's true, i don't see the diffence between matt's and roli's style. roli simply marked two mines instead of one and did it more obviously. so if we accept matt's ten we should accept roli's 9. Elmar
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 08:10:32 AM  
Name: Roli
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Owen, itīs no argument to me that youīve got the DB only twice! Thatīs not my fault and youīve got other good games instead. Actually this doesnīt solve the problem! Since Mattīs 10 got accepted, the 9 is there, too! I know itīs easy to say itīs not, but where do you want to draw the border then the next time? Nobody can proof about remembering a board or not (same problem with Mattīs 10). If I wanted to I would learn the board now in that way that it is not to be detectable if itīs memorized or not (kinda similar to Mattīs 10 again and similar to my 10 without vid before!) I would play then until I have this on video and what would be the argument then? Anybody can do the same way and they will even have less suspicion now than Iīve already earned. You canīt forbid the dreamboard! Also you have to admit that the dreamboard is the best board you can get! Which means it will be almost impossible for ANYONE to actually break Mattīs record. Again: a 1 on Beginner has nothing to do with pattern recognition or logic! Nobody forbids anyone any 1! If the result of my 9 is, that Intermediate becomes more senseless like beginner well that may be the result, but that was the result sometime before with beginner, too! We still all agree, that Damien is the best Intermediate player, but anyway Matt was before him on the list! In further times, when I have lowered my expert level to an accepted standard my chances of beating the world-record again would be immensely decreased since I couldnīt play the dreamboard or shifts of it, because I cannot play them your "normal" way anymore! And this will happen to a lot of you, too! Some boards will just appear the more and more often and even if you donīt want to, this takes away logic and pattern recognition! I know itīs easy to vote on a no in such a poll, since it always makes your score better, when the other ones are lower. But please think about it before, that the problem will not be solved this way!
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 07:42:41 AM  
Name: Ben
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: I think we play this game too much... look how far we brought it
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 07:41:06 AM  
Name: Ben
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: I don't want to accept it as a Minesweeper WR either, if I consider what minesweeper should be all about. But again, the game is what it is, it does not entirely reflect what we think minesweeper is about ideally. I have problems with discarding a record after it has been set... Other people made their records partly through the same processes (probably not deliberately though). Their records aren't valid either. Try to find out which ones it are... you can't completely do that... the problem is in the game and the 9 is fair for this game, not for minesweeper as it should be... If we want to rule out board memory, then drop intermediate.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 07:11:26 AM  
Name: Owen
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Ok, I've just read most of what's lay before me in this guestbook and feel obliged to make my point of view known. I think Roli's 9 should not be accepted as a new world record. I mostly agree with Paul's and Marc's previous points. Sorry Roli; you're skilled but what you did was not in the essence of of how Minesweeper should really be played. Also, you got the board 6 times now. I've gotten it twice in over 1 year. Someone run a poll on this. Owen
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 07:04:42 AM  
Name: Ben
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: I don't think the programmers thought there would be people who would push the game so far to encounter the problem we encountered. Minesweeper is as it is. If Roli was the one smart enough to increase the probability of getting a 9 in a legal way (I mean without stopping the timer or so), that's okay. We came at a point were the intermediate limit is reached. Expert is no better than intermediate, the only difference is that it is a bigger board with more mines such that far more boards exist and the limit on this level is much harder to reach. That's why this level is the only standard level that can be trusted as to minesweeper ability. But then again, if I play tonight, make the timer stop at 53, and simply finish the game calmly, nobody would see through that. I mean: behaviorally, minesweeper is starting from scratch, finding out where the mines are, and clicking squares until all non-mine squares are open (as fast as you can). Thus, you cannot start to flag before the timer is running. You cannot stop the timer. But there are no rules that prohibit other things. The 9 is legal, but the way it was reached may not please us. Thus, an intermediate ranking would have Rolis 9 on No 1. We discovered a shortcoming of the game. Who will control if we all played by relying on speed, technique, and pattern recognition only? Nobody. If I get the DB, have a 12, it would be okay, but it would be too fast because I would have relied on memory even without wanting to. Accept the 9, but think about the game. The problem is in the game, not in the 9. And again, we may create new levels ourselves...
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 06:53:40 AM  
Name: Marc Schouten
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Oh, and by the way.. Paul: Good to see you back. Haven't seen much of you lately, around here. Still got that refreshingly confrontational style, I see
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 06:25:12 AM  
Name: Marc Schouten
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: A few thoughts... Mikael I seriously doubt that the designers of Minesweeper considered the possibility that people would find out there were board cycles. To say that it works like this and is therefore an intended feature is straining credibility. I wouldn't call it a bug, necessarily, but I would most definitely call it an unintended side effect and making use of it is not how the game was intended to play. That said, one might ask who we are to decide how a game should be played. Many people have said that Roland has simply made use of different properties of the game and therefore his record is just as valid as Matt's. They say he has the right to do so and we should accept that and move on. Perhaps. But anyone who makes such a statement will have to accept that we, as a community, have the right to reject a score that was achieved using methods that we feel are untrue to the game we play. It is a simple, undeniable fact that Roland has eliminated two of the most important characteristics from his play in that 9. Neither logic nor pattern recognition were used to get it. I say: if you're not using those two skills, you're not playing the minesweeper we've all grown to love over the years. Did Roland get the fastest time ever on Intermediate? Yes. Is that an impressive feat? Sure. But I, for one, will not accept any record list where Roland's 9 is ranked higher than Matt's 10 or Dan's and Damien's 11s (or my own 12, for that matter). Roland is not a cheater. He made creative use of a flaw in the game. I'm glad I mainly play expert, because due to all this, expert is probably going to be the only standard left...
