sequencing

Heidi sent this one to me recently. She took it with her cell phone. It's me and Rose from our Numble session this past April. The sun was going down. I think I won that game, too.

SEQUENCING:

all dailog is paraphrased from memory...

Rose: When you lay a sequence adjacent to another, can a remaining standalone sequence be the same number, as in 2-2?

Phayvanh: I don't see why not. It's still an order of numbers, even if it is the same number.

Heidi: I don't think so, but whatever you guys want to do.

The Rules: "a valid sequence must consist of two or more tiles in a single row" and "all sequences must have the face value of their tiles arranged in either ascending or descending order...however, the same number may be used two or more times consecutively."

We played it so that any secondary sequence (as a result of a play) could be single number "sequences" ie: a row of tiles of the same value. That was easy, if you call three hours of number-crunching easy.

On second thought, I think that a number sequence must move either up or down the value scale, and since a row of 2's is static, it does not qualify.

Heidi: I agree with that

Rose: That's what I originally thought, why I asked.

This resulted in a removed play by Rose in our next session, which I challenged because of the new Rule.

The Official Numble Rules printed on the inside of the box unfortunately do not clarify on this issue. I think that a static row of three 8's (for example) could qualify under the printed rules, as it may be moving fractionally but has not reached the next whole number destination.