Meldrew Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Oh, and the umpire has just declared flags. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scooby dooby doo Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Meldrew - the fitzwalton corallary of 1983 in play though - and has been since the plit-infinitive was invoked by rhubarb - this means that Smythe-Watkinson is active UNTIL flags are declared. They have been now so I'll shuffle over to Marylebone and cunningly avoid your rather devious Camden Town trap 😬 HOOPY R706KGU Hoopylight R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meldrew Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Hoops, you are sorely mistaken about the practical application of the Fitzwalton Corollary. It only allows inversion of the flag protocols if a split-infinitive is invoked WITH THE USE OF TURNTABLES AND - AND, please note - THE DAY RETURN SMITHERSON MANOEUVRE PRECEDENT. No such precedent was in place, even with Hammer and Spigot active and the standing requirement to follow Awdry's Principle that has been in place since the Casablanca Conference and subsequent riot in 1922. For future reference, the quick way to ensure you can do this is to deploy Scrimshaw's Subversion after someone has canted and subsequently allowed displacement via the up-line. In the meantime, I'll play a defensive fugue strategy - High Roding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs GTD Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Ahem...Finsbury Park Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meldrew Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Very deft. Looks like a variation on the Gaddafi-Crossthwaite gambit. Very elegant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debert Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 On the radio - someone's usually got to by now ❗ Methinks you guys (and girlies) are deliberately stringing this one out You can't measure safe driving in miles per hour (or kph if you're pedantic) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meldrew Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Fletch, the radio programmes are heavily edited for brevity, and, of course, the players tend to make more daring choices as they are incentivised by huge win bonuses to keep it exciting for the listeners. Brondesbury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisb Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 I think, following the above, and after full consultation of the past paper considering The Hammer&Spigot regulations Rev 3, I can see only one blocking manouvre, and that is :- Willesden Green Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La vache espagnole Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Time to try out that Gonzales/Watson diversion again: Euston Square 😳 nothing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meldrew Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Invoking Goldfarb's matching principle and the Spelthorne reversal - Mornington Crescent! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.Mupferit Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Bugger.....ok I'm going to invoke the St Petersburg 3rd protocol reversionary principle as practised to superb effect by Grozolsky during the 1961 Northern hemisphere tournament................... Green Park ❗ MT Sorry but the Gonzales/Watson diversion doesn't apply unless you can prove it can be used perpendicular to the isosceles whilst traversing Newington. Brent Zetec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meldrew Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Sorry but the Gonzales/Watson diversion doesn't apply unless you can prove it can be used perpendicular to the isosceles whilst traversing Newington Sorry Brent - but it's the diversion failure that permits (and indeed results in) the use of Goldfarb from the alternative terminus at Euston: the application of Spelthorne at Highbury and Islington then results in a clear run to Mornington Crescent unless you take a defensive strategy and wind up in Kensal Rise (with all the obvious downsides that that entails). I would heartily recommend "McNaughton & Stranks on Mornington Crescent - Advanced Strategies and Underhand Tactics" (Oxford University Press 1987, £65.99) which is a mine of historical precedent and novel thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisb Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 But Brent, I however think that you may be forgetting the inverse dodecohedronic version of the equalatoirian (Tuffnel Park, Hempstead and Camden Town) move posed by the earlier Right Worshipfull Hoopy, and that in fact Gonzales/Watson diversion does apply beacuse you can prove it can be used perpendicular to the isosceles whilst traversing Newington. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meldrew Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Only when playing the eight-dimensional variant. I think we're all agreed that we're playing in fourteen dimensions? Aren't we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisb Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Unless I'm very much mistaken (And trust me, having consulted Page 132 of McNaughton & Stranks on Mornington Crescent - Advanced Strategies and Underhand Tactics" (Oxford University Press 1987, £65.99 I may well be) I thought that the Eigth Dimension paralleled that of the fourteenth dimension, particularly when considering the equalatoirian move ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
not a Postman Pat Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Jeez Chris, you've picked up the rules fairly quickly 😬 Pat and his not quite black and white cat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs GTD Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 eh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La vache espagnole Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Meldrew and Chrisb, may I remind you that following the ruling at the Interlaken convention in October 2001, any player invoking McNaughton & Stranks is required to go straight to Hainault (without passing Go or collecting a Zone 3 ticket). A second breach may result in immediate disqualification. So... Caledonian Road 😳 nothing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meldrew Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Subtle one, this. McNaughton and Stranks are weak on dimensional adjustments and rather vague on it (their only real weak point). It was left historically to Andropov, Brezhnev, Kosygin and Kuryakhin to clarify this area, which they did as follow: "Dimensional parallels only apply if the referee has permitted the use of Mercator projection at the start, which has to be signalled correctly using the appropriate hand gestures. Otherwise it defaults to catch-as-catch-can and the geometry is made unworkable." (from the Transactions of the Komsomolskaya Morningtonski Creszentaya Instit, Petropavlovsk, 1954). This was adopted in the West following Perestroika in 1991 at the Mornington Crescent World Unification Committee in Szeged, Hungary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meldrew Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Toady - The Interlaken Convention (Hah! So-called!) was nothing more than a discredited attempt to break away from the true spirit of Mornington Crescent and nearly caused a schism. I'm surprised that an educated and intelligent fellow such as yourself would give these splitters anarchists the time of day (not least because of their insistence on the use of O'Hara's interpretation and Murphy's Law, which had fallen into disrepute long before). Nevertheless, I shall play on in the spirit of goodnatured MC. Hainault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scooby dooby doo Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Meldrew - I must congratulate you on your very detailed knowledge of the game and concede your point. Secondly - I vote we all gang up on him for being such a girly swot by playing the Totteridge and Whetstone inversion gambit in his general direction. I'll start it off with a move to Brent Cross - which is very appropriate as thats what Brent was when his last move was blocked 😬 HOOPY R706KGU Hoopylight R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La vache espagnole Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 EEEEK! I've been inverted. Unfair, unfair! ☹️ 😳 nothing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisb Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 With reference to Game 200, I can only assure the gathered audience that whilst considering the last known flight of concord, and applying such vectors, as to take into account such reprecussions (as previously seen in Brent Vs. Mrs GTD, that there can be numerous options availiable to me, and that the the choice of issuing nothing but pure chaos, may I give you:- Leicester Square Edited by - chrisb on 8 Dec 2003 16:15:23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meldrew Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Totteridge & Whetstone, eh? I apply the Singapore variant: Dhoby Ghaut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La vache espagnole Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 [tentatively] Turnham Green [/tentatively] 😳 nothing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now