Introduction to Connect 4 Strategy

[@SteelXawesome]

i dont get it whats 4

[@twoswap]

S(3), according to PA

[@iesusdesus5704]

​@@twoswapwhat does PA stand for

[@gaugea]

@@iesusdesus5704pennsylvania

[@kevinbroberg3504]

Peano arithmetic

[@Sevrgpro]

@@iesusdesus5704plotting apples

[@literallynooneimportant2337]

If you close your eyes its like micheal cera explains connect 4 to you and its oddly soothing

[@Ragdollmaster333]

I don't think you need to close your eyes, maybe squint a little

[@TalaaAlore]

A friend of mine told a story about a time he was in a bar in Thailand, and a girl challenged him to connect 4. She said they would play for a drink, my friend wins a drink. She then said "okay, okay, now we play for money" my friend wins around £10 in Bhat. She then challenges him to a game for roughly £50 in Bhat and proceeds to absolutely whoop his ass at this seemingly simple game and takes £50 of his money. Incredible hustle

[@twoswap]

Brb bout to grab some plane tickets

[@undeniablySomeGuy]

you said "girl" and i thought 6 years old, and then you said "drink" and i'm just like i guess drinking laws are different in different countries

[@Yellowc0ld]

Definitely let him win the first time to lower his guard

[@inafridge8573]

​@@Yellowc0ldyep classic

[@plastictouch6796]

2swap is about to find the underground connect 4 ring in Thailand

[@superoriginalhandle]

Wow, there's a real community of Connect 4 players? I've always seen Connect 4 websites, but I never knew there were serious communities. As a casual Connect 4 player that's really interesting to me. By the way your videos are great and deserve far more attention than the amount they are getting

[@NisseHult101]

I played a lot of connect 4 with my friends on the breaks in school back in the days and already back then did we quickly learn that the starting player had a clear advantage. The thing about two vertically adjacent threats we also learned rather quickly. Nice explanation of parity, that concept was not clear to me until now! You could perhaps go into more about the openings in another video?

[@twoswap]

I definitely will!

[@MrEdwardCollins]

Thanks for taking the time to create and upload this. I've been a Connect 4 fan for about 40 years. Because the 6x7 game has been solved for a long time now, for many, many years the 8x8 game was a very, very popular game to play on many game servers, including Little Golem's popular turn-based game server. (It's simply called Four In A Row at that site.) I think a lot of the stronger players there actually believed it might be 2nd Player win, but it had yet never been demonstrated or proven. And that's exactly the outcome. Only just recently, in 2015 I believe, Connect 4 on an 8x8 board was recently solved. On this size board it's indeed a 2nd Player win. I believe a gentleman by the name of John Trump is responsible for proving this. So, now that both the the 6x7 and the 8x8 size boards have been solved, I'm wondering what's the next size board that would be fun to play that hasn't yet been solved. 8x9? 9x9?

[@twoswap]

My suspicion is that strategy is quite similar for any board size with an even height, since the parity mechanic remains intact. It would be curious to try odd-height boards, I suspect it would be much less easy to transfer the skill I've already picked up in standard size to that domain. As a huge go and lambda calculus fan, I can confirm that tromp is a legend :) Glad you enjoyed the video!

[@sorin_markov]

A lot of high-skill players I've met enjoy 9x9

[@jackerylel]

9x9 has an odd amount of spaces while all previously mentioned boards have even amount of spaces. Just an observation but it might be important

[@karanshome]

@@twoswap Maybe I'm completely wrong, but with an odd height board, couldn't you count the number of playable (as in not immediately losing) spaces and apply a sort of parity from there. Of course, it's slightly more complicated, but I think a similar approach might work?

[@twoswap]

since having written that comment I have played a lot of odd height boards, and yes, it is a bit trickier, but definitely still transferrable!

[@poison3429]

Very well done guide! I can certainly attest to the fact that simply playing more games with these principles in mind will make you better - it's where most of my skill comes from haha Would definitely be interested in more connect 4 content from you!

[@minikretz1]

Super understandable explanations and easy to remember, great video!

[@jkid1134]

This is a nice video. It's mostly things I picked up on already, but with a valuable level of clarity and precision (and examples!). Is there an opening database somewhere I can study? You may be pleased to know, exactly today, your last 4 uploads were 4 days, 4 weeks, 4 months, and 4 years ago.

[@twoswap]

I'm sort of working on one! It already exists, but not going to link it here until I get around to polishing it when my openings video comes out, so stay tuned!

[@troybartelson7420]

I’d be interested in a database too

[@alekszewczyk9271]

This is a brilliant video, thank you for creating it. I wish there were more strategy tutorials for other simple games...

[@WontTrout]

Your new videos are much better, glad to see you improving! This is great content

[@Average_CoD_Clips]

Honestly this seems like one of the most competitive games from when I was a kid. Most other games were RNG based with a pair of dice or “Chance” type cards.

[@suspiciousshadeofgreen]

Dude talks about connect 4 like it’s chess

[@anticarnick]

It's funny because connect four is deceptively complicated.

[@egwenealvereiscool7726]

I had no idea there was an actual community around this game! I figured out the parity and combinatoric strategies on my own from playing, but I have never heard of any of these openings. Are there any practice webites on?

[@twoswap]

Yeah definitely! FlyOrDie has the highest caliber player base. Plenty of other sites though

[@bupobm]

Great video! Am interest in more Connect 4 content also A whole video just on the opening would be amazing

[@timothykubista3823]

I want to see more connect 4 content!

[@jacknygren]

Believe it or not i actually know all of this just by playing against the bot on connect 4 solver! i do think your opening is good as yellow because it did throw me off, but it also might not be good because i learned how to refute all the moves. My least favorite opening to see beleive it or not is when people go in column 2 and 6 as red. As yellow that really throws me off

[@culwin]

Thanks, Michael Cera, big fan!

[@willsenay]

Whoa the parity concept seems so important

[@foxmaddenreal]

this is a really informative and cool video, would love to see any more videos about connect 4 strategy should you make more

[@ilovezsig]

Best video i didn't know i needed

[@hermi1-kenobi455]

i will be unbeatable..

[@noahniederklein8038]

Are vertical double threats necessarily better than other double threats since they both guarantee a win? Or is it that vertical threats aren't guaranteed if you don't play perfectly before they're forced and double threats are often immediate?

[@The7legacy]

GREAT VIDEO!! Good Tips!!

[@katelikesrectangles]

great explanations, thank you

[@mariosamson1716]

i'm already good at this game and i made my own openings, ik they're not good against robots but they work againts humans so i won't change them

[@jacobmendenhall978]

are there any other good resources for learning? This video was insightful but if there is a good site to practice on, or a wiki of some kind, or just a lesson plan for beginners or something out there I'd like to know :)

[@twoswap]

There is a textbook by James Dow Allen, the same computer scientist who first solved the game. I've read it, and only partially recommend. It's a bit slow in my opinion, a few times longer than it really needs to be. The best thing that you can do after learning the basics is, if you ask me, practicing online and reviewing your games with an engine. I also have an interactive openings anki (flash card) deck which exists online, but I am hesitant to publish it here before I polish it a bit. Might introduce it when I get around to making an openings video.

[@jossglz.]

Now I want to play Connect 4 👀

[@Pixelarity64]

I can tell I have a lot to learn about Connect 4, but I'm 6 minutes in and I've gotten 3 ads, which deters me. Edit: I like the ultra master magic video, and the ads are probably not your fault, so, sorry.

[@twoswap]

Thanks :) Yeah, unfortunately I can't turn them off until I get 4000 view-hours or so :(

[@twoswap]

Ads are off!

[@ruferd]

I recently started playing with my 7 year old son (he's picked up some things pretty quick!) But he always makes his first opening move (as player 1) on the very first column. Is there some strategy at the higher levels where this actually works? Because no one does it, no one has probably studied any openings that start with that move. So maybe player one going in column one throws off the opponent and you get the advantage from having studied the potential openings?

[@twoswap]

It's pretty tough. You'd probably have to learn a lot more to capitalize on a first column opening then you would need to learn to get by using 4th column. The more advanced your opponent is, the more true this becomes, I would imagine. It's not completely unthinkable but it really isn't a good move either.

