Ultimate Tic Tac Toe Winning Strategy
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 พ.ย. 2014
- First learn the rules of the game: • Ultimate Tic-Tac-Toe: ...
The winning strategy is described in this post
www.joachim-breitner.de/blog/...
If you like my videos, you can support me at Patreon: / mindyourdecisions
Connect on social media. I update each site when I have a new video or blog post, so you can follow me on whichever method is most convenient for you.
My Blog: mindyourdecisions.com/blog/
Twitter: / preshtalwalkar
Facebook: / 168446714965
Google+: plus.google.com/1083366085665...
Pinterest: / preshtalwalkar
Tumblr: / preshtalwalkar
Instagram: / preshtalwalkar
Patreon: / mindyourdecisions
Newsletter (sent about 2 times a year): eepurl.com/KvS0r
My Books
"The Joy of Game Theory" shows how you can use math to out-think your competition. (rated 4/5 stars on 23 reviews) www.amazon.com/gp/product/150...
"The Irrationality Illusion: How To Make Smart Decisions And Overcome Bias" is a handbook that explains the many ways we are biased about decision-making and offers techniques to make smart decisions. (rated 5/5 stars on 1 review) www.amazon.com/gp/product/152...
"Math Puzzles Volume 1" features classic brain teasers and riddles with complete solutions for problems in counting, geometry, probability, and game theory. Volume 1 is rated 4.5/5 stars on 11 reviews. www.amazon.com/gp/product/151...
"Math Puzzles Volume 2" is a sequel book with more great problems. www.amazon.com/gp/product/151...
"Math Puzzles Volume 3" is the third in the series. www.amazon.com/gp/product/151...
"40 Paradoxes in Logic, Probability, and Game Theory" contains thought-provoking and counter-intuitive results. (rated 4.9/5 stars on 7 reviews) www.amazon.com/gp/product/151...
"The Best Mental Math Tricks" teaches how you can look like a math genius by solving problems in your head (rated 4.7/5 stars on 3 reviews) www.amazon.com/gp/product/150...
"Multiply Numbers By Drawing Lines" This book is a reference guide for my video that has over 1 million views on a geometric method to multiply numbers. (rated 5/5 stars on 1 review) www.amazon.com/gp/product/150... - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
When a tiny board is won, you are not allowed to play there again, so this statement is false.
+Corniel Nobel In the way he stated it in his previous video, it's not how it works.
there are different variations, personally, I prefer where you CANT play in a square that has been one, but thats not the way his rules work
I played it like that so I was confused about his winning strategy.
It isn't when the square is won, it is when the square is filled up.
Yes I agree
yes in a fundamentally broken version of the game where the second player can get trapped in the center for 8 turns (even though that isn't how it works in any version I've ever played) yes there is a winning strategy. similarly in chess if you remove all pieces but a king on the black players side there is also a winning strategy too.
If a player is sent to a board which is already won by someone, isn't that player allowed to go to any board? Or is this another variation on the rules?
That is a variation and definitely a good one. As far as I can tell, it is an open question of whether there is a winning strategy.
i think , it should be like that or this game is just pointless
krishna sai nunna the rules haven't changed. In 1:40 he says you should play the oposite side not that you must. It's just part of the strategy.
i Know but i think that in other versions of ULTIMATE TIC TAC TOE the rules are different
@@MindYourDecisions "That is a variation and definitely a good one."
It's the only version I've ever heard of. The game is obviously broken without it. See: your video.
If anything, this broken version is the variation.
This is wrong. The rules of Ultimate tic tac toe dictate that when a player wins a small tic tac toe by putting three Xs or Os in a row then he claims that square and no other symbols may be put in that square. So in your example when the O player makes a tic tac toe in the central big square at 0:49 then he wins that big square and nobody can play there any more. If you have to play there you choose any other place instead.
Art Schell this version is fucking stupid if there obviously such a simple algorithm to win. what a fucking dumb variation
Dope Dawg chill, salty boy
I'm just finding out about this game and your way sounds way more correct. I am curious about how the next player moves after the center square is played on the local board. Do they make a move on the same board to bring it to the next local board? I think that sounds right but I'm not sure.
Different people play by different rules. I find that when you can send people back to boards that have already been won and allow them to place symbols there, the game is more interesting.
But nobody plays UTT with these rules.
And if they did then this strategy would have been found immediately and then the game would have become unfun
Pun intended?
Unfortunately, this set of rules is flawed, slowing this always win strategy.
Yea... Except, at the very end, 0 wins first...
