Legal jumps: check source, middle and landing hole
Read a jump as three consecutive holes on one row or column. All three conditions matter: occupied source, occupied middle and empty destination.
LEARNING CENTRE
Peg Solitaire: keep a route to the final jump
Learn to verify a jump, track what each jump removes, and look beyond the next available move. In the small playable studies, compare a checked finishing sequence with alternatives that strand pegs. The useful question is what the remaining pegs can still do together.
The rules in this version
Playfield's classic version uses a full five-by-five grid of holes, not the traditional cross-shaped board. Jump one peg horizontally or vertically over exactly one adjacent peg into the empty hole immediately beyond. The jumped peg is removed. Finish with exactly one peg anywhere on the board; the classic version does not require a centre finish. Diagonal jumps and jumps over longer runs are not allowed.
Four decisions to understand
The peg count: distinguish a target from a dead end
Each legal jump reduces the population by one. Use this invariant to check a proposed finish and to understand why a quiet board with no moves is not necessarily a win.
Look ahead: inspect the pegs left behind
A legal jump can remove the very peg needed for a later connection. Compare the resulting positions before choosing between available jumps.
Reverse planning: build the position before the last jump
Working backward clarifies what a finish needs. Choose a possible final hole, then reconstruct the two pegs that could produce it in one legal jump.
Two practice collections
Foundations: read the board before moving
Four studies in legal moves and their immediate effects. Make a prediction, test it, and compare the starting-position answer.
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.
What the evidence establishes
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.
Each technique has two playable starting positions. The collection and print links reuse those same studies, so a lesson, a practice page and a printed sheet do not count as three different puzzles.
DECISION LAB
One peg anywhere is possible. One peg in the centre is not.
Separate the actual winning condition from a familiar extra condition, then enumerate every reachable finishing hole.
Test your prediction and follow the evidence →