Deck Of Cards - New Version

A bunch of students were heading on a long hike and came to a town called Bala, where they decided to rest. That evening being Wednesday, some of the students went to therapy. Those who had manuals took them out and began to discuss their life-scripts, but one student had only a deck of cards and began to lay them out. The therapist saw this and, having issues with being perfect, was cross, and said “Put away those cards and come and see me in the morning” and threw the student out of the group.

When the student returned in the morning, the therapist and his supervisor were there. “Why have you brought this student here?” said the supervisor.

“For playing cards in therapy”, said the therapist.

“I hope you have a good explanation” said the supervisor.

“I do”, said the student. “It’s like this …” and he began:

‘I have been on a long trip and during that time I have had neither my training manual, my copy of TA Theory, nor my notes from Eric Berne’s lecture series. But I have had a deck of cards which has helped me to get through the difficult times.

When I see the Ace, I remember that I’m OK. I knew that anyway.

When I see the two, I remember that every transaction takes place between two people and that there are two roles in counselling, therapist and client, and I know which one I want to be.

When I see the three, I remember the three ego-states, Parent, Adult and Child. And all the sub-states which are quite a lot more. I like the Little Professor most.

When I see the four, I think of the four life-positions in the OK Corral.

When I see the five, I think of the five drivers “be strong”, “try hard”, “please me”, “hurry up”, and “be perfect”. and the five schools of TA. Except that there are now six drivers.

When I see the six, I think of the six patterns of personality adoption identified by Stewart and Joines and the six types of social behaviour – withdrawal, ritual, activity, pastime, games, and intimacy.

When I see the seven, I remember the seven elements that make up a script and the age up to which parents give us general injunctions.

When I see the eight, I think of the eight therapeutic techniques; four are interventions and four are interpositions.

When I see the nine, I think of the nine types of complementary transaction. And some have ulterior ones.

When I see the ten, I think of the ten modes in the OK Modes Model, four effective and six ineffective. (Nancy Porter)

When I see the Jack, or Knave, I remember that I am a prince but I have been turned into a frog.

When I see the Queen, I think of my mother who as controlling parent did this by teaching me the five restrictive rules of stroking.

When I see the King, I think of Eric Berne, who developed his own theory of therapy when his application to the San Francisco Psychoanalytic Institute was turned down, and I wonder what his drivers were.

 

There are 52 cards in a deck, the number of countries which had TA Associations in 1992, so it must be true.

There are 12 picture cards, the number of script injunctions.

There are 4 suits, the number of categories of goals.

There are 13 cards in a suit, the number of people in a group session, counting the therapist.

If I add up the spots on the cards, I get 365, the number of hours it would take to learn all the theory of TA, and nearly as many as the number of games.

So you see my deck of cards is as useful for therapy and counselling as all the TA Journals and text-books put together.’

And the therapist now had enough stamps for a racket so threw him out, so the student with his awareness of himself and of phoniness went on to be a successful gestalt therapist.

Hitsville UK

Am watching Top of the Pops 76 repeated on BBC4 weekly (well nearly, come to that in a minute).

It really did use to be the must-watch pop programme on TV. Well, there wasn't much else. You could see what the people looked like who'd made the records you'd bought or were thinking of buying ("stockmarket for your radio", thank you the Rezillos).

Well ... up to a point.

I hadn't seen the ones that are now showing because in May and June 1976 I was at University and the TV room (singular) was not comfortable and usually somebody wanted to see something else - although not usually during TOTP, admittedly, even the intellectuals who posed as not being interested had to watch. Room always busy.

Blimey, TOTP was in a dire state in 1976, reflecting the charts and the state of British pop music in general. We really did need punk - which was just on the horizon. When the Number 1 progression goes Brotherhood of Man (weeks on end), Abba, (OK that was a good one, Fernando, but it hung on for ever, several weeks at number 2 before the top and still at number 4 "currently", JJ Barrie (appalling piece of schmaltz) and the Wurzels (fun once, but then really tiresome, comedy record without any comedy), then the charts are in trouble.

But that isn't TOTP's fault (although they probably take some blame for who they publicised).

So this is about the programme itself. They were clearly in trouble getting people on, groups go on tour, I know but TOTP was breaking its own rules consistently. In short, it was no longer a chart show.

So all right the first one on was always a new release, fair enough, this week the Surprise Sisters (who?) with Got To Get You Into My Life, which never troubled the Guinness Book of Hit Singles compilers. Last week the G Band (renamed even though Paul Gadd had not yet been found out) with Don't Make Promises (You Can't Keep) which I bought although clearly no-one else did.

And then seemingly every week several not actually in the Top 30 - and some which didn't make it there at all - although "bubbling under" probably, all right they were going up and so in a sense if it's next week's chart, well OK. Prediction is difficult.

But "this" week (now I'm getting to that), a classic. No less than 6 acts not on the chart performing on the 13 June is a new record (groan). (Because BBC4 is not actually showing it every week, it is already slipping in the schedules. They started together at the beginning of May and are now two weeks adrift. By the time we get the 1976 Christmas chart, it will be February here, at this rate. Henceforth we shall regard 13 June as "this" week. "How much does BBC4 care about this show?" is a question worth asking though.)

So apart from the Sisters, we had on the show but not in the 30, Bryan Ferry on film (was a big hit in a week or two and it is a fantastic film), two of Ruby Flipper dancing to Maureen McGovern (don't see the excuse for that one, can't they dance to something in the charts, the alleged point was to cover for acts that couldn't make it into the studio) which did make No 15 eventually, the Sensational Alex Harvey Band, good value but not there right now, Flintlock (no never heard of them either) who struggled up to No 30 in time, and Osibisa's follow-up to Sunshine Day which statistics indicate hit the dizzy heights of number 31.

And then ...

There used to be a rule that once a record had gone down, it didn't get on again even if it started going up again. Now that was a shame sometimes when some yo-yo records were still quite popular or if there were a one-week blip, but a rule is a rule.

But clearly this rule did not always apply ...

On this week's show were Slik with Requiem. Number 30 in the charts. Down from .. not sure, 24? And not the first time they'd broken the rule, two weeks ago, this classic yo-yo had dropped out of the 30 and still been on. I've counted 4 times Slik were on with this one, and I may have missed one. And 2 of those broke the rule ...

Now it's lovely to see the fresh-faced Midge Ure again so many times and I didn't mind the song, even though its wonderfully atmospheric beginning and original lyrics for what's only a lost-love song both get lost a bit in the poppy chorus ("This is a req, only a req, this is a requiem ..") but you have to ask "Just what hold did he have over the producer of TOTP in the mid-70s?" Were they really the only band he could get hold of at short notice on a Tuesday?

But while we ponder that one, one final question for BBC4. What are you doing with the editing?

Each week (...) there is a 30 minute version at 7.30 on Thursday - and a 40-minute "repeat" in the middle of the night. It's very amusing (well it's not really) when the V+ box preview and the BBC iPlayer give you a brief blurb including some of the acts who are on - and then you think afterwards "hang on, I didn't actually see Cliff, did I drop off in the middle?", but it's only because he got edited out of the shortened version (which is also the iPlayer version), although the preview/description clearly says he would be on. You wonder if you've got the wrong show (particularly given the dates thing).

Come on BBC4, don't get tied to this modern thing where every programme between 7 and 11 has to be 30 or 60 minutes. Can you be bold enough to plough your own furrow? BBC1 may have lost it, but you don't need to. And have some integrity of what you show.

As Seen on TV

We've been much enjoying the BBC2 series Episodes a vicious satire on television production, (mostly in America). Brilliantly acted by Stephen Mangan and Tamsin Greig who we knew were good from Green Wing and others, but also ... Matt LeBlanc has been a revelation. Who knew that Joey could do that?

This and The Trip may just be the future of television comedy, or at least the direction it should be following.

Fighting For Strangers

Three fixed points in the gaming (and indeed general) calendar:

Beer and Pretzels - third Saturday in May
Midcon - third weekend in November
and
The Live Draft - first (but this year, second) Saturday in September.

You get to annoy people at all three, but perhaps most enjoyably at the Draft when someone has been following a player for several minutes waiting for his chance to draft him - and you take him the pick before. 15 minutes later, Mark said he was still cross with me. Result. And only a L6 Returner who's not quick. But it was at least a more interesting choice than a L3 OG with 65S.