You cannot win a square that was already win by the other player. So O can't win since X always take the right square first.
the rules I play by is that if you send a player to a grid that has already been claimed, regardless if there is still space left in it, they get full range of the board. Now, what is the strategy there?
it's complicated :)
There is no winning strategy as of yet. That variation is unsolved
@@gamerdio2503 I might have found it. I can beat the AI on impossible in 34 turns for my best run yet.
@@sagegeas5198 If you can prove that the moves by both players were optimal, you could say it's weakly solved. Unfortunately, it's still not strongly solved, as that requires an algorithm to make the best move in any position, even if the opponent makes suboptimal moves.
You're playing by the wrong rules.(check coolmath)
before u did a 3-in-a-row in the middle square O had already done 1 in the middle-left , middle-right and the middle
i noticed that too. im confused now
Billy Sondervan he already won though
For the purposes of explaining, I'm going to give the squares co-ordinates like a chessboard (rows are denoted by numbers from 1-9 with the bottom row being a 1, and columns are denoted A-I with A being far left)
At 1:12, O should have played B5, to let X go anywhere. The video says when this happens, X should go to G5 to send O back to the middle-left square. Now O can play C5 to break the lock. (They can't be sent back to the middle-left from that move.)
Not sure if they have a chance of winning from that situation, but this strategy is over-simplified if the O player knows what they're doing.
Smart
Except... house rules. There are rules such as "if sent to a board you can't play on you get a free play." or "If you play a board and claim it you get a free play" or "if you are forced into a box that causes you to do a 3 in a line you clainm that board and then must p[lay another bo."
Or " if you win you claim another square"
If ANY of these rules come into play your tic tacs are useless.
This doesn’t work. Every time someone has explained the rules to me-once a square gets a three in a row the square is closed and the person instead gets a chance of playing in any open spot.
Not much point in playing with this ruleset as the game is beyond broken then.
Seems the ruleset where a section is off limits once won is more balanced.
Interested in the Ultimate Reversi game being developed off the UTT concept. That looks like a blast
I developed a similar strategy for a variant where playing in a square that has been won on the larger board gives the next player the ability to place an x or o anywhere on the board... interesting
to have more fun I prefer the rules in which when a player is sent to a small board that has been won, then the player is not allowed to play there. Actually, None of the players are allowed to play in a small board since it is won. To avoid ties I also consider those Statements:
-A player wins if it scores three boards in a row (horizontally, vertically or diagonally)
- If the bigger board is filled and there is no three scores in a row from a single player, but there is a small board in a tie, then the tied small board account a score for both player. If both can make a row with this Statement, then it is definitily a tie.
- A player can also win using a tied small board, but a complete row of won small board has preference, so that if in the middle of the game a tied small board makes for each player a suppost winning row, than the game must continue until there is more of those rows for one of the players (like 2 for one and 1 for the other) or until a player wins somehow else, like making a regular complete row of won small boards.
For the new Statements, none player can play in a tied small board also. Actually, the idea is that if a small board is won or tied, it is closed.
The number of people who don't understand that this is a different variation of ultimate tic tac toe than what they learned. Yes, there is a version where if you get sent to a board that has already been won, you get to play anywhere. That version is still unsolved. This is a different version where you can play on a board that has been won, it's just different rules. With these rules, there is a winning strategy.
Yeah but since this strategy makes victory for the first player 100% sure from the beginning, then the rules are awful. It's not a real game if the first player can always win
@@ira1420 whether it's a good rule or not is a different discussion (spoiler, it probably isn't a good rule). This rule does exist, that's my point.
Nice video! I know nothing about game theory but I was wondering if there is a math way to come up with winning strategies like this. If so, I'd love to see it explained in a video.
Even with your flawed understanding of the rules, O would still win by 2:28.
I don't think you put much thought into this.
Exactly
That is not how Ultimate Tic Tac Toe works, when a player wins a one of the small tic tac toe's it is marked as that player's property (and no more play can be done in that location, if that happens they must choose wherever else they want to play).
Once a tic tac toe is reached that square is closed and the player can choose any other square to play in.
Circle already won before X at 2:34
i thought if the board already has a 3 in a row, then you get to play anywhere
1:23 -1:34 you say you should play on the middle right, but you continue to play on the middle left. Why?
You stuffed up- your demonstration shows O winning before X- the middle row.
X already owned that square. Unfortunately, O can't wrestle the square back from X
What if you’re playing the version where sending the opponent to a capture space allows him to pick ANY square?
