| 159 | |
|---|---|
| |
| 32S-54H-52P-44 | 158 |
Position ID: 4HPMASHI5+ABMA Match ID: cAkSAAAAAAAA | |
"... 13/5(2) ... 24/20(2) 13/9 8/4 ... (No idea how to Nactate either play.)"
13/5*(2) is P (closest point to 6pt gets the capital).
24/20(2) 13/9 8/4 is "Y" (Yoga split or Y-split), which is not yet in the tutorial.
If you turn the Y upside down, it looks like a person doing a split-legged pose. It/she points to the three areas of the board in which the plays are being made. The arm(s) point to the area where 24/20(2) is being played. The legs point to the two areas where 13/9 and 8/4 are being played.
Strictly speaking, 24/20(2) 13/9 6/2 would be Y, and 24/20 13/9 8/4 would be lower-case "y" (as I used in my other post). But you can easily get by with Y for the 8/4 play, using assumption.
On the subject, does anyone else find it hard to track who's who in a long sequence of Nactation, where "long" starts around 5? It's not immediately clear who plays the opening roll, which makes vizualizing the game tricky. I've seen Nack underlining one player's moves, but no-one else adopts this, presumably because html underlines are laborious.
I don't consider them tedious since I started cut/pasting. I had started alt-underlining five on the site here, but I stopped because it looks so easy to me to count backwards. Just look at the last roll and with two quick alternating glances you're back to the first roll. First, third and fifth must belong to the same player.
Maybe it would help if you told me exactly what you're trying to do. If you just want to know who played first, I can underline the first or second roll, whichever matches the player on roll now, though it would I think it would be a little more aesthetic to leave it off. (I'm sorry how this may sound, but do you really need it when the length is only five?)
If you're playing through a long sequence in your head or on the board, then I can understand how it would help to be able to distinguish the odd/even rolls. Let's use the annactated game sequence recently posted as an example:
51S-21S-62R-32D-41H-51H-61R-21L-62H-51H-63H-53E-55R-65R-62
I find alt-underlining easier to read than the Keith convention way...
+51S-21S+62R-32D+41H-51H+61R-21L+62H-51H+63H-53E+55R-65R+62
... because the vertical strokes of the plusses interfere with the readability. I realize it might just be a matter of my getting used to it, and I have to give credit to Tom for a clever idea. If people flock to that, I'll try to be accommodating.
The html tags may seem tedious at first, but not if you get used to cutting and pasting them for long sequences, and for short sequences I don't see that they are needed.
How would it look if we adopted a convention of pairing the moves, so only putting the dash in front of the top player, and using a space in front of the bottom player?
So this game would be -32S 54H-52P 44?
Or, in the case of the long sequence...
51S-21S 62R-32D 41H-51H 61R-21L 62H-51H 63H-53E 55R-65R 62
Oof! that is in the same format I use to list groups of second roll plays.
As you may have noticed in the book I wrote with Paul, we have a convention of eliminating punctuation and conjunctions for rolls and groups of rolls (e.g., the best opening rolls are 31 42 61 53 65 54). Well, I've gone further with that. I group opening plays (e.g., I hope Stick includes 63R 43S 43U 32Z as opening plays for his XG reply positions), and I group reply positions (e.g., I'd like to see 63R-43 32D-51 21S-52 41$-54 21$-62 31P-63 64R-64 rolled out by our next meeting.)
So, unfortunately I don't think I can be objective evaluating that suggestion.
Perhaps I can think of another solution, but I'll wait to hear what you might have to say on the other items. In particular,
(a) Why do you need the rolls of short sequences marked? Odd number of rolls, side on roll went first; even rolls other side first.
(b) Have you tried cutting and pasting the html tags (angle-bracket, u, angle-bracket) to long sequences? You can do it at the end of a post -- everything at once.
(c) How often do you write long sequences?
Nack