[Home]Stepdown Move

HomePage | RecentChanges | Preferences

The Encyclopaedia has now been locked; contributors must log in to make changes. [more]
Difference (from prior author revision) (no other diffs)

Changed: 1c1
The stepdown move was introduced in 1942, as a way for players to claim tokens at Mornington Crescent without initiating the endgame - the move takes place as normal, except that the player is moved to Euston before endgame occurs.
The stepdown move was introduced in 1942, as a way for players to claim tokens at Mornington Crescent without initiating the endgame – the move takes place as normal, except that the player is moved to Euston before endgame occurs.

Changed: 3c3
At first glance this may seem pointless, but it has proven useful against crippling endgame blocks (ref. Ondyzseki v Niais, 1978) and is frequently used to claim excessive token bonuses without sacrificing them during the endgame. (Ref. Maelberg v Kluggman, 1982 - although Kluggman gave up a safe claim on MC and subsequently lost the game, the considerable token bonuses saved him from an otherwise imminent relegation.)
At first glance this may seem pointless, but it has proven useful against crippling endgame blocks (ref. Ondyzseki v Niais, 1978) and is frequently used to claim excessive token bonuses without sacrificing them during the endgame. (Ref. Maelberg v Kluggman, 1982 – although Kluggman gave up a safe claim on MC and subsequently lost the game, the considerable token bonuses saved him from an otherwise imminent relegation.)

Changed: 7c7
Categories: A to Z
Categories: A to Z

The stepdown move was introduced in 1942, as a way for players to claim tokens at Mornington Crescent without initiating the endgame – the move takes place as normal, except that the player is moved to Euston before endgame occurs.

At first glance this may seem pointless, but it has proven useful against crippling endgame blocks (ref. Ondyzseki v Niais, 1978) and is frequently used to claim excessive token bonuses without sacrificing them during the endgame. (Ref. Maelberg v Kluggman, 1982 – although Kluggman gave up a safe claim on MC and subsequently lost the game, the considerable token bonuses saved him from an otherwise imminent relegation.)

[KD]


Categories: A to Z

HomePage | RecentChanges | Preferences
This page is read-only | View other revisions
Last edited March 14, 2009 1:37 pm by Simons Mith (diff)
Search: