What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

*** Official Onslaught Thread *** (3 Viewers)

1 new message

Hello sir. I was wondering if you could please post a 3 man onslaught for me. Thank you.
:unsure:
Cosmo?
:lmao:
Hello. I was wondering if you could please post a 19 man onslaught for me. Thank you.
I work strictly on faxed requests, though.
That wasn't really my problem. I make it my policy not to do "solved" onslaughts. Five man? Might as well play tic-tac-toe.
Exactly.
There is beauty and hidden complexity in all onslaughts. Only a fool claims mastery over even the simplist and his foolishness shall be exposed.
 
1 new message

Hello sir. I was wondering if you could please post a 3 man onslaught for me. Thank you.
:unsure:
Cosmo?
:lmao:
Hello. I was wondering if you could please post a 19 man onslaught for me. Thank you.
I work strictly on faxed requests, though.
That wasn't really my problem. I make it my policy not to do "solved" onslaughts. Five man? Might as well play tic-tac-toe.
Exactly.
There is beauty and hidden complexity in all onslaughts. Only a fool claims mastery over even the simplist and his foolishness shall be exposed.
W
 
Quality stuff. Could use some work on the introductory spacing maybe; most experienced opponents would see that coming from a mile away. Try Noblesse's Single-Digit Onslaughts, 1956. Every serious player should have a copy of this at home.

 
1 new message

Hello sir. I was wondering if you could please post a 3 man onslaught for me. Thank you.
:unsure:
Cosmo?
:lmao:
Hello. I was wondering if you could please post a 19 man onslaught for me. Thank you.
I work strictly on faxed requests, though.
That wasn't really my problem. I make it my policy not to do "solved" onslaughts. Five man? Might as well play tic-tac-toe.
Exactly.
There is beauty and hidden complexity in all onslaughts. Only a fool claims mastery over even the simplist and his foolishness shall be exposed.
very very :goodposting:
 
Just a heads up:My buddy is having an online Onslaught tourney in May. It's going to be a great chance to see who's talk and who's actually throwing up meaningful onslaughts.Sign ups are here. I'll need to know ahead of time if you're in. Right now I think he's doing three different types, but I'll let you know as it gets closer. Let me know if you want in.

 
Just a heads up:

My buddy is having an online Onslaught tourney in May.  It's going to be a great chance to see who's talk and who's actually throwing up meaningful onslaughts.

Sign ups are here.  I'll need to know ahead of time if you're in.  Right now I think he's doing three different types, but I'll let you know as it gets closer. 

Let me know if you want in.
I'm IN like Rin-Tin-Tin.
I figured as much. I'm taking you in the Calcutta. I think the entry fee's going to be $100 and they're looking at about 200 to 250 players. They're doing $100 entry fee to make sure only serious players get in. Is that going to be cool?

 
Just a heads up:

My buddy is having an online Onslaught tourney in May.  It's going to be a great chance to see who's talk and who's actually throwing up meaningful onslaughts.

Sign ups are here.  I'll need to know ahead of time if you're in.  Right now I think he's doing three different types, but I'll let you know as it gets closer. 

Let me know if you want in.
I'm IN like Rin-Tin-Tin.
I figured as much. I'm taking you in the Calcutta. I think the entry fee's going to be $100 and they're looking at about 200 to 250 players. They're doing $100 entry fee to make sure only serious players get in. Is that going to be cool?
No problem. But are the pay-outs going to be straight up Cambridge or "Xian Jamboree"?
Xian Jamboree. He said he wouldn't do the tourney unless the payout was XJ. I can't say I agree, but he's running it so whatcha gonna do. :shrug: I think it should still be fun though.

 
okay, I read close to 3 pages of this threaed and I still do not know what the #### an onslaught is. I am lost. Would someone kindly explan what this is all about. I know i do not post that often but am completely mystified with this thread.

 
okay, I read close to 3 pages of this threaed and I still do not know what the #### an onslaught is. I am lost. Would someone kindly explan what this is all about.

I know i do not post that often but am completely mystified with this thread.
reported
 
okay, I read close to 3 pages of this threaed and I still do not know what the #### an onslaught is. I am lost. Would someone kindly explan what this is all about.

I know i do not post that often but am completely mystified with this thread.
reported
:coffee:
 
OK, this is my first attempt, so I'll keep it small. Please let me know from this if you feel I have the potential to be tournament-worthy.12-34-4-4-4-456-7-8-91011I tried to keep it simple. Note the use of the multiple fours, derivative of the Alayman defense first employed in the late 70s. I understand this is more of a defensive move and may weaken the 2-3 and potentially leave the 1st wave exposed, but I am trying not to bite off more than I can chew. Any thoughts on this approach?

 
OK, this is my first attempt, so I'll keep it small. Please let me know from this if you feel I have the potential to be tournament-worthy.

1

2-3

4-4-4-4-4

5

6-7-8-9

10

11

I tried to keep it simple. Note the use of the multiple fours, derivative of the Alayman defense first employed in the late 70s. I understand this is more of a defensive move and may weaken the 2-3 and potentially leave the 1st wave exposed, but I am trying not to bite off more than I can chew. Any thoughts on this approach?
:banned: Drinking the Vorchnok koolaid huh?
 
OK, this is my first attempt, so I'll keep it small.  Please let me know from this if you feel I have the potential to be tournament-worthy.

