You’ve heard about LL and would like to know what it is about. So what is the idea, or philosophy, behind LL?

When I try to have somebody explain why they auto-play left, it too often sounds like the fallacy called circular reasoning. Note: a fallacy is an invalid reasoning or argument.

...  The last rule may sound scary, but it’ll help you notice those situations where it’s indefensible to not play left – those situations where there’s no way leftmost isn’t playable because it’s too obvious, i.e. where it’s logical to play left. And it’s just for your first few...

Click to enlarge. Pay special attention to the red boxes:   under usual conventions, you would play in these cases. In LL, you would not.   The end result is a  less systematic, more analytic, more situational  playstyle than what you may know, where  you don’t always play leftmost .  ...

Leftism (playing leftmost when several cards are clued) logically results from the following efficient principle: one should clue playables as soon as possible  (ASAP) (otherwise the clue might be made worse by future draws)   OK. Now, if you extend this  logically : 1) A clue that is not...

The first impression a CL player might have after playing LL is – it’s slower and therefore less efficient. Let’s look into the strengths and weaknesses of both styles.  Note that not all these points have the same "weight".   LL CL You can save unique cards safely True, with either value...

Although LL originally means “logical leftism”, the expression gradually extended to a whole logic-focused, comprehensive playstyle. Here are the differences, in terms of strategic impact, between LL and the style commonly played on BGA.

When you receive a clue that hits multiple cards, you can sometimes play newest among them. The reasoning is “ if the playable card is not the newest, they would DEFINITELY have told me earlier ” (following the “ clue playables ASAP ” principle). Makes sense. HOWEVER , if you play by...