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 05:51:55 AM  
Name: Mikael Jonker
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: The way I see it, there are two options on how the boards are generated. Either there are a set number of pre-generated boards that are displayed in a cycle (random or not), or the algorithm that generates the boards is limited to generate quite similar boards and thus increasing the chance of the same boards coming up twice. This would mean that using board rotation to your advantage can not be considered as exploiting a bug since the programmers must have known that boards would cycle. This is simply how the game was designed. Finding out exactly how the boards rotate should be easy enough, unless the cycle is completely random. You could just write a solver which records every game and reports the number of possible boards and in which order they occur. Such a program could also be used to let you skip all boards except the dream board by letting the program stop when the dream board is due. Using a program like this to only play the dream board should definitely be considered as cheating though. If Roland is not using something like this or is doing something to increase the chance of getting the dream board, I don't see any problems with his style of play. You are free to play the game in any fashion you please.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 05:22:32 AM  
Name: Paul
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: 121 has *everything* to do with logic. Period. I know the addicts group used to like polls, I suggest a fabulous new one... 'most ridiculous statement made on Damiens guestbook'. I think only one choice is required.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 05:05:06 AM  
Name: johannes
Best expert: 72
Best intermediate: 27
Best beginner: 7
Comments: hello folks i always thought (never really was into this game), minesweeper fields were randomly generated, and because of this, i have problems accepting rolis record. first of all, there should be no doubt, it is regulary achieved and should be accepted as the new world record. it is only the style, that's a thorn in my eye. i did not know of repeating boards, so roli's style seems absurd to me. but i don't claim accepting records according to my understanding of the game ;-) what roli did, was pushing himself towards the world record, with - in my opinion - no other way than doing it on the dreamboard. @ roli: don't get me wrong, of course, you are a talented player, as your other times show. but you tried to get the record, without evolving the skills you actually need to. in my opinion you should practice and than you improve your skills and times, and step by step, you get near the record-zone. don't you tell me, it was not your intention, to break the record as soon as possible by using your strategy. you didn't really hope to reach your goal on a board you did not know by heart!?! you, did it, reached your goal, but the reaction is not as you accepted it to be. more boo's than ah's. und womit? mit recht! (sorry, englishman) see the trouble you caused, only because you wanted to hold the record!! would have been a good idea not to tell anybody about your record and be satisfied with you alone to know about its possibility !! another point, i am wondering about: why have you sent your video sessions in that late? i think, it is quiet possible, you recorded your "10" on the DB, too. but only sent us a video when the record was not tied, but broken. maybe because you didn't want this discussion to start, before you actually broke the record?? sorry, in case i am totally wrong, just a thought !!
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/08/02 04:11:14 AM  
Name: Roli
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Just in short again: Getting a 1 in beginner has nothing to do with logic, neither has remembering patterns like 121 where "normal" players would still have to think about, neither has watching a video a hundred times, THEN remembering every click to go through the fastest way, which I did on my 10 for example, too. So I thought, if it is legitimate to remember each click and play why not spare two clicks this time and do the same?! I didnīt know about any cycles, I just hoped to get it by chance and time. Same what everyone else could have done. I also wonder that no interjection came until to my 6th dreamboard. You could have told me then that you think itīs cheating to get a board by chance more than twice.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 10:49:52 PM  
Name: Lance Votroubek
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: ...5-7 months with this being his full intention, while Matt had been playing more than 1 1/2 years 'legitimately' before his 10 (a very rough guess at Matt's career to that point). There is really only one true way to make this go away... someone needs to get a 9 or 8 on a non-dreamboard (or rather not THE dreamboard). Any takers? Dan? Matt? Damien? Me ? Happy sweeping, all! Lance
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 10:43:58 PM  
Name: Lance Votroubek
Best expert: 58
Best intermediate: 16x3 (none dreamboard!)
Best beginner: 1
Comments: In a pseudo-response to Keith, I remember that someone (I think David Berry) did a very interesting experiment on that exact topic some time ago... right around the time of Matt's 10. I guess I hope David will re-post his results - but not the methods, because I remember there was some consternation about them - in the hope of filling in some newer people about the "random" board generator. I have let the people speak who are much better than I at Intermediate (Matt, Dan, Damien, Marc, Owen, etc.) before I chose to weigh in, and I have also watched the video a few times, so I feel I can voice my own personal opinion now. I think that Roli's "record" is like a circus freakshow. It was completely planned out and manipulates certain aspects of the game in his advantage in order to make the crowd go "ooh" and "aah". His video reminds me of another game... mole-bopping. Suggesting that the player gets points (an accepted world record) for hitting the mole with the little padded bat before it even comes up (marking mines before logic suggests) is just rediculous. By manipulating the fact that the game has a board regeneration "bug", he is able to get the best board almost whenever he wants. It only took him a few days to use this bug to get the board AGAIN and record his 9 second game. That's not minesweeper, it's manipulation. However, his video does prove that even faster speeds are achieveable (with Matt's 10, we all knew 9 was possible, but even 8 now looks doable). I suggest that the 9 be half-accepted, meaning it be 9*, with the * meaning that it was achieved using very questionable methodology (yes, Americans, similar to Roger Maris' 61*, even though that was a crock of shit and this might be, too). That way you could list Matt's 10 and Roli's 9 side by side and let people decide for themselves. Which also begs the quesiton... is Roli's 10 acceptable? It was achieved with the same methodology, and he's only been playing for 5-7 months with
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 09:16:41 PM  
Name: Keith Whitener
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: I didn't realize the boards cycled so often. Can someone corroborate this? If they do, and memorizing their order is a reasonable task, then I see nothing wrong with your argument, Paul. However, we must remember that for every unique intermediate board, there are at least 40 variants, accounting for the fact that the first click cannot reveal a mine. Then, if we have even 100 distinct boards (a conservative number for the game, given the actual number of permutations), this leads to 4000 variants. Then I'd be inclined to say that anyone who memorizes the order of a possible 4000 boards deserves to have their world record (even 100 seems pretty darn good to me). Granted, someone could click the same square every time and just hit f2 for a restart; also, if the boards have a regular cycle, one could count the number of times between each dreamboard and simply wait until the dreamboard popped up again. Then you're exactly right. However, I don't know the specifics of the board generator so I can't really evaluate your argument objectively just yet. Maybe someone could lay out the statistics of the program (regular cycles, whether there are cycles within cycles, number of boards possible with the generator) so that we can make accurate judgments about this problem. I appreciate any insight you guys can give me. keith
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 07:56:01 PM  
Name: Paul
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Gah. Amazing lack of a point there. Bug abuse, aka cheating, can be part of no legitimate claim on any game. I would have to conceed that if board cycling was purposefully introduced to the Minesweeper program, with the express intention of allowing people to memorize boards (and the order they come in), to achieve ridiculously fast times, to be able to ignore the games obvious logic premise, then to the guy who made the game, that 9 is certainly a genuine world record. However, in the real world, this isn't a gray area. It is black and white. There is *no* difference between waiting for the board before the dream board, and marking every mine before starting (the dreamboard, that is), than there is to marking just a couple using prior knowledge while going through the game. There is no difference between that, and having a specific plan, for a specific board (especially when it can be predicted when it will arrive). It is simply not what Minesweeper is about.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 07:04:12 PM  
Name: Keith Whitener
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Let's remember that, and I'm quoting from the Minesweeper Help Topics Menu, "The object of Minesweeper is for you to determine where all the mines are as quickly as possible without uncovering any of them." This is all it says. Nothing more. In this case, the game timer is irrelevant and all times should be measured objectively. Sort of like the discrepancy in Stephan's 66 video and Yoni's 64 video, even though that apparently had more to do with the difference in computer speeds than any internal bug. Also, if poker is more about "playing the man" than "playing the hand," then should minesweeper be more about "playing the program" than playing the actual game? Sure, Roland's style of playing is rather unorthodox (and it contradicts the idea of minesweeper as a purely logical game), but memorizing a board is a pretty formidable feat in itself. I'm still trying to think of a practical way to reconcile this. I do like the idea of taping the entire playing session to evaluate top sweepers, but I also understand the impracticality of this. More to come later. peace keith
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 05:17:58 PM  
Name: Paul
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Bleh, what a fabulously dull few days here. A style of play designed to take advantage of game bugs is cheating. Only a fool would agree that the repeating board syndrome is not a bug. If it is about what the timer says at the end, and has nothing to do with game bugs, then all ye who have 1 second games with timer freezes, congratulations, you're 43 times faster than Lasse on expert... be proud. All bug abuse is cheating. Regardless of what the timer says at the end, cheated games have no value. That a bug exists, and normal play will lead to board repetition is a slightly different matter, clearly. Mind you, what hope, for a 'community' that uses 1-click beginner boards to compare ability... hmm, infact, uses the beginner level at all. And a note to Damien, I'd *still* not mind having my scores removed from your lists. I'm assuming at least some of my reasons are clear?
