A legal jump can lose the finish
Compare all legal first jumps. Which preserve a one-peg finish, and which strand the position? Then play a successful branch.
PRACTICE COLLECTION
Peg Solitaire — Decisions: compare what happens next
Four studies in future consequences. Distinguish a verified finish, a short tactical proof and a useful feature that does not establish a win.
Print these four studies with answers
Use a prediction, a test and a reason
- Read the task before opening the answer. Say where a move lands or what it changes.
- Test it on the playable board. In two-player studies, play both sides to inspect a reply.
- Undo and compare one alternative. Use the answer’s stated search limit when explaining the result.
- Repeat the decision on paper, where the move cannot be checked for you automatically.
These are teaching groups, not a player-tested difficulty ladder. The four board IDs match the technique examples, individual study pages and print pack.
Choose between two futures
Compare all legal first jumps. Which preserve a one-peg finish, and which strand the position? Then play a successful branch.
Read a finish backwards
Imagine undoing the final jump: one peg splits into two with an empty landing left behind. Use that idea to explain a complete forward finish.
Build and unwind a longer chain
Imagine undoing the final jump: one peg splits into two with an empty landing left behind. Use that idea to explain a complete forward finish.
Bring the idea to a fresh round
Every classic jump removes exactly one peg, so a successful finish from N pegs uses N minus 1 jumps. That arithmetic does not prove a successful sequence exists. An available continuation is not proof of eventual solvability. Exact winning or losing claims require a complete checked sequence or exhaustive search of the stated position. The live generator uses reverse jumps to build reachable layouts, but a poor forward choice can still strand the pegs.
Open Peg Solitaire →