@@baileycarroll7711 There is a winning strategy, it's completely impossible to avoid one in a game like this (perfect knowledge, finite). It's just a bit more nuanced; I don't know it but it's proven that one exists
@@berylliosis5250 Wrong. Over a year later and no solution is found and it's never been "proven" one exists. Lotta people used machine learning to create an ai to play with, the ai has simulated every movie possible and still not found any sure-winning strategy or even one that wins majority of the time. Where is your proof exactly?
@@DrakeOola Allow me to amend my statement (cause it is indeed wrong); it's not guaranteed there is a winning strategy, but it _is_ guaranteed there's either a winning strategy or a tying (against a perfect opponent) strategy. That simply follows from the nature of a game like this. It might not be a neat little rule that people can memorize like the one in this video, but one *must* exist. I can spell out the proof explicitly if you want, but it shouldn't take too much thought to figure it out
@@berylliosis5250but at that point you are basically saying there is always a method that guarantees either a tie or a win against 2 players that play perfectly but that is true for any game. It's like saying "something exists so it must end". Like I guess what you are saying is true but it's still unknown whether a game like ultimate tik tak toe is a guaranteed win for the first or second player, or a tie for both and that's the bigger question.
Just won impossible mode on hiroku's ultimate TTT. 34 turns.
Well this only works if it is allowed to make a move on already finished boards. According to the standard rules, O owuld be allowed to move on any other board as soon as the middle one is finished, and forbidden to make more moves on the center board.
This does not work. If you send O into the middle and the board was already won they get to play wherever they want...
I wish there was a template for the grid.
Why would you keep playing an already won board?
O literally won first, he made 3 wins in a row before X
Here from Vsauce
the opponent won first watch carefully
wouldn't o have won right before your final move
I like it better when you can play where ever you want
Why would O stay in 1 Square?
Your statement doesn’t work since they get that square if they have 3 in a row and in the middle 0 has more than 3 and well 0 had won by that logic since it made 3 in a row first (the middle line ) .. think the tactic is , to put on places that they wouldn’t make a 3 in a row and let them have that part .. and going back and forth to it when you don’t know what to play , but mean time you should have 2 of your sign to each of your desirable spots (so when they move and it goes to your the you have the ultimate spots you wanted ) and play it
Author, First learn the rules of the game!
Agree with others. The variant where you can't play in a won square isn't solved, so is much more challenging. Why would anyone want to play this solved variant?
at 2:34, O beat you with a win on the center horizontal. I can also win at any game if I take shelter in my own alternate universe where my opponent's wins are never acknowledged by the referee. Also this ruleset is very broken. You shouldn't be able to continue playing on a board if it's already been won.
Didn't 'O' win at 2:37 ?
Yep, i feel like this video is the rage bate strategy before it was wild spread. Thankfully he learnt in the past 9 years and doesn't do these kinds of videos anymore
O has already won that board, they can't go back there again so this wouldn't work.
Edit: Plus, this version is very unfair and should not be played!
But O could have already won be fore X would in your example… Maybe you shou)d check the video again to see what I mean
My dude, you cant play in a square which in won
*Bruh*. This isn't even a WINNING strategy. It is a TYING strategy. At 2:38 the middle horizontal line is also won by circle. So even if we use these rules (which suck HARD) this strategy doesn't win
But O already won in the middle left, middle and middle right. Look carefully at the end of the video. Like if you agree
Boi you cant claim what has been claimed
at 2:23 O can win the game so this strategy with these rules doesn even make sense
You cant claim a square that has been claimed
I guess I don't know the rules.
No but once one is won they can go wherever that’s not how it works
Hold up, that's false. O would win even with this rule-breaking strategy because they had three three-in-a-rows before X.
Face of Impending Doom exactly, this is just not a strategy, O wins before x
cool
these aren't the rules..
India schute red dot forhead
But... O won...
You cant claim a square that has been claimed
Once a square is won none can play in it. O already won the middle so you can't do this to capture the centers.
dislike
What in the world are you saying at 1:24??????🤦♂️
This is the biggest bull- I've seen at 2:25 O could've played the down-left corner and thus winning the game. Well of course this doesn't happen here because this is a "winning strategy". I like the idea but the execution was below ground level.
Can you take this down please? It literally wasted 3 minutes of my life and I don't know how much more time this will waste for other people.
WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT
YOU CHANGED MY LIFE
This is not how you play
What is this
Not to mention, he actually loses. LOL.
You cannot claim what has been claimed
This boi doesn't even know how to play.
hm
Look again o won in the middle before you won on the bottom
You cant claim a square that has been claimed
dude X just lost in the example
nvr mind
U don't even know the rules
O actually won that game anyway, 2:35 O won all Three Squares in the Middle
scam
That's not how you play ultimate tic-tac-toe, disliked with so much disappointment. Next time read the rules.