The thing is you know they are only little bits of computer code but you get strangely attached to them. (Groome and John this time are lamenting "old boys" who are now retiring.) So although now they are strangers, you hope in time they will be old friends (unlike several of the little so-and-sos who came to nothing - Groome again, cut a first round pick who never played ..)

The Hunter

Some results the Draw Specialist get are achieved easily (too easily, even). Some take a bit more work.

Yes, another draw on board 3. This one a bit different. I sacrificed a rook (R x b2+, he didn't see that coming) on move 21 for what I hoped would be a winning attack with a perpetual in hand. It wasn't a winning attack and he managed to find the way out of the perpetual. So I played on a rook down.

A glorious king-hunt, chased the White King from b1 to h3.

At one point the other rook was hanging, too, for at least 3 moves. Threats of mate in 2 (there might have been a mate in 1) were ignored, mainly because there was no way to defend them. Initiative is everything.

At the death he has a pawn ready to promote with check. (My king is on g5 by this point, his pawn is on g2 and g1 is guarded by his rook.) And then I finally forced a perpetual. Draw agreed on move 51; all I have left is queen and a few pawns, in just the right places.

Thirty moves played a rook down (a pair did get swopped at one point) achieves a draw. Is this a record?

My team-mates said I was lucky. I said I always had the draw. You just have to know how to play it.

Sadly, the team lost - to the bottom of the division, see last week - as Boards 5 and 6 yielded only half a point and Glen on 4, despite playing well (their board 4 got a bit distracted by the fireworks on 3), winning at one point, misplayed the ending and eventually lost a piece. 2-4. Heigh-ho.

Still, it was fun.

Sing When You're Winning

Yesterday's chess match was one of the most thrilling ever. This is my report on it.

Background info: we are second bottom in the division. Our opponents, Clevedon, are second top, relegated last season from division 1. Promises to be a toughie. However our captain, Steve, points out that there are a lot of teams in the middle very close together and that if we win, we go third. I point out that actually we go fifth on board count. We compromise on "equal third" not worrying that other teams will also be playing tonight and some of them have to score points ...

Our team is:
Board 1: Andy, most improved player last season, stepping up to the mark again
Board 2: Steve, with no wins this season
Board 3: me, undefeated but mostly draws
Board 4: Glen, currently with the best grading performance in our club this season
Board 5: Phil, who gets into and out of positions you wouldn't believe
Board 6: Anthony, the smart one (but not today)

Odd board numbers are playing black, as usual.

I get to watch quite a few openings since my opponent is really taking his time (and seems to have had a tough day at work, given by his yawns). Glen has a strong centre, Andy seems to have a loose kingside, a shortage of space and no desire to castle; his opponent's king is also remaining in the centre, with an h-pawn advance. I play the usual Caro-Kan but in response to Nf6 I get not NxN ch doubling my pawns (I of course would play gxf6 like Miles against Karpov) but the retreat Ng3. Which seems to leave my white-square bishop a problem. I lock it in with e6 and start thinking about a Q-side fianchetto.

Meanwhile Andy has played Qxb2 and declines to play Qxa2 in response to Rb1. I can't see the trap ... still a pawn up is a good start.
I get in c5 and cxd4 rather easily and have to think what to do next. Nc5 looks good, forcing Bc2. What now? Develop the Q-side what a good idea. Nh5 really forces g6 but seems to do no harm - he doesn't even force off the dark bishops.

However Nc5 seems to lead inevitably to a threat of a rook on the seventh. Just as he's about to achieve it though, after a bit of swapping off, he offers the draw that I hadn't expected. I accept with alacrity. I wouldn't have offered one there, even with opposite bishops. This time it wasn't the Draw Specialist making the running in splitting the point. All done by half-nine and time to watch some others.

Andy is still a pawn up with a George Crockart-type structure and rooks going to be doubled on the c-file. Still squashed but looking like breaking out. Anthony is dominating the board with a massive space advantage but as pieces get swopped the defence looks easier and counter-play seems easier. Phil wins a pawn and looks comfortable. Steve has a nice-looking centre, but what to do? Is the sacrifice playable? Oh, there go a pair of bishops, perhaps not. Glen's opponent refuses a draw offer, quite a fair one I thought what with Glen's passed pawn securely blocked.

