On the presumption that X is the son, the son had to go first in the top game and almpst certaily went first in the middle game. Dad’s 2nd placement n the top game and likely third placement in the middle one, no matter which move that was, makes no sense unless he was trying to lose or ignorant of the game’s objective. Making the same presumption, Dad had to go first in the bottom game, as it’s the only one with more Os than Xs. Can anyone figure out a “logical” sequence of placements for the bottom game that gives Dad a reason to fill in the fifth O rather than just jabbing his maker into the wall?
distortion over 3 years ago
Two outta three ain’t bad…
MeGoNow Premium Member over 3 years ago
And he wonders why she gives him that look when he talks about having a second child.
ScratchyPDX over 3 years ago
…And, when you try to paint over it the ink bleeds through. (True story.)
mistercatworks over 3 years ago
Shouldn’t have let him go first.
David Partlow Premium Member over 3 years ago
X always goes first, rule! That last game O has 5 plays, oops.
xaingo over 3 years ago
You should remember what Joshua learned about Tic-Tac-Toe from Wargames, “The only winning move is not to play.”
CTew Premium Member over 3 years ago
On the presumption that X is the son, the son had to go first in the top game and almpst certaily went first in the middle game. Dad’s 2nd placement n the top game and likely third placement in the middle one, no matter which move that was, makes no sense unless he was trying to lose or ignorant of the game’s objective. Making the same presumption, Dad had to go first in the bottom game, as it’s the only one with more Os than Xs. Can anyone figure out a “logical” sequence of placements for the bottom game that gives Dad a reason to fill in the fifth O rather than just jabbing his maker into the wall?