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 04:38:03 PM  
Name: Envious One
Best expert:
Best intermediate: less than others
Best beginner:
Comments: Best argument I ever read!Iīm stunned by this genie-like almost sentence! I wonder if he deserves your attention, oh Mr. nice one?
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 04:19:17 PM  
Name: Nice One
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Youīre an asshole!
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 03:17:54 PM  
Name: Roli
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Elmar: About a week or two serious playing doing nothing else! Sure it would be faster now, but only if you donīt play any other non-dreamboard! Boooring! And by the way! Youīre crazy! Go to bed, man! Marc: Iīm sorry, it wasnīt meant like this! Damien: I think I play since March, or April as an addict! But I do this with everything I start! I practice until I think Iīm somewhere, where it is very hard to beat me and start the next hobby then! At the moment I practice juggling with 6 balls for example! I plan to stop at seven!
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 03:05:45 PM  
Name: damien
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: hey roli...how long have you been playing? my advance hasn't been particularly fast; actually, i think i've advanced a bit slower than the average serious player here (especially lukasz and matt and sorin). on int i've gone from 19 to 11 in 2 years 4 months (with a 6 month break in there) and it is now 4 months later. i will admit i think it's easier for newer people to advance quickly because others before have shown that's it's possible (lasse quit at 53 because he thought that was close to the limit and his success has motivated the rest of us), but 3 months to hit 9 rocks the boat.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 02:45:24 PM  
Name: Marc Schouten
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Errm.. Roland, I think you're ruffling quite a few feathers when you say that it wasn't easy to get that 9 because it took you a few months. Many of us spent years to get to the level where a 9 even becomes possible. Intermediate *has* lost a lot of its significance, just *because* it's possible for someone to spend a few months on it and get a 9. If you want to get your record acknowledged, I suggest you use valid arguments.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 02:11:36 PM  
Name: Elmar Zimmermann
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: talking about addict. i'm taking my forediploma in thermodynamics tomorrow morning at 8 and i'm sitting here at 11 pm local time writing about minesweeper. roli, how long did it usually take you to get the dreamboard. with my described method it would probably only take a third of that time. plus you don't really have to pay attention at all times. so that makes it easier i assume. ok that's it for now. i gotta go to bed!
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 01:58:02 PM  
Name: Roli
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Yeah, now that Iīve got the time from Intermediate and with my 2 this period also from beginner, Iīm pretty near at breaking my expert record, I think! I just never spent more than half an hour a day on exp.! The problem: I got to know today that my forediploma in chemistry is scheduled in 8 days! Wuaah! Thatīs not much time for a minesweeper-addict! And one more thing: I find it a bit sad that everyone says now that Intermediate makes no sense anymore! Believe me it wasnīt that easy to get that 9! After all it took me a few months to reach it! Every well-played Intergame, and especially on non-DB, should still be honoured, since we all know how hard this game is! Thx, Roli!
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 01:45:49 PM  
Name: Elmar Zimmermann
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: roli: from what you wrote i suppose you kept clicking on the spaces where the two openings are on the dreamboard. you don't have to send me your directors cut. i believe you when you say you didn't know the dreamboard was coming up. but still, people could do what a described earlier or what you just mentioned. i think this would be the end of int. fortunately i don't think we will have the same problem with expert. 1. there are a lot more possible different boards, so the cycles should be longer. people won't wait that long for a certain game to come. 2. it's much harder to recognize an exp board 3. " " " " memorize " " " so i'm confident that minesweeper will stay alive.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 01:44:22 PM  
Name: James
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: One thing is clear from all of this: we should have thought of all this a long time ago. Lets not wait too long before we come to some kind of consensus about the ethical guidelines of our game, and how they will be enforced, so that we don't have to go through this again. (I do not think that anyone will disagree with this statement) Matt: you said that you brought up "the exact same argument I brought up for myself when I had a score of 72 when I got the 10". Now that you have the 51 do you feel that the 10 is more legit? If you say yes than, within that framework, all Roli needs to do in order to made the 9 legitimate is to lower his exp time. (If you have not noticed, I am trying to trap you into saying either that the 9 is completely legit or that your 10 is not legit; I don't expect that you will though)
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 01:17:16 PM  
Name: Elmar Zimmermann
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: maybe taking the middle of 5 times doesn't make much sense in terms of world records. on the ohter hand i think it does make sense if you want to rank players. i do think that a person who can get 5 14s is a better player than a person with 4 15s(or probably even worse) and maybe on lucky game. perhaps we have to come up with a new system. a list of world records which may include the (DB) idea and a ranking of players which includes more than just one board. but then again the whole thing only concerns int and not exp. i have to agree, we certainly have a problem here.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 01:14:43 PM  
Name: Roli
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Itīs not true Elmar! It looks to me as if my right opening click on the board before wasnīt accepted by the game, as it happens often to me. But you can definitely see that I wasnīt knowing the DB to show up on my "Directorīs Cut Video!" Shall I send it to you? But what you have found out brings bad possibilities along! With my vid I could trace back to about 10 games before the dreamboard, evtl. backup my Minesweeper.exe and then play the dreamboard whenever I want to by replacing my exe-file everytime after I played it! I guess this could probably work! Also, if Intermediate games come in big cycles probably Prof. will do the same! I think Iīve already recognized a game in prof. as already played, too! I just hope Minesweeper stays alive!
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 12:32:58 PM  
Name: Steffen Stachna
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: May be that there are Boards one can memorize;but there is certainly no board which to play on and to memorize is as simple as the dream board. Just taking the middle of the 5 best times makes it stupid also. Whats a 12 then, when you got 4 15s? A 14,4? And then 5 14s are better than a 12? Argh! Think weīve got a prob. What about putting screenshots next to the active ranking, so everyone can see, what the other had achieved?
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 11:52:55 AM  
Name: Elmar Zimmermann
Best expert: 66
Best intermediate: 19
Best beginner: 2
Comments: but is it true that you did know the dreamboard was coming up? or was it just coincidence that you clicked on the right opening on the dreamboard. although you didn't do that on the board before. i think it's an important aspect if you knew the board in advance. i think it doesn't help much if you write (DB) behind the record. i have similar times on the other levels as roland and i think i could get a low time on int that way. like everyone else could. and besides there are other good board which one could memorize, so that isn't worth much. i find the idea of taking the average of times on 5 different board a much better solution if we want the int record to keep its meaning. otherwise it would be just as meaningless as the beg. Elmar
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 11:36:55 AM  
Name: Matt
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Damien, I never had a 12 for a record, much less on the dreamboard. I missed it once, then got a 14 with it, then got a 10 later. James, Your argument of "what if Roland sub-50's...will his 9 then be more legitimate?" Is the exact same argument I brought up for myself when I had a score of 72 when I got the 10. Check the archive; I used those exact words.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 11:12:38 AM  
Name: Roli
Best expert: 67 (158)
Best intermediate: 9 (DB)
Best beginner: 2 (4)
Comments: I didnīt work like this, though itīs not bad finding out about stuff like this! Well, actually it is bad, because this fact to my mind really kills Intermediate! But I still have my uncut video of the session, which shows that I didnīt cheat that way! By the way: I do like Steffens way as a possible solution! Regards, Roli!
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 11:03:20 AM  
Name: Elmar
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: if you take a look at rolands vid, i think it's pretty obvious how he increases his chances of getting the dreamboard. on roland's vid the board before the dreamboard is the same as the one on matt's 10sec vid. this board has a large significant opening in the top left corner. so i think roland's method or at least a possible method is this: you put the cursor in the top left corner and keep hitting the left mouse and the F2 button until ou get that particular opening. pretty dull, but it works! that way you already now that you're getting the dreamboard before you start the board itself. i don't think that is the true intention of the game. you could also take roland's method one step further and already mark the board in advance, since that doesn't start the timer. people could still argue that this is part of the game and not cheating. but i really don't think times earned like this should be accepted to neither the world records nor the active ranking. the ultimate question is: how do we keep people from doing it anyway? i don't think we can really prevent it, but we could make it a lot harder. from now on a simple video of only the one board with the record won't be proof enough. i suggest that we have people record the entire session(at least on intermediate). that way you can see if the person is really playing minesweeper or just waiting for a certain memorized board to come. we do have that ability with the new 3BV program and i say we should use it. ok, that's my opinion on this issue. tell me what you think about it. Elmar
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 08:50:44 AM  
Name: Steffen Stachna
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: What about writing the 3bv behind the int score -in the active rankings at least- and in addition to that if it is the dreamboard a "DB" or so? Just like Score 2-15-60 ;3bv 5-36-136 or Score 2-9-60 ; 3bv 5-DB-140...
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/07/02 07:27:02 AM  
Name: Roelof Smit
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: OK, Roland explained the thing to me via e-mail. Formally, there's nothing wrong with the way he plays, but nevertheless I feel it's not fair. I can't explain why, but after this, I don't see the point of playing intermediate anymore. Something must be done about this problem, but at the moment I don't have any suggestions.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 11:48:09 PM  
Name: Keith Whitener
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Maybe a committee of sorts could be formed. You know, to determine what the "spirit" and the object of minesweeper really is, and from there they can determine some pretty airtight rules for world records as well as for competitions as August suggests. Just a thought. Minesweeper will yet make politicians and philosophers of us all. keith
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 07:38:33 PM  
Name: August
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: interesting... the first internet olympics are coming up... if a foolproof online clone of minesweeper was made along with fairly elaborate rules for competition and submitted to the committee, i believe minesweeper could be an event. ideas for competition... each contestant gets an hour with the option of playing either the expert, int., or beg. board and the best combined total from the three after an hour of play is the score... any other ideas? i believe if many sweepers entered a competition like this we could settle a lot of beef on this board.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 05:04:42 PM  
Name: damien
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: i find this whole event disheartening. it was quite a blow when matt got his 10 on the dreamboard and i remember the controversy...i was reluctant to accept his score for the site; the main points against it being it was his 3rd record on the dreamboard (14, 12, then 10), that he was too new to the game to have earned such a rank, and that he had probably memorized it. the defense is that the board appeared randomly and was not 'played for', a strategy had not been worked out, and the majority of sweepers were in favour of accepting it. it's also to be remembered that the previous world record (by Gernot Stania) was also a personal repeat of the board (he had a 15 then the 12), but at that time no one had known that boards repeated and it was not recognized until later that the boards were idenical. admittedly, one problem i have with the board is the selfish one; i have nearly 3000 sub-20's and my stats are considerably better than roli's, yet he has severely curtailed my ability to hold the int record. the only way to solve something like this is a mixture of lasse's suggestion, identification of the 5 or 6 dream boards (including the shift i got my 11 on - albeit i didn't recognize it at the time), a listing of stats for the ranked players or something else. the main issue here is a lack of foresight among us in setting up standards for this community. i particularly respect those involved in the 3bv project, and as soon as it works on all systems i think it should become a standard download and could be included beside the scores in the rankings. i would encourage the creation of an official minesweeper game. i don't want to declare on opinion on the 9 for now, just to put out some ideas.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 03:44:29 PM  
Name: James
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Lets not get carried away. While expert is obviously the best sign of skill, a person with say 500 sub-20s is obviously a very good sweeper, regardless of whether their best is 10 or 14. Like Dan said before, he got his 11 on an unknown board. This is an obvious sign of superb skill and should not be overlooked because of the new record.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 03:17:20 PM  
Name: Lasse Nyholm
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: hey guys - to get you to think of something else I've prepared a nice little dish of 5 sub-47s for you, including my new 43, a nice little sweety with a 3BV of 129. So, no need to go to Blockbuster today - enjoy. - Lanyjé
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 02:42:27 PM  
Name: Steffen Stachna
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: I ve just added rolis 9 sec video to the yahoo groups! Happy memorizing!
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 02:02:38 PM  
Name: Manu
Best expert: 59
Best intermediate: 12 (12!)
Best beginner: 1
Comments: Back from a little week-end, and a bit sad, I must say, to see what happened in the past 2-3 days. I feel like the int level was dead and meaningless. I've always Known that the game would evoluate ( die ? ) like that one day. Just read what I wrote 18 months ago in my profile on Matt's site about the way to get a sub-10. I'd like you to send me your video Roland, thanks. I'll give you my opinion about all this after watching it. But it seems clear that the expert is now the only level that really shows the skill of a player, in terms of pattern recognition, speed and efficiency.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 01:57:31 PM  
Name: Roelof Smit
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Holy shit... I haven't got time to read all the messages, but I'd like to know one thing: Roland, do you have a method to get the dreamboard more than others? Because, if you do, I won't accept your 9 for the Active Ranking -unless the community thinks truly different. I can't remember getting the dreamboard even once, and I think it is not fair that someone (whatever his other scores are) can get it several times. If we would accept it, the meaning of an intermediate world record is 0. Maybe you answered my question already, but as I said, I don't have time to read it all now. By the way: a great man died today. Prince Claus, Holland loved and loves you. Rest in peace.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 01:53:46 PM  
Name: Keith Whitener
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Thanks for the correction, guys. Anyone know where I can get that video? I've been searching everywhere and can't find it.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 01:31:52 PM  
Name: Stephan
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Roland didn't flag before starting. But while playing, he flagged two squares which could only be flagged successfully with knowing where the mines are situated, as, at the moment of flagging, no surrounded squares were uncovered. Therefore, there is not even any guessing at all, but even a strategic sequential solving of the dreamboard without unnecessary clicks. That can't be called cheating. I think we should return slowly to everyday's life. Every player should decide for himself if he plays boards randomly (with the hope of eventually getting a really fast board) or just searches his favourite board (with changing his playing strategy to optimize times on that board). Using the first way, everyone probably can reach Lasse's dimensions of playing speed of EVERY board. That's my goal as well (respectively reaching Eduardo and Vincent in our nf style).
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 12:56:47 PM  
Name: Steffen Stachna
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: May be Roli could upload it here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/minesweeper-addicts/
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 12:54:53 PM  
Name: Steffen Stachna
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Dont know what you mean. Actually he didnt flag before the timer started. He started normally without flagging.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 12:44:17 PM  
Name: Keith Whitener
Best expert: 95
Best intermediate: 24
Best beginner: 3
Comments: Wow, it's been a while since I checked the guestbook, and apparently a lot of things have happened. So without further ado... In the past month or so, the theory behind the game of minesweeper has seen many changes and improvements. Lanyje set a new expert world record with his 43 (brilliant), Stephan formulated his 3BV model for checking fast boards, and, most recently (and at the heart of the present controversy) Roland broke Matt's intermediate score, getting a 9 on the "dreamboard." Which leads us to the question: is memorizing a board cheating? Given the limited number of boards that the random generator can make, if played enough, all boards will regenerate in time. This leads me to believe that memorizing a board is not cheating; it simply points to a new skill that may or may not eventually dominate the world of intermediate minesweeper. However, Roland's memorizing the "dreamboard" is not what bothers me about his playing. Rather, the fact that he flagged two squares before he began seems to me to be more questionable. Technically, once you begin working on a board, whether the timer has started or not, you are playing a game. Hence, at least for now, it seems that his score on intermediate should include the time it took him to flag the two squares before he began. This argument is counter-intuitive though. Roland makes a good point when he says that one should take advantage of the bugs in the program. After all, if flagging before the timer starts was written into the program, shouldn't taking such an action be considered a legal play? I leave this question up to the true experts because, at present, the only correction that I see for this is to rewrite the program so that the timer begins as soon as any action (flagging or clearing) is taken on the board. Your opinions? peace kids, keith
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 11:34:59 AM  
Name: Stephan
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: And I think, intermediate level will lose lots of its tension. Unfortunately, as I still hate losing expert games after clearing 3/4 of the board. I will continue playing intermediate just for my personal improvement.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 10:58:23 AM  
Name: Stephan
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Lanyjé, I think that your xx (xx) suggestion wouldn't help a lot. There are other dreamboards, not called so so far, but as easy playable as the original one. Dan's 11 or some of the known shifts of the dreamboard could serve as "standard record breaking boards".
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 10:16:46 AM  
Name: James
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Sorin: Sorry if I offended you. I do not mean to say that you are a cheater, just that Roland is not. I was just saying that for Roland he probably played thousands of games, not knowing whether the next game would be a dreamboard or not. He has never practiced the board, only examined it and, yes, memorized it. If you play the board thousands of times in a row until you can play it unconsciously then that is cheating. Yesterday I tried to enter a measage, but for some reason was not successful. Its main points were: About Matt's point that Rolandd is not an elite sweeper with a expert score of 67. This is an obvious argument, but a dangerous one. We have all seen that Roland is certainly a determined sweeper, and also a very talented onee (2x15 and 67 are not poor times). I guarantee that before long his expert score will drop. What if he gets a sub-60? would that somehow make the 9 more legitimate? What if he joins that select group of truly elite players and gets a sub-50? Would this make the 9 totaly legit? Dan: I have to agree that your 11 on an unknown board, and I think Matt said he had a missed 10 on an unknown, is far more impressive that the 9 (with your 46 being even more so). All I am worried about is Roland being considered a cheater, which he is not. I think that a new intermediate level is not totaly absurd. Even if we made it 41 or 39 mines wouldn't that make all new boards? (I guess we would eventually find a dreamboard.) This could be used only for the AR.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 10:07:59 AM  
Name: Lasse Nyholm
Best expert: 43
Best intermediate: 12 (13)
Best beginner: 1
Comments: I suggest that on recordlists, a person who has his record on the dreambord, will have his record from a non-dreamboard next to it, as shown above. Then it's up to people to judge, who's the better player. Besides that I don't want to comment on the situation, since I haven't had high thoughts about intermediate since Gernot got his 12. - Lanyjé
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 09:45:10 AM  
Name: Roli
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: The problem is simply: There is something like the dreamboard and there are ways to get it! But does that have to be my problem?!
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 09:34:10 AM  
Name: Matt
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: I missed a 10 that wasnt on the dreamboard...
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 08:45:54 AM  
Name: Sorin
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: I didn't claimed a 5s int record. I only said it can be done and I did it on another game. I never thought of asking to be recognized. It would be ridiculous because my actual record is 14 and 5 is more than 3 times faster(if you don't count the first second). But yes, it can be done. I don't even know what to do if I get the dreamboard now. Play it as fast as possible or play it the normal way and get a lower score? James, I don't see why that is cheating. I'm not playing to get the dreamboard. I just did that to check the lowest possible score. From now on int world record does not mean a thing to me while it's on the dreamboard.. (it was the same with Matt's 10 in fact) and it seems it will be like this forever
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 08:34:46 AM  
Name: Dan
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: I think it was James that said Roland's 9 is just as valid as my missed 10. For the record, my knowledge of the dreamboard is limited to general layout. I know there are four sub-areas to clear; upper right, middle, lower left, and one square in the upper left. I've played the dreamboard in the same natural way each of the five or so times I remember getting it. Just watch the video of my missed 10 and you can see my style is no different from any other intermediate game I have played. I realize I will tend to recognize the board earlier and earlier each time I get it, and I can't do anything about that, but I purposely avoid studying any intermediate screenshots or videos so I can keep my games as fair as possible. Even if players start passing me on the records list by memorizing boards, I'm proud of the fact that if records could only be made on boards we've never seen before, my first 11 would be the record.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 05:08:12 AM  
Name: Roli
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: I donīt know, Matt, if itīs easier to cheat in Intermediate, because I do not cheat! Neither do I use bugs to my advantage! It canīt be a bug that many as good boards appear every now and then! Itīs purpose, otherwise Microsoft wouldnīt have "invented" the dreamboard! But itīs true: Itīs easier to use memory skill to improve your time in Intermediate than in expert! And thatīs something where you have been taking advantage of, too! Think about it!