1

2-3

4-4-4-4-4

5

6-7-8-9

10

11

I tried to keep it simple.  Note the use of the multiple fours, derivative of the Alayman defense first employed in the late 70s.  I understand this is more of a defensive move and may weaken the 2-3 and potentially leave the 1st wave exposed, but I am trying not to bite off more than I can chew.  Any thoughts on this approach?
:banned: Drinking the Vorchnok koolaid huh?
You noticed that, eh? See, this is why I posted this here. Are you implying that Vorchnok's contention that using all the men in sequence is erroneous? Or rather that I erred by only deploying multiple 4s, another Vorchnok trademark.
 
OK, this is my first attempt, so I'll keep it small. Please let me know from this if you feel I have the potential to be tournament-worthy.

1

2-3

4-4-4-4-4

5

6-7-8-9

10

11

I tried to keep it simple. Note the use of the multiple fours, derivative of the Alayman defense first employed in the late 70s. I understand this is more of a defensive move and may weaken the 2-3 and potentially leave the 1st wave exposed, but I am trying not to bite off more than I can chew. Any thoughts on this approach?
:banned: Drinking the Vorchnok koolaid huh?
You noticed that, eh? See, this is why I posted this here. Are you implying that Vorchnok's contention that using all the men in sequence is erroneous? Or rather that I erred by only deploying multiple 4s, another Vorchnok trademark.
I'm sure the answer is in one of your books.
 
okay, I read close to 3 pages of this threaed and I still do not know what the #### an onslaught is. I am lost. Would someone kindly explan what this is all about.

I know i do not post that often but am completely mystified with this thread.
reported
:coffee:
:goodposting:
Eh, I'll leave it to you. I'll be out of townTanner, do you want to go ahead and set up a tourney or should I?
Ok, I'll set it up. If I set it up today will you be able to at least be here to sign up(and then of course, we'll wait for you to get back since you are most responsible for popularizing the onslaughts here)?
 
OK, this is my first attempt, so I'll keep it small. Please let me know from this if you feel I have the potential to be tournament-worthy.

1

2-3

4-4-4-4-4

5

6-7-8-9

10

11

I tried to keep it simple. Note the use of the multiple fours, derivative of the Alayman defense first employed in the late 70s. I understand this is more of a defensive move and may weaken the 2-3 and potentially leave the 1st wave exposed, but I am trying not to bite off more than I can chew. Any thoughts on this approach?
Derivative of Alayman? WTF? E.G. you practically did a cut and paste from page 217 of Kortke's book "Traversing our existence in geometric planes/A conceptual guide to Onslaught". Come on, give credit where credit is due.

 
E.G. I'm sorry for the previous post. I had no right to go off like that. I think the tourney talk has me wound up too much.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
OK, this is my first attempt, so I'll keep it small. Please let me know from this if you feel I have the potential to be tournament-worthy.

1

2-3

4-4-4-4-4

5

6-7-8-9

10

11

I tried to keep it simple. Note the use of the multiple fours, derivative of the Alayman defense first employed in the late 70s. I understand this is more of a defensive move and may weaken the 2-3 and potentially leave the 1st wave exposed, but I am trying not to bite off more than I can chew. Any thoughts on this approach?
Derivative of Alayman? WTF? E.G. you practically did a cut and paste from page 217 of Kortke's book "Traversing our existence in geometric planes/A conceptual guide to Onslaught". Come on, give credit where credit is due.
:goodposting:
 
Practically, but not exactly. The differences may be esoteric, but Kortke's 5 did not follow the 4s nearly as closely, and he transposed both 6-7 and 8-9. I know this is minimal, but surely you can see how the end result is affected, even by such a small change....

 
FOR ALL OF THE ONSLAUGHT FANS, LISTEN UP!I'm going to start the sign up for the onslaught tourney on Monday. I'll start an entirely new sign up thread in the FFA(if they let me.....not sure since they seemingly want to limit our great minds to one thread). Please sign up then. If you're not going to be around on Monday but want to sign up, then PM me.

 
FOR ALL OF THE ONSLAUGHT FANS, LISTEN UP!

I'm going to start the sign up for the onslaught tourney on Monday. I'll start an entirely new sign up thread in the FFA(if they let me.....not sure since they seemingly want to limit our great minds to one thread).

Please sign up then. If you're not going to be around on Monday but want to sign up, then PM me.
:fishing:
 
You have choosen to cease all goodbat regarding criticism of certain onslaughts. You are one sammich maker who isn't afraid to pee in the winter.
LOL...I left this on and totally forgot about it! I was wondering why I wasn't seeing some posts. LOL! I just took it off now.
 
Have been working on this one for a while. 32 man onslaught. Its a touch of Bridian with a touch of Ellison. Take it FWIW.

32

32

32 32 32 32 32 32 32

32

32

32 32 32 32

31 30 29 28 27 26 25 22 23 24

32 32 32 6

32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 21 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32

20 19

18 16

17

16 16

14 13

15

32 11

12

10 9

1

2

3

4

8

7

5

32

 
Bridian and Ellison, but I also see a tidbit of Kanovalev.

See your apex quadrant? It's reversed like Kanovalev did in the Moscow Open in '72.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bridian and Ellison, but I also see a tidbit of Kanovalev.

See your apex quadrant? It's reversed like Kanovalev did in the Moscow Open in '72.
Funny you should say that because Kavovalev is probably my least favorite of the B-class onslaughters. I think that he drastically overestimates the importance of the rod-end sizemores in comparison to the entering shift. Its not as if its ABC, but its as elementary as you make it. I guess I can see why you'd say that, and I don't think that Kavovalev is without a few strong points. However, like many others, I consider his '72 win to be just about the biggest fluke of all time.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top