Having fun playing checkers these days, but it seems like there's no room for strategy, just clever tactics.

Is there more to this game than meets the eye?

I haven't played a lot of checkers, but my understanding is that the game has surprising depth (and room for strategy). Checkers has well researched opening lines, set patterns for attack and defense, and a complete endgame theory. Despite being "solved" by computers some time ago, it is still beyond complete mastery for any person.

See https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/ ... rs_for_45/

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

That makes me feel like I should amend my statement to say, " it is still beyond complete mastery for any person, except Marion Tinsley."

My feeling is that games or techniques that can be read out or iterated precisely can be considered as "tactical", whereas more vague ideas based on intuition are more in the realm of "strategy".

So fundamentally, all games could theoretically be "tactical" in that there could be a precise, provable solution. However, as the situation becomes more complex, strategy and heuristics come into play.

If this is correct, then checkers is tactical to the extent that logical and precise iteration of variations can be used as a method for winning the game. If the game is as complex as it appears, strategy could certainly be useful.

_________________
be immersed

Funny, I thought checkers was normally played on a 10x10 board, with 5 stones on a row. Isn't that more common than 8x8?

I guess they are both common. The Wikipedia article says:

According to Wikipedia, English draughts and American draughts are played on an 8x8 board. That's what I've always seen. International draughts are played on a 10x10, and Canadian draughts uses 12x12!

The rules are slightly different on the larger board sizes, too. Most notably, the king is limited to moves of one space on the 8x8 game, but can move any number of spaces on the larger board sizes. Also, uncrowned men can only capture forward in English draughts; they can capture backwards in international draughts. (I had no idea about these differences before looking this up!)

A quick search indicates Tinsley played on an 8x8 board.

I would put the emphasis differently, though I don't think I can define strategy that well. However, I don't think tactics are limited to those cases where you can precisely read out the outcomes.

The Cho-Chikun vs. Otake game that appears in Hikaru No Go is a good example (http://www.go4go.net/go/games/sgfview/10885 look at move 73 and onwards). Cho's invasion of the top begins a 60 move sequence that the game hinges upon, and is too complicated for even top professionals to read out entirely. But I would say it's a definite example of a tactical issue: the goal of living locally is clear, the problem is isolated and game deciding (which means that we're not going to run into a potentially strategic question like "would it be better to sacrifice this group for external thickness?").

_________________
Occupy Babel!

Good point, hyperpape.

_________________
be immersed

Using hyperpape's example, I might describe a tactical game as one where the most profitable local move will always be the most profitable move overall. "Local," in this case, can refer to time as well as space. In other words, a player never needs to consider making a sub-optimal move in the present in order to take a greater profit later.

From what I know about checkers, I would consider it to have a healthy dose of strategy under this definition.