---
id: GROUND-WP-0004
type: workplan
title: "Reopen GR-E01: the void ruling rests on a premise clay-borg has corrected"
domain: consumer
repo: ground-game
status: ready
owner: bernd
topic_slug: whynot
created: "2026-08-03"
updated: "2026-08-03"
origin: correction
origin_ref: GROUND-WP-0002
state_hub_workstream_id: "067434eb-18cc-472f-b4ea-7dd16555629f"
---

# The GR-E01 ruling was made on a false premise, and clay-borg supplied it

GROUND-WP-0002 T03 ruled `gr-e01-threshold-unreachable-2p`:

> **Void / overturn as a rules gap** — stand-in artifact. With
> authoritative `Problems.csv` (**12 pts available**) the printed
> thresholds (2p→5, 3–4p→7, 5–6p→9) stand.

**The 12 is wrong, and clay-borg is where it came from.** Twelve points
exist *in the file*; **GR-S01 deals 2 / 3 / 4 of the five Problems**, so
the points ever in play are 4 / 6 / 9. clay-borg asserted the 12 in its
CB-WP-0021 declaration, corrected itself one commit later after actually
running the arithmetic, and by then the ruling had been made.

**The gap is not a stand-in artifact. It survives the authoritative
dataset**, and it has now been confirmed at the table.

## The evidence, in three independent forms

**1. Play.** The maintainer played several 3-player games on 2026-08-03
and could not win any of them.

**2. The engine's own constants.**

| seats | dealt (GR-S01) | max achievable | GR-E01 threshold | |
|---:|---:|---:|---:|---|
| 2 | 2 | 3 | 5 | **unreachable** |
| 3 | 3 | 6 | 7 | **unreachable** |
| 4 | 3 | 6 | 7 | **unreachable** |
| 5 | 4 | 10 | 9 | reachable |
| 6 | 4 | 10 | 9 | reachable |

Claim every Problem in play, concede nothing, play perfectly — at 2, 3 and
4 seats the group still loses. In SHARED GROUND, where the group total
*is* the outcome, those games cannot be won.

**3. Both datasets agree.** The stand-in gives 3 / 6 / 10; `Problems.csv`
gives 4 / 6 / 9. Both fall short of 5 / 7 / 9. **No edition data
reconciles them**, which is the part the void ruling turned on.

**Reproduction:** `gd0001_group_success_is_unreachable_below_five_seats`
in clay-borg —
`cargo test -p games-ground --all-features gd0001 -- --nocapture`. It
reads `problem_priorities` and `threshold` out of the engine, so it cannot
drift from the rules it tests.

## Task: rule again, on the corrected numbers

```task
id: GROUND-WP-0004-T01
status: todo
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "dcd7da12-be3a-4289-8d21-1924401a1259"
```

Two numbers disagree and only one can be right:

- **GR-S01's deal** — 2 / 3 / 4 of five Problems. Should more be in play
  at low seat counts?
- **GR-E01's thresholds** — 5 / 7 / 9. Were they set for a deal larger
  than GR-S01 makes?

A third possibility to rule out **explicitly**, because nothing currently
does: the thresholds may be *intended* to be unreachable at low seat
counts, with SHARED GROUND being a 5–6 player mode. If that is the
design, say so — the engine will otherwise keep offering a game that
cannot be won, and a player will keep concluding they played badly.

`gr-e01-threshold-unreachable-2p` stays as a failing-in-fact record until
this is answered. It is **not** retired on the previous ruling.

## Task: how a clay-borg premise reached a ruling unchecked

```task
id: GROUND-WP-0004-T02
status: todo
priority: medium
state_hub_task_id: "bd1c7a7d-36a2-4bf4-ab42-8e5489706df4"
```

Worth one paragraph, not a project: the ruling was sound reasoning on a
supplied number, and the number was wrong. The engine now attaches a
**runnable reproduction** to findings of this kind (clay-borg CB-WP-0022),
so a future ruling can be checked against an artifact rather than a
sentence.

State whether that is sufficient from this side, or whether rulings should
cite the reproduction they relied on.