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 04:14:30 AM  
Name: Ben
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: I didn't care to read ALL of the things posted on the 9, but I do think to remember that when Matt got his 10, people were also saying that he knew were the mines are and that some parts were played not only by pattern recognition and stuff but also from memory. I believe that Matt said that was true. Am I correct here? I don't want to make a statement here, it's just something I remember. And maybe there is still a difference between remembering a board and memorizing it. But I haven't got a clear-cut opinion about this. In any case, what happened caused justified questions about the usefulness of the intermediate level as far as (world) records go. Also, people were saying that expert level is the only true measure of a minesweeper's ability, but we should not forget that we can create new levels by ourselves if we would like that. It's not because beg, int and exp are the standard ones, that no other level could be created. I know, however, that only people who know that records are kept for new levels may play those levels. But people who would visit our sites would know though.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 04:12:46 AM  
Name: Roland
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: In short: Why not accept Sorinīs 5? Because he didnīt play it on Minesweeper! He played a different game, which I didnīt! Iīd like to thank David, Dave and James for writing down all the arguments I had in mind.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/06/02 02:53:26 AM  
Name: Steffen Stachna
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: If we accept Rolis 9 why not even Sorins 5? May be there is even a way to configure exp like one wants to. I think if in the next A.R. one of these times are in, there are 2 different games in that list. Minesweeper - Memory. If we do not find a solution for it i would probably not compare my times with anyone and play alone again.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 07:55:34 PM  
Name: David Barry
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Quoting Matt from the guestbook archive: "I did NOT memorize that board. I did not sit down one night and remember all the spaces and patterns. I watched my 14 video so many times....With each viewing, I noticed more slip-up's then previously and grew more and more discontent with my playing. Incidentally, I corrected those mistakes subconsciously and consciously, like everybody does when they watch a video and see a mistake. Going with the denotation of the word, "memorize", I most certainly did not. And lastly, after watching my 10 video, I realize that especially without a timer jump, 9 is possible. But it's someone else's turn to get that board, and maybe a 9." Whether you had the intention of memorising the dreamboard or not Matt, you did, and at the same time you worked out the most efficient way of sweeping it, which led to the 10. Roland did the same thing, only explicitly intended to. The result was the same - a memorised board with a memorised way of sweeping it. That'll be all from me today, flame away.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 07:39:28 PM  
Name: David Barry
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Heh, whilst I was slowly typing that message, James, Dan and Matt all posted. Now let me bring in some purely irrational, personal prejudice. If Minesweeper times come down to expert alone, what a wonderful thing that would be! While at some point I recognised that the int. playing style is different and as equally valid as expert, I never really liked seeing int. get equal importance, probably because I never learned how to play int. properly. This debate also brings up something we discussed and eventually discarded as being impractical, the idea of using the average of your 5 best times (obviously now it would be with the catch that each time be on a different board).
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 07:30:18 PM  
Name: David Barry
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Dave, you beat me to it, I was about to make similar comments myself. The world record for intermediate is now 9, whether we like it or not. There isn't much we can do about this, just as we can't do anything about Matt also memorising the board and scoring a 10. The only difference between the methods in Roland's 9 and Matt's 10 is that Roland flagged two mines before starting in the hope of getting the dreamboard, which gave him ~1sec advantage. (I haven't actually seen the video, so forgive me if there are other differences.) After this, there is no difference - Matt knew precisely where he wanted to click, just as Roland did. Now, let me try another, probably dead-end argument for the hell of it. If you click on a mine with the first click, that mine is transferred to the top-right corner. Therefore, you could theoretically gain a small advantage by flagging the top-right corner before the timer starts. It only has to give you say 0.2 sec to reduce the time by a second if you're lucky with the timer (assuming of course that that square is indeed a mine). Is this acceptable? I see it as little different from flagging a couple of mines on the dreamboard before the timer starts. Also remember that we sort of agreed (after much discussion) that while Matt had the world record after his 10, Damien remained the world's best int. player, because of his greater consistency. I say that now, Roland is the world record holder, but certainly isn't the #1 int. player.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 07:22:34 PM  
Name: Matt
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: continuation... ... Roland's score on int. leads people to believe he is an elite sweeper, when in fact, his 67 is far from elite (no offense). This discrepancy is what will eventually probably push the true test of the game to be expert and expert alone.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 07:20:27 PM  
Name: Matt
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: I have to say that yes I was familiar with the board by the time I got the 10, but I had certainly not devised an ideal playing srategy as Roland explicity stated he has. Sure, I knew the locations of the mines well (notably in the upper right corner) and gained some time simply with familiarity but I only played the board from memory of experience, not planned action or drilling of the scenario. As for the evolution of the game, we are definitely developing new ways to excell but I dont think these ways are good for the game. With the current trend, rankings will be devoted entirely to expert simply because no one has yet to, and probably will not, catch a repeat board cycle, much less a single repeat board. I think a fitting analogy is a test high schoolers take here in the US called the SAT. It is a basic test that ascertains your ability to solve problems in math and verbal areas and is one of the biggest factors colleges look for in admissions. Lately, classes promising a 100-point improvement in score have been springing up all over the place and other classrooms have adopted the practice of teaching the best methods to taking the test, rather than the content covered on the test. This is analogous to strategizing how to play the dreamboard, rather than just playing. Recently, SAT scores have been on the rise, due, in major part to better preparation (or, rather, more preparation). Those who know the strategy for taking the test score higher than they would just by taking it "normally" (i.e question by question in order). Roland has developed a super-standard preparation program and has suceeded where others have failed. Yes, sounds good, but as people continually score higher and higher on the SAT, it becomes meaningless; your end score begins to be less representative of your actual ability. Likewise, sweepers with true, unadulterated ability like Dan, Lasse, Lukasz, etc. can now be looked at as sub-par on the intermediate scale. Roland's scor
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 07:08:18 PM  
Name: Dan
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Dave: "It means that the game is evolving..." Are you serious??? Evolving to cheating is ok with you??? I sure hope this view is not widespread among the readers of this guestbook.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 07:07:32 PM  
Name: James
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: I think that Roland's 9 is just as valid as Matt's 10 or Dan's missed 10. Matt, Dan (and others, even myself) know the dreamboard well and know how to play it well. Personally, the only thing that I do not like about the way Roland plays is that I could not do it as well as he does. I think that the only problem anyone has with this new record is that while we all knew someone would do it eventually, we all hoped that it would never happen. Well, it has happened and one day it will be a 8 and maybe even a 6. Like it or not, that is just the way that intermediate has always been (Roland is just the first to take advantage). Matt: I can find no justification for your assertion that clicking in the same spot every time is cheating. I start each game the same way (withing a few squares or so). The only thing that makes this "cheating" (besides the fact that it beat your record) is that Roland is looking for a certain board. If you truly feel that this is cheating I propose that record vids include the 10 games previous to the record game in order to make sure that each game was started differently and that the player was not looking for a certain board. (Obviously this is absurd and so is the notion that Roland is a cheater.) Sorin: I can't help but think that creating a program that allows one to practice certain boards is cheating. If anyone disagrees witth me then....well....then I guess I want a copy of that program so that I can practice my patern recognition. Oh yeah, and my board recognition too. That would be cheating. Roland does not know when the next one is coming; he cannot practice; Roland is not a cheater! I do enjoy controversy.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 06:28:33 PM  
Name: Dave McBryan
Best expert: 61
Best intermediate: 17
Best beginner: 2
Comments: I can't help thinking that a lot of people's complaints with Roland's 9 applied to Matt's 10 at the time aswell. When he first tried to defend that against sceptics, his main argument was that he had watched his earlier dreamboard video (12 or 14, I can't remember) so many times that he knew the board by heart. That was accepted, so I think this should be too. (Any quibble I have would be with the circumspect way in which the evidence was produced) Yes, it does take away from the logical aspect of the game, but it merely continues an onward trend in that direction. To not allow it would be akin to disallowing 1 second beginner games because players just went click-F2-click-F2-click-F2 until getting lucky. If someone has the patience, persistence, and all-round dullness to do that (or the intermediate equivalent), good luck to them. It means that the game (like all games and sports) is evolving, and techniques to master it evolve with it. Allow me to present another analogy: Chess. In modern times, both the openings and endgames of chess are deeply computer analysed and increasingly understood. There is an argument that at the highest level, the human involvement in chess is restricted to an ever decreasing portion of the middle game. Does this mean that todays grandmasters are not as good as former ones? No, they are demonstrably better. Does it decrease the enjoyment and challenge of the game for those who are not masters? Not in the least. Does it mean that reaching the top in chess requires different skills to what it did 50 years ago? Of course. Should analysis be banned and a 'back to basics' approach instituted? Utterly impractical... Need I say more?
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 04:43:08 PM  
Name: Stephan
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Sorin, I think, it would be better not to publish that video. We should try to keep "normal" combinations like 2-15-55.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 04:26:05 PM  
Name: sorin
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Should I put on the net a video of a 5 on dreamboard so anyone can see how to get world records? I think it's a bit dangerous. Then we would have scores like 1-5-70.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 04:09:11 PM  
Name: Floeren
Best expert:
Best intermediate: 31
Best beginner:
Comments: And a silly game it is, but great are those who have the skills to go faster than their own dreams!
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 04:06:05 PM  
Name: Matt
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: One more... I most certainly do not agree with you saying that playing the dreamboard to get a world record is a distinct style of play. But to your credit, we do have to accept the fact that boards come and go in cycles and some people are just blessed with better cycles than others. Its part of the game.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 04:02:43 PM  
Name: Matt
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: also, I most definitely do not agree with your style of clicking in the same spots of the openings on the dreamboard every game. I would consider that cheating.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 04:01:47 PM  
Name: Matt
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Roland, Your statement of, "That's why intermediate is called intermediate and expert is called expert" as well as the preceding explanation can be summed up as you saying, "intermediate is easier to cheat on than expert"
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 03:59:18 PM  
Name: Marc Schouten
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Ah, yes, that's right. You got a 14. Damn, that means I'm down a rung again I should really get working on my records. That 51 has been bugging me for way too long.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 03:55:04 PM  
Name: Sorin
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Correction Marc. I'm on 7th place and i got 14 Got 5 on my dreamboard player. could you please send me Roland's video Marc.. or Roland?
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 03:44:35 PM  
Name: Marc Schouten
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: In response to a few things you say, Roland: >I will use logic, speed and patterns like everyone! At the dreamboard I just use less of it!. From looking at your video, I can only come to the conclusion that you use memory and speed, not logic, speed and patterns. Of course you used logic and pattern recognition when you first played that board. And probably for the next few times as well. It's when you memorized the board and figured out where to click and flag exactly that you abandoned logic and patterns. >If you care about the purity of Minesweeper instead, itīs up to you how to play! Very true. And that's what I do and will continue to do as long as I'm playing this silly game. >If you just play for your own record on skill, why care about a worldrecord? I'll tell you why. We care for a world record because it helps us improve ourselves. It sets a goal for us. Very few of us will reach it, but the fact that it's there and that it can only be reached by playing the game as well as you possibly can drives us. If there's a way that the record can be beaten using entirely different techniques than the ones we've been honing for so long, the drive disappears. That's why we care about the world record. >I didnīt write "I use strategy, bugs, etc.!" I wrote "Minesweeper is strategy, bugs, etc.!" I meant this, because you have to deal with minesweeper including all possibilities and all bugs! Without a bug, I would have a 1 already, too, but hey, thatīs minesweeper!! There's a big difference between dealing with bugs and using bugs to one's advantage. >If you care about a world record representing EVERY ability needed for this game, just look at expert, where the kings are! I think all the "Kings" agree that both Int and Exp are needed to become a truly complete sweeper. On Matt's top 20, of the top 7, only one (Lukasz) has an int score higher than 12.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 03:33:08 PM  
Name: Sorin
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Ok, ok but where can i see the video? Marc you got it on mail? I never got the dreamboard and i don't think i ever will considering 2 hours of intermediate at each 2 weeks so I don't have to worry about that Marc . If I get the dreamboard i'll play it without flagging
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 03:29:05 PM  
Name: Eduard Cros
Best expert: 50
Best intermediate: 14
Best beginner: 2
Comments: I'd like to congratulate Roland for his job, but I agree that that's not exactly playing minesweeper. I play like Dan, as if every board was completely random, just using the logical and pattern recognition, not the memory. In fact, I don't even know how is the dreamboard, I couldn't recognise it even at the end of the game...
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 03:23:17 PM  
Name: August
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: In as few words as possible: The expert level is the only true test of minesweeping ability.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 03:21:14 PM  
Name: Roland
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Okay, I guess I canīt keep it secret, since everyone wants to know! Playing for the dreamboard: All I thought of was, where the first two clicks would have to be to get the 2 great openings! So everytime it shows up, I recognize it quickly! Perhaps it even increases the chance of getting one?! Also good for getting dreamboards is playing a long long looong time a day! But of course I donīt just play dreamboards! Even with my frequency, it would be very very boring to play one board a week! I donīt play EVERY board either since some just suck! I have two 15secs on non-dreamboards as well, and not out of memory! It takes a lot of pattern recognition and logic to play for me, too! Otherwise, even with pattern-recognitions like 121, 1221, etc. logic was taken out of the game. Everybody just memorized where to put the clicks instead of thinking about it! I will still play Inter (after a little break) as usual and try to be fast on every board! I will use logic, speed and patterns like everyone! At the dreamboard I just use less of it! Itīs just a style for the dreamboard and just for records! I would like to see the one memorizing a good expert board! I mean minesweeper challenge stays minesweeper challenge! And thatīs also why Intermediate is Intermediate and Expert is called Expert! If you care about the purity of Minesweeper instead, itīs up to you how to play! If you just play for your own record on skill, why care about a worldrecord? If you care about a world record representing EVERY ability needed for this game, just look at expert, where the kings are! My 9 dreamboard is somehow like the 1 in Beginner. Many people say, it doesnīt matter if you have a 1,2,3 or 4! Secondly I didnīt write "I use strategy, bugs, etc.!" I wrote "Minesweeper is strategy, bugs, etc.!" I meant this, because you have to deal with minesweeper including all possibilities and all bugs! Without a bug, I would have a 1 already, too, but hey, thatīs minesweeper!! Roli!
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 03:17:13 PM  
Name: Marc Schouten
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: I have thought of doing exactly that in the past, Sorin. I decided not to do it, because I wouldn't have been able to accept any new record I would have gotten on the dreamboard after that.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 03:10:03 PM  
Name: Sorin
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: The slowest possible time to get on the dreambard is 6. And I'm serious. I have done it once... I made a minesweeper like game and played the dreamboard over and over. Only once I got a 6 and mostly 7's. The playing style was not logical(following patterns like Marc said) but memorizing the entire board. I made 23 clicks. And I never got the dreamboard so far. I don't know if it should be considered a world record. Where can I find the video of that 9?
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 02:57:09 PM  
Name: Dan
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: I agree completely with Marc. If Roland knows of a way to get the dreamboard frequently and has the board memorized to the point where he knows every necessary click by heart, then as far as I'm concerned the intermediate record is now meaningless. That is not playing minesweeper in my book. I play every board like it is random and that is the way I will always play. Please do not explain how you can improve your chances of getting the dreamboard... I do not want to know.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 02:26:11 PM  
Name: Marc Schouten
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Roland: First of all: I'm not accusing you of anything, nor am I judging your style of playing. You seem a bit on the defensive. If I came across as attacking you, I'm sorry, as that was not at all how it was intended. You haven't yet answered my first question. You say you know how to increase the chance to get the dreamboard. Care to elaborate on that? Also, do you start a new game as soon as you see it's not the dreamboard, or do you play any game that shows up? As for the second matter, I'll try and keep this short (at which I will probably fail miserably. The way you play, you're eliminating what I feel is the essence of Minesweeper: combining pattern recognition, logic and motor skills to clear the field as fast as possible. Your method leaves out the logic part entirely. You have the board memorized, you know where to click. No logic required whatsoever. You're also mostly leaving out the pattern recognition part. The only pattern you need to recognize is -I assume- the first opening of the dream board. Then you say your style is "a combination of technique, strategy, bugs, memory and reaction!". I assume that by bug you mean the fact that a certain board keeps popping up. A bug is an unintended feature. To make use of it is to make use of unintended game mechanics. These two things combined are why I asked whether it was still Minesweeper you were playing. Your 9 is very impressive and shows a lot of skill. But as a Minesweeper, to me -to *me*!- Matt's record is of a different order altogether. Again, all of this is not intended personally. Something like this was bound to happen and you were the first to do it. Credit to you for showing the perseverance and ingenuity needed to get that 9. I fear Intermediate won't be the same anymore, however...
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 02:08:03 PM  
Name: Steffen Stachna
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Regarding those things Roli said before, i think it is a pity, because now this is another quality of minesweeper and i am not sure if it is really a better quality? -> Now playing minesweeper in int is just hoping to get a familiar board (best the dreamboard or one of those 5-6 boards one knows very well) and doin everything that one has already constructed in his head -> So, what stays for the real "good" players is the expert level, except one specializes to the 87 3bv board and plays for it over years -> I dont hope so! This is not my understanding of minesweeper.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 01:52:05 PM  
Name: Matt
Best expert:
Best intermediate: 10
Best beginner:
Comments: Please explain how you "play for the dreambord"
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 01:40:03 PM  
Name: Roland
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: ...To my mind, I would see it as extension to minesweeper, since itīs a combination of technique, strategy, bugs, memory and reaction! But itīs not in my hand to decide this! Regards, Roli!
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 01:37:16 PM  
Name: Roland Seibt
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Marc, Iīll try to give statement to those two points: Firstly: "I hear Steffen say you play only to get the dreamboard. What does this mean?" On the one hand my "fast career" has been suspicious to some! Fast career means improvement in all three difficulties! I mean 2 and 67 ainīt too bad either! These scores indicate that Iīm not only playing and not only enjoying Intermediate. On the other hand itīs stated Iīm just playing for the dreamboard! Thatīs paradox! Iīts true, I know how to increase the chance to get the dreamboard and I know how to play it and so why not among other boards play for it?! If you knew how to beat a world record, wouldnīt you beat it? Secondly: "Are you still playing Minesweeper?" I told you before that I have the board memorized! Nobody interjected! The fact: Matt and Dan for example are surely faster than I am, but Minesweeper, as every other game, is a game with more facetts than speed! I developed a strategy how the record can be beaten and it took me about 3 months of hard improvement to do so! Itīs not that it was too easy as it can be counted as record. Itīs just not the "normal" way! With my way the best players in the world know how to beat the record including their advantage in speed! Steffen said: "There is at least room for a second!" I guess I have just woke you up and lowered the barriers. Without competition, no improvement! You have to accept that many people tried my way before but didnīt reach it yet. It is a part of the game to find out that some boards come by and by and using this "against" the game is simply strategy!. To quote David Barry with Ben Van Calster again: It's fun to think about things like this, but it's just minesweeper! (rf.: Intermediate Hall of Fame, words) And what should I do in the futuretime then: "Oh, the dreamboard again, but I canīt play it, since I know it!"? To my mind, I would see it as extension to minesweeper, since itīs a combination of technique, strategy, b
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 01:31:36 PM  
Name: Owen
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Send me the video please at the address stated!
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook

10/05/02 12:56:58 PM  
Name: James
Best expert:
Best intermediate:
Best beginner:
Comments: Good job Roland! How do you get the dreamboard so often? I have been playing for about 8 months with the dreamboard memorized and have not gotten, or at least recognized, it yet. As for Marc's comment. I have to agree that memorizing the board is not exactly what minesweeper is all aobut. However, it still takes a lot of skill (and luck) to do it in 9 seconds. The only way to say that the 9 is not a new world record would be to prove that Roland cheated somehow, maybe by altering the vid or even finding a way to create a board. I highly doubt this though.
 E-mail     Website    My Guestbook



Guestbook courtesy of Bravenet Web Services - All FREE!