Masters - winning by winning

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Freecell Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Reporter on February 24, 2004 at 19:52:28:

It is difficult to know what to call this posting.

It's about coming from behind to win a masters tournament by winning a game which hadn't been solved and remaining the sole winner of that game. Back in June 2003 greggory won a masters this way and later said that he "pinched" the tournament, implying that

the "moral" winner was the player who had been leading for much of the time. Bearing that in mind, I considered calling it "Masters - winning by theft".

However, I just don't see it like that and besides it is an insult to the winner. The rules are that the winner is the player who wins the most games in the fastest time. In a professional environment sentiment should be kept out of it.

Of the 199 masters held there have been 24 where the victor has won by exactly one game. In two of these the winner finished faster than the runner-up even though they won one more game. In other cases the winner was also leading before they solved that extra game. These do not qualify for this posting. Then there are cases where the winner might have come from behind but there was no one game with only 1 win registered in the game stats. These wins also do not qualify.

That leaves only nine masters in which the winner come from behind and solved a previously unwon game and was the sole winner of that game. That's not very many, yet this situation has now occurred in consecutive weeks, with mabb passing mickyiw and then

WRAC passing bluerose, both times the runner-up leading for the best part of an hour or more.

These are the nine masters:

Masters - winning by winning Page 2 of 3

198.         mabb               31, 100:32 ... mickyiw .... 30, 38:25

199.      WRAC ....... 31, 105:51 bluerose 30, 50:56

In each case the winning time has been more than 100 minutes and at least 20 minutes past the time the runner-up, who was leading, finished. The game progress situation was ascertained from the winner's comments in most cases.

Additionally, there are a further two masters where

this could have happened, but there is no information to know for

..9. WRAC ....... 32, 112:08 ... ActuaryMom . 31, 91:23

101. mickyiw..... 31, .64:50 ... greggory ... 30, 50:36

Both weeks had one game with only one winner. In week 9 the winner's comments were by ActuaryMom, who won the prize money, and there is no indication of how the tournament unfolded. In week 101 it is quite possible that mickyiw was also leading at 30 wins.

This has been an interesting exercise. Reporter

Follow Ups:

·      Re: Masters is 200 on the way Bicentennial Man 22:41:26 2/25/2004 (0)

·      Re: Masters - winning by winning Crunch 15:54:51 2/25/2004 (0)

·      Re: Masters - winning by winning WRAC 21:59:56 2/24/2004 (1) o Re: Masters - winning by winning Reporter 17:24:45 2/25/2004 (0)

Post a Followup: Name:

Subject: Re: Masters - winning by winning

Comments:

Re: Masters - winning by winning
[ Follow Ups [ Post Followup 1 [ Freeceil Discussion Forum I [ FAQ I

:

Posted by WRAC on February 24, 2004 at 21:59:56:

In Reply to: Masters winning by winning posted by Reporter on February 24, 2004 at 19:52:28:

Maybe you should use a running analogy and call it

winning by kicking? Or winning with a finishing kick? (Still not great names.)

In any case, your report is most interesting, as always.

Concerning Masters #9 (below), I remember that

tourney well because it was July 4 weekend, and I was in the office calculating second quarter reserves. I had a program that took about two hours to run, so I waited until Masters time, and ran it then, while I was playing. I'm not positive, but I think it was also a come-from-behind win. I do remember that it

was my second win, and at the time, I figured it was probably the only way I was ever going to be able to win because I just wasn't fast enough to win the "conventional" way.

Whatever happened to greggory anyway? And, for that matter, JC?

: Additionally, there are a further two masters where this could have happened, but there is no information to know for sure:

..9. WRAC ....... 32, 112:08 ... ActuaryMom 31,

91:23

101. mickyiw... 31, .64:50 ... greggory ... 30,

50:36

Both weeks had one game with only one winner. In week 9 the winner's comments were by ActuaryMom, who won the prize money, and there is no indication of

how the tournament unfolded. In week 101 it is quite possible that mickyiw was also leading at 30 wins.

Follow Ups:

Re: Masters winning by winning

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Freecell Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Reporter on February 25, 2004 at 17:24:45:

In Reply to: Re: Masters - winning by winning posted by WRAC on February 24, 2004 at 21:59:56:

: Maybe you should use a running analogy and call it winning by kicking? Or winning with a finishing kick? (Still not great names.)

: In any case, your report is most interesting, as always.

: Concerning Masters #9 (below), I remember that

tourney well because it was July 4 weekend, and I was in the office calculating second quarter reserves. I had a program that took about two hours to run, so I waited until Masters time, and ran it then, while I was playing. I'm not positive, but I think it was also a come-from-behind win. I do remember that it

was my second win, and at the time, I figured it was probably the only way I was ever going to be able to win because I just wasn't fast enough to win the "conventional" way.

: Whatever happened to greggory anyway? And, for that matter, JC?

According to information obtainable using the scores page, greggory last played at this site on Monday August 4th 2003 and JC on Wednesday July 23rd 2003.

Both are unlikely to be reading this, so I guess it will remain a mystery!

: Additionally, there are a further two masters where this could have happened, but there is no information to know for sure:

50:36

: : Both weeks had one game with only one winner. In week 9 the winner's comments were by ActuaryMom, who won the prize money, and there is no indication of how the tournament unfolded. In week 101 it is quite possible that mickyiw was also leading at 30 wins.

Re: Masters - winning by winning Page 2 of 2

Based on your recollections, week 9 can be added to the list, making it 10 occasions that a masters has been won this way.

Incidentally WRAC, you may be interested to learn that of the 24 Masters won by the margin of exactly

one game, you are responsible for 12 of them, with 10 different runners-up, viz Outcast, ActuaryMom, Crunch, mickyiw (2x), mick126 (2x), M.Burtle, JC,

jbranick3, vishna and bluerose. You have been runner-up yourself twice, both to mickyiw.

Thanks also to Crunch for your response. Reporter

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup:

Name:

Subject: Re: Masters - winning by winning Comments:

: Maybe you should use a running analogy and call it winning by kicking? Or winning with a finishing kick? (Still not great names.)

In any case, your report is most interesting, as always.

: Concerning Masters #9 (below), I remember that tourney well because it was July 4 weekend, and I was in the office calculating second

Optional Link URL: Link Title:

Optional Image URL:

Submit Follow Up Reset

,

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Freecell Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Re: Masters - winning by winning
[Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Freecell Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ }

Posted by Crunch on February 25, 2004 at 15:54:51:

In Reply to: Masters - winning by winning posted by Reporter on February 24, 2004 at 19:52:28:

.snip

: These are the nine masters:

The difference between the first and second times is very large up to 20 to 50 minutes.

Very interesting, Thanks Reporter

Crunch

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup: Name: