Planning to visit London in November

madaxeman · Post by **madaxeman** » Wed Nov 10, 2010 5:54 pm

peteratjet wrote:
madaxeman wrote:We are moving (back) to a pub now called The Escape at Mornington Crescent - the only question still to be resolved is which night we will be meeting on.
A bold move sir! Normally, such an early (Turn One even!) attempt to go straight for the win would be considered declasse, but I guess you are using the Neasden Central optional rule.

CLWC has a long history. This is more turn 21 than turn 1 !

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:46 pm

madaxeman wrote:
peteratjet wrote:
madaxeman wrote:We are moving (back) to a pub now called The Escape at Mornington Crescent - the only question still to be resolved is which night we will be meeting on.
A bold move sir! Normally, such an early (Turn One even!) attempt to go straight for the win would be considered declasse, but I guess you are using the Neasden Central optional rule.
CLWC has a long history. This is more turn 21 than turn 1 !

In which case I would suggest a diagonal move under the Pendlebury variant.

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:20 pm

nikgaukroger wrote:
madaxeman wrote:CLWC has a long history. This is more turn 21 than turn 1 !
In which case I would suggest a diagonal move under the Pendlebury variant.

Yes, those things are allowed down south. Deviants the lot of 'em.

ShrubMiK · Post by **ShrubMiK** » Wed Nov 10, 2010 9:43 pm

I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue what you are all talking about!

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Wed Nov 10, 2010 11:35 pm

ShrubMiK wrote:I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue what you are all talking about!

Now that is either totally brilliant or you really don't know what is going on here

My guess is the former.

Nik, are you sure about that Pendlbury variant? I thought that it was modified in the 2007 clarifications...

ShrubMiK · Post by **ShrubMiK** » Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:10 pm

I think I would deserve more praise if I hadn't wimped out of my original intention of typing without capitalisation

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Thu Nov 11, 2010 10:12 pm

ShrubMiK wrote:I think I would deserve more praise if I hadn't wimped out of my original intention of typing without capitalisation

But it is impossible to play the game without at least one Capital. Actually just one Capital but either way it would be a bit of a damp squib without it.

ShrubMiK · Post by **ShrubMiK** » Thu Nov 11, 2010 11:02 pm

Very good point

But I fear you are behind the times. This was commonly held to be the case up until Edmond Cheesefilcher's liberal yet simplistic reanalysis and consequent reinterpretation of the long-controversial Pilkington Clause begin to find widespread acceptance in recent years.

acl · Post by **acl** » Thu Nov 25, 2010 12:59 am

Sadly, the game has been dropped from the next series because it is too simple.

The good news is that a distinguished rules writer has been drafted-in to replace it with something more challenging, which will be known as MMornington Crescent.

For those who can't wait, Central London is now meeting on a Monday at the Escape pub, Lidlington Place where MM, Fog and all sorts of interesting games are played.

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Thu Nov 25, 2010 1:37 pm

acl wrote:Sadly, the game has been dropped from the next series because it is too simple.

The good news is that a distinguished rules writer has been drafted-in to replace it with something more challenging, which will be known as MMornington Crescent.

Fantastic, it is a good job I wasn't drinking my tea when I read this post.

ShrubMiK · Post by **ShrubMiK** » Thu Nov 25, 2010 8:50 pm

Indeed that rates a solid ROFL!