Did Data cheat at Strategema?

If Data had violated the rules of Stratagema, Kolrami would have called him on it and claimed victory. He was a third level grandmaster; it's a safe assume he knew the rules of the game.

No, Data's strategy was completely within the rules. He did what anyone would do in a strategic situation: he played to his strengths: vastly superhuman endurance and patience. And if Kolrami hadn't been played as the petulant man that he was, he would have congratulated Data on his innovative approach.

 

But neither side is up material in this position. The position is equal and there is no way to force a win.

 

This right here is the best, most succinct explanation of Data's strategy in this episode that I've ever seen. It immediately makes it clear how Data's change of strategy worked.

 

Well, while I agree with your game asessmeent, I'm not sure any opponent of such skill would be wholly congratulatory or overly thrilled at the kind of defeat Kolrami is dealt here.

It's already established that at strictly gameplay, Data was fairly easily beatable by Kolrami. So for Data to outmatch Kolrami, he had to switch his strategy from playing the game to essentially using the gameplay to play only the man, as a man. Even Data knows he didn't win the game. He beat a man. (A man who undoubtedly needed a good beating)

I don't know about anyone else, but I'd be none too graceous if a machine man, who hadn't been able to best my gameplay, instead deliberately figured he could best me by extending gameplay until I dropped from fatigue. I wouldn't go so far as to say it's cheating, but it's probably not in the most honorable spirit of gameplay, & thereby not entirely worthy of any accolades from the opponent IMHO.

But it is one mighty delicious revenge lol

 

Data's assessment of his previous game with Kolrami was that he made no mistakes. He sought to win, using all of his abilities, and was defeated. Because he detected no mistakes, he could not learn from them. Therefore, the proper presumption was that he could not win. So, instead he played for a stalemate. Whether this was because he considered it better to tie than lose, or whether he recognized that he could defeat Kolrami by outlasting him, it was a completely sound strategy.

 

Only in so much as it could not be defeated by a man

Data's line "Theoretically, I should be able to challenge him indefinitely" implies a different goal than a final draw outcome. It suggests the intent to perpetually stave off defeat, by settling for an ongoing, endless balance within the game, wherein Kolrami, the man, would not be capable of challenging an opponent indefinitely.

A stalemate is an outcome where neither side of the game is capable of victory. Data's outcome was one where the person he was playing could not last long enough for his side of the game to achieve victory. That's not really a draw, like 2 chess kings being the only pieces left on the board, with no winning move to be had. It's limbo.

 

A stalemate in chess occurs several ways.
1. The players repeat the same pair of moves three times.
2. Neither side has enough material to defeat the other (king and bishop against king, for example).
3. The king is not in check, but ANY move will place him in check. In theory, a player can be utterly outmatched and a draw can still occur this way.
4. The players agree to a draw.

Scenarios 1 and 4 might have been applicable with Data and Kolrami. But, if Kolrami had offered a draw, it would presumably have been legal for Data to decline (aware that his infinite patience and endurance would ultimately bring victory). Though Data might have been a good sport and accepted.

 

Hence my original post about honoring a spirit of good play. Data is apparently forcing a scenerio of requiring his opponent to concede to his ability to force perpetual limbo. It's not cheating. It's not even unfair really, but it's hardly a move worthy of congratulations. You merely get the Kirk original thinking award lol

 

Remember, though, it was the only way Data could change the outcome. He committed no mistakes that he knew of in the first game.

 

& I'm not criticizing it. All I was saying was it wasn't in the truest sense of good sportsmanship to play for that goal. In essence, Data isn't being a true good sport here, & frankly that's better than ok with pretty much everybody, because if ever there was an opponent who didn't deserve good sportsmanship, it's a blow hard like Kolrami. Everyone was encouraging Data to do just that.

In fact, not only is it a sound strategy, it's the perfect strategy for the desired result, under the circumstances, but you can see why Data's opponent wouldn't want to have a drink with him afterward. After all, the plan here wasn't to win, but to bust him up.

 

Imagine Kolrami playing Solok, Solok 'busting' him using this strategy. They'd have a bitter feud about whether Solok won or not for the rest of their lives...

 

I don’t think data’s strategy was illegal.
He saw that he cannot win on a skill-based level. But he can achieve a tie and has an advantage in the character. He played his enemy, he used every weakness of his enemy, not only strategically but also personally.
I think that is what strategema is also about.

 

It's certainly what strategy is all about.

Sun Tzu, considered to be ancient Earth's greatest strategic mind, would have been pleased by Data's tactics.

 

let’s quote riker quoting sub this: fear is the enemy. The only enemy

 

Fear and the Borg.

 

More of a victory over Kolrami's emotions than over his bladder. He quit the game out of frustration, not because he had to pee.