[@ruferd]

@@twoswap after I posted this I thought about it and it does just seem bad. You give player 2 the best opening move (column 4) and there's a wasted move hanging out in column one. It's just like letting them go first for no reason. You're right that it does just not seem like not a great move. I was just thinking back to a video that I saw where Magnus Carlson started with his left most pawn up one square (instead of a more traditional opening). But then again, I'm not Carlson and this isn't chess XD

[@twoswap]

@@ruferd It's not completely unimaginable. variations like 4156 and 4136 can get complicated. 417 is a well-studied opening (called the swedish.) Not easy to follow through with, but the lines that come out of it aren't trivial either.

[@ruferd]

@@twoswap oh interesting....I wasn't talking about 41xxx I was talking about 14xxx. I'll look through the 4136, and 4156 and 417 though and see what I can find. Also, where do high level players go to discuss this stuff (aside from KZbin comment sections)?

[@twoswap]

@@ruferd Oops. I think I realized that on my first reply but forgot by the second, lol. Yeah starting with 1 is pretty tough to recover.

[@s.i.r.g3366]

hey its vigdo, i think i played against you a couple times, nice to see your doing nice vids👍

[@LithmusEarth]

in general I think this video feels very at home with my chess analysis videos I watch except the software you use its not as good. I would prefer some nice white highlighting on the dark background, with circles and lines to show not just a tiny dark mouse, this was impossible when i was on my phone, it's a little better on my computer. You also don't seem to have a way to backtrack you have to just keep resetting the board and rebuilding.

[@twoswap]

See my newer videos :")

[@MilesIsReal]

hello, I found your channel from your recent video about parity. is there some database for openings? thanks

[@MilesIsReal]

more specifically names. I've been using an engine so far without names

[@twoswap]

I'm making one!

[@MilesIsReal]

@@twoswap oh okay so the names you mentioned are made up? ive personally been calling 6-1 setup the main line since its the "correct" sequence

[@twoswap]

@@MilesIsReal No, 6-1 is a common name. compare with the 5-4, 5-1, etc. 6 pieces in the center and 1 next to it.

[@jacknygren]

@@MilesIsRealey bro, its khorndog. Play me sometime!

[@danih.5675]

Idk why this was rec to me but now i am going to terrorize retirement homes everywhere

[@manbuckets]

So interesting!

[@ppppppqqqppp]

Genuine question, as connect 4 is a solved game, with a pretty surprisingly simple solution for the first player to always win, is there a reason for theorycrafting strategy?

[@bglamb]

"Surprisingly simple"? Can you elaborate/link to sources? A cursory Google shows lots of simple strategies that purport to allow you to "almost always" win, and a solved solution that is up to 40 moves deep - which given the possible range of opposing moves, seems outside the realm of what can be memorised by a human.

[@twoswap]

It is very much not simple at all. I'm hesitant to speak in universals since there are some ridiculously good players out there, but in my case I've been studying the game casually for a while now, and to me it still looks like a well of infinite complexity. My suspicion is that no human really knows how to always win as red.

[@ppppppqqqppp]

@@twoswap yeah gonna be honest I looked into it a bit more and it goes a lot deeper than I thought

[@DavidKlausa]

I suggest buying The Complete Book of Connect4 and trying the problem sets. Finding the only move to win is often very, very hard.

[@telph3223]

What are you using to play connect four?

[@twoswap]

Little browser doohickey I made myself

[@Mercurialites]

This video is great because I can only count to 4

[@Thiscreeper]

What program do you use?

[@twoswap]

Just something I made in order to record that video

[@jacknygren]

My favorite opening as yellow is filling up the middle even at the top because red never knows what to do

[@twoswap]

That's called the 6-1! Among advanced players it's really well studied and there are much fewer "gotchas" if you stick to the standard continuations. For that reason it's generally more common among experts to see openings like 436, 42x, 444441, etc.

[@jacknygren]

@@twoswap where could i find opening names? i probably actually have all them memorized as i studied all openings in the solver but never named them. I learned studying openings from chess

[@twoswap]

There isn't really a good database or anything. I'm sort of making one. For now it's mostly tribal knowledge. There are so many first row openings it's dumb. I doubt you (or I) even know a tenth of them. Not many are named though, at least as far as I know.

[@theanarchonazbolinquisition]

Better than chess

[@blizzard8958]

Where is a good place to play connect four?

[@twoswap]

FlyOrDie has the best players

[@blizzard8958]

@@twoswap really looking forward to the series you're doing on connect four, they feel like 3blue1brown videos and it's gotten me wanting to play connect 4. I play a good bit of chess in my free time for fun and haven't played connect 4 outside a few times on game pigeon but now learning that the game is solved as a WIN not a draw makes it much more exciting in my opinion. Are there any videos you would recommend to a beginner to learn more of the basics?

[@twoswap]

​@@blizzard8958tbh no haha. I only made the videos since I was appalled at the lack of (good) connect 4 content out there. I'm honestly surprised there isn't more.

[@superoriginalhandle]

​@@twoswapEven searching for information on Connect 4 strategy in other mediums (you know, the internet, books) doesn't yield as much as I would have thought. Connect 4 is quite a popular game but it seems that competitive Connect 4 is extremely small

[@twoswap]

Truly a shame 😔

[@Unpug]

Nice

[@GigaOtomia]

What about bigger boards, or more players? One time eleven years ago, I played a 20x12 (20 wide) Connect 4 board with like, six players, over teamspeak with MS Paint. I don't remember who won, but it's on my channel with a half-hour long video. kzbin.info/www/bejne/i3Sxomqkn5eWjdE

[@twoswap]

I've seen plenty of multi-player connect 4 but I dont think anyone studies it seriously. Big boards on the other hand are definitely a thing, 9x9 is pretty common. Major threat analysis changes a good bit on odd height boards. Fun fact, optimal play is proven to be a draw on some (all? I forget) classes of infinite boards.

[@B.27y]

Tip from me if you just Pause instead off saying uhm it seem smarter

[@Adventure_fuel]

Michel Scott was correct. Connect four is plenty complicated.

[@Learningin-L]

I can't find any opening theory on connect four.

[@twoswap]

I guess you have no other option than subscribing and waiting for my video ;)

[@Learningin-L]

​@@twoswap Yeah, you're the best person on the subject of Connect Four I've found so far, but you don't have many videos out.

[@twoswap]

That's soon to change!

[@somethingsomeone196]

💪💪💪💪💪

[@rexr0b0twars80]

hearing chess terminology in relation to connect 4 is both hilarious and terrifying to me...

[@undeniablySomeGuy]

oh hell no, not opening theory in connect 4, too

[@dreamsolutions3037]

Isn't this game solved?

[@twoswap]

yes

[@tomfogle8173]

that went by so fast

[@WhatAreDrums729]

Interesting how so much of the game is inevitabilities. Claustrophobic, but interesting!

[@TheWorldsStage]

I liked Connect 3 better. It had a better storyline. Connect 3: The Connection Protection

[@strangeanimations2518]

I’ve found my people

[@matt-ko4cc]

"Such that..." "Contrapositively..." Do you have a mathematics degree by any chance

[@twoswap]

Yes haha

[@matt-ko4cc]

@@twoswap Same here, that's why it was so obvious haha

[@JuhoHartikainen]

This game is really difficult to follow. Best regards, Color blindness

[@twoswap]

So I hear! Switching to IBM colorblind-safe pallette on my upcoming vids.

[@marklondon9004]

Write an AI that can play an NxM game!

[@twoswap]

Sounds like fun, too much on my plate right now but maybe someday

[@andybaldman]

It’s like chess for dummies.

[@twoswap]

By that logic, chess is go for dummies

[@andybaldman]

@@twoswap And Go is life for dummies.

[@AhsokaTanoTheWhite]

I don't understand, Connect 4 is a completely solved game, the first player can't lose unless they make a mistake. The second player can only lose or draw if the first player doesn't make a mistake. All this about strategy is complete bogus. IIRC if player 1 opens in the middle column and plays perfectly, they will win. If they open on either adjacent column and play perfectly (as does player 2) it will be a draw. If they open on any of the 4 outside columns player 2 can will win if they play perfectly.

[@twoswap]

Just because it's solved computationally doesn't mean you can "just play perfectly"

[@DanielRBW]

@@twoswap We'll all just learn all variations of responding to the 4th column. It'll only take literally forever

[@KitagumaIgen]

Annoying clickbaity title-card.

[@twoswap]

thanks you too

[@laurencahn9192]

Hi 2Swap! I love your explanations and I want to interview you for Reader's Digest on a story I'm writing about how to win Connect 4. Please reply here, and we can exchange contact info. My deadline is Sunday, so hope to hear from you soon!

[@twoswap]

Sure, why not :) Shoot me an email at my throwaway: [e-mail]