Richard is watching with me and I say prophetically "we could win this with four and a half or lose by the same" and he agrees. The match is heating up nicely. Anthony still looks like he is winning but if that passed e-pawn moves there will be mate threats (after some Q manoeuvres it does and there are, but he has it covered). 1-0.

Phil and Andy both have opposing Qs in their defence. Andy gets rid of his but Phil has to play very delicately, not taking a pawn until the second opportunity, but this seems to be his opponent's last desperate throw and suddenly Phil is a knight up with only rooks on in addition. Careful play and he closes it out. 2-0.

Andy is short on time. He's broken out, bits everywhere, particularly the knights look to have had sone fun, but he's repulsed although his opponent seems relieved. 2-1. Steve is losing. The sacrifice didn't work although I thought he missed a chance to win the piece back (surely Qe5+ works?) and he's got not just a Q in his defence but a rook too. So I go to watch Glen.

I'm not sure where it came from but his opponent misses some tactics and Glen goes a pawn up in a same-bishops ending. That pawn secures the sacrifice of the bishop so it's two v two all on one side but Glen has a bishop. Slightly behind in the race to the Q-side he plays the B to a3 where I would have gone to f6. But it seems to work - I don't think I would have advanced the black pawns, I think Kb1 was the way to go - and when Black resigns against a lone pawn and bishop with his K stranded I say "You've just won us the match, Glen." "Have I?" he says when Steve says "Excuse me, but I won it a few seconds ago". And he did too. Apparently there wasn't the mate his opponent thought and Steve has won with sixteen seconds left on his clock. A captain's performance. Even he can't quite believe his first win this season. Four and a half to one and a half against one of the strongest teams in the division.

So we are third. Or fifth. Or third equal. Or somewhere. And as Richard points out, if we lose next week we'll be back to second bottom. Still that's another day.

Merry Christmas Everyone

Well the shopping is all done now, I do like to do it in good time, and the tree was up a few days ago. Points West want me to be really "festive"; when I find out what that means perhaps I'll have a go. However when they are so relentless it's easy to see that the Puritans may have had a point.

Grumpy, moi? No.

Merry Christmas to all, peace, goodwill etc. Normal service resumed in the new year (maybe). Busy, busy, busy.

Go Wild in the Country

(observ8n)

i c u
i .
u c me
u .
we . . .
u x no me
i wil x hrt u
.
u r cool
u rn & jmp
ur frenz r ther
find cheez

bye

The Song Remains the Same

In the absence of winning a ticket to the real thing, went last night to see Whole Lotta Led at the Fleece. (Still might win a ticket?)

The vocalist was not Robert Plant, and didn't quite have his vocal range - but he had his style and his heart and he sang blues and rock with passion and power. 9/10. Since I've Been Loving You was fantastic.

The bassist played a wonderful No Quarter and the drummer played Moby Dick like you've never seen. He could have played all night, and I think he wanted too. Both 9/10. Maybe that's harsh.

But the guitarist was astonishing. No-one is Jimmy Page, but this is as near as you could want. He was ferocious, tender and exciting. The players may change but the song remains the same. Off the scale.

And if the song is good enough and still relevant, the song can remain the same. Only if the song is dated does it need to change. But which songs should remain the same and which need a new riff? A 12-inch remix? A live version? (We can always use a live version.)

No D'yerMak'er, alas. To lament it would be to quibble, to ask too much.

Everything that's small has to grow. And it has to grow!

Mathematics

Define F(N), the factor-sum of N, on integer N, as the sum of the proper factors of N. Formally F(N) = Σi, i divides N, i = 1 to N-1.

Further define Q(N), the quotient-factor of N, Q(N) = F(N)/N.

In common usage:
Q(N) = 1, N is perfect
Q(N) < 1, N is deficient
Q(N) > 1, N is abundant.

Previously existing result:
N is perfect if N = 2^n x (2^(n+1) - 1), provided (2^(n+1) - 1) is prime.
It is not known whether all perfect numbers are of this form.

Preliminary results:
If P is prime, F(P) = 1 and Q(P) = 1/P. Clearly, for e, there exists N s.t. that Q(N) < e.
Primes are maximally deficient.

If N = P^n, where P is prime, F(N) = (P^n - 1)/(P - 1), Q(N) = (N-1)/N(P-1)
For particular P, Q(P^n) tends to 1/(P-1) as n tends to infinity.
In the case P = 2, F(2^n) = 2^n - 1 and Q(2^n) tends to 1.
Integers of the form 2^n are minimally deficient.

Question: Are there other N such that F(N) = N - 1?

If N is abundant, any multiple of N is abundant with greater factor-quotient. (See following lemma; more fractions are added when a multiple is derived.) Formally, if M divides N, then Q(N) > Q(M).

Lemma
For all n, there exists N s.t. Q(N) > n. (Abundancy increases without limit.)
Proof
Q(N) is the sum of fractions of the form 1/n. Since Σ1/n diverges (well-known result), Q(N) is unbounded.

Therefore it is possible to define N is abundant-S if Q(N) >= S and assert that there exists an infinity of abundant-S numbers, whatever the value of S. For instance, 120 is abundant-2 (the smallest such).

Question: Find for each integer N, find the smallest M such that Q(M) ³ N

Further Result:
Since the sum of the odd fractions can also be shown to diverge[1], there is also an infinity of odd abundant-S numbers. The first odd abundant number is 945 and the smallest odd abundant-2 number is believed to be 1 018 976 683 725, which has Q-value 2.0107.

Define N is super-abundant if Q(N) > 1 and Q(N) > Q(n) if N > n. (Informally, a new record is set.)
The first super-abundant number is the first abundant number, 12. Q(12) = 1.33. (The record-holders that are not abundant are 2, 4 and 6.) The set of super-abundant numbers has infinitely many members. (A record-holder will be beaten by any multiple, from result above.)

Question: Find the super-abundant numbers.

[1] The proof is similar to that of the full series. Consider the series 1/3 + 1/5 + 1/7 +1/9 ... If we successively group 1, 3, 9, 27 ... terms ie 1/3 + (1/5 + 1/7 + 1/9) + (1/11 + ... + 1/27) + ... it is clear that the series is greater than 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 +1/3 ... and therefore diverges (slowly).

It has been necessary to replace some symbols unsupported by this font by words in the above.

Aspirational TV

I've discovered a wonderful new TV programme called Jane and the Dragon. It's about (ostensibly) a girl who wants to train to be a knight when everyone else, including her mother and father, wants to pigeonhole her into being a lady-in-waiting like her mother. Even her friends aren't sure about her ambition, but at least the rules are applied fairly by Sir Theodore, although he is a daft old ... knight. So she sets out to kill the dragon but instead befriends it and brings it back to the castle. Which isn't always appreciated as it should be.

Why she wants to be a knight when the examples around are less than honourable beats me, but I suppose it's better than being a lady-in-waiting, even if the young princess who smells of lavender is quite nice really.

There's a website although Jester hasn't fully finished it, so no link here. Google it and you'll find it. Programme is Saturday and Sunday mornings on Five.

In other news, I'm hoping to meet a man with seven wives.

Rock Your World

According to New Scientist, researchers have been making recordings to show what sounds come out like on other worlds, in preparation for sending recording equipment there. Atmosphere density and composition changes the harmonics. So now they know what Smoke on the Water sounds like on Venus and Titan. ("I should have doen thunder, but I couldn't resist" says the producer.)

On Venus it's much deeper and punchier and on Titan it's much louder. So that's next holiday sorted.

Strange Echoes

Well it isn't exactly a pick-up truck, but I have this curious feeling that I should get a pink carnation and drive to the levee ...

New Game

"Fagin's Gang" was playtested yesterday with some popularity. Stealing is harder than you think. You have to be in the right place at the right time - not easy with the policemen moving you on and the other players stealing your turf. Deceptively simple and frustratingly complex.
A winner.

Rain rain go away come again another day

I suppose it really was a bit much putting the beer festival on Friday the 13th. Asking for it, you might say. Wetter outside than in, and so forth. Still Saturday was nice, made up for it, beer hadn't all run out, with a good band who seemed to have borrowed my record collection at one point. Get your tickets early next year.

And today is St. Swithin's Day. Which is not going to be good news for all those living on flood plains.

Literary Tricks

(Re)discovered a figure of speech on "Eggheads" yesterday and wanted to compose a few. Two to go on with:

"Time ran out and so did the dog."

"I cleaned out the garage first and the casino second."

Eggheads called it zeugma but Wikipedia says this is syllepsis, a sub-category.