I'm a Risk board game champion... Here's how Trump's tactics are a winning strategy for global domination

UK Daily Mail ^ | 01/11/2026 | Chris Melore

[DFG]

A top-ranked board game player has said President Trump's geopolitical rampage through the Western Hemisphere looks just like a popular strategy in the game of Risk.

Michael Olivol, a grandmaster and former world number one player at Risk, revealed that the game's most advanced players often attempt to control all of North America before moving on to easier targets like South America in their quest to rule the world.

Risk is a classic strategy board game where players battle for global domination by conquering territories on a map, building armies, rolling dice to fight enemies, and forming sneaky alliances.

Coincidentally, three of the key spaces on the game board are Greenland, Central America, and Venezuela, which the 32-year-old accountant from New Jersey described as major 'choke points' that keep enemies from invading your territories.

'You need those territories, as well as Alaska or Kamchatka [Russia's closest point to the US], to safely hold the North American continent,' Olivol told the Daily Mail.

Since taking office for a second time, Trump has not only lobbied to buy Greenland and Canada and take over the Panama Canal, but the US has also launched military strikes against alleged drug traffickers in Mexico and Venezuela.

Trump has also touted the massive supplies of natural resources, including oil and precious metals, that the US would have access to by gaining more control of both continents.

Olivol noted that Risk players gain shockingly similar advantages, being showered with more 'armies' (or resources) as a bonus reward for controlling more nations on the board.

In Risk, controlling an entire continent gives you a big troop bonus every turn, which snowballs your advantage and allows you to invade other parts of the world more quickly.

---

TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: armchairquarterback; riskisagame

[DFG]

[proxy_user]

Many years ago, when my father was alive, he always tried to capture Asia. He always lost. My brother and I would hide out in North America or Australia, and build up our forces until we were ready to attack.

[Williams]

Kamchatka was the place.

[Jeff Vader]

Ukraine is weak, I think it’s time to put the hurt on Ukraