hist-games: Game of the Goose
Adrian.Seville at btopenworld.com
Mon Aug 11 07:14:16 PDT 2003
There is no doubt that the earliest Italian specimens (e.g. the Venice print
by Coriolani, often reproduced, and said to be of date 1640; or another from
the Bertarelli collection, said to be end of the 1600s, reproduced in
Mascheroni and Tinti's book) give the rule for both well and prison as: wait
there to be released by another. I therefore take this as being the
for Goose. It is also the standard rule in several other countries
France, Netherlands..) in the early 1700s.
As I demonstrated in my statistical analysis of the game presented to the
2002 Board Games in Academia conference in Barcelona, this rule has a
profound effect on the playing of the game. Indeed, for two players, it can
lead to stalemate, where one player is in one hazard and the other player in
the other hazard. The other rule is free from this problem but leads to a
less exciting and varied game.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Padget" <bapadget at yahoo.com>
To: <hist-games at pbm.com>
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 1:58 PM
Subject: hist-games: Game of the Goose
> Looking at Dagonel's and Modar's online
> reconstructions of the Game of the Goose, I noticed
> that both have the "well" and "prison" spaces doing
> the same thing. However, Dagonel says to stay at each
> space until another lands there, and Modar says to
> lose a turn at each space.
> What are the arguments for the differing
> reconstructions? Also, it seems odd to me to have two
> different spaces that do exactly the same thing.
> Would a reconstruction where the "well" loses a turn,
> and the "prison" holds you until another lands there
> be reasonable?
> bapadget at yahoo.com
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
> hist-games mailing list
> hist-games at www.pbm.com
More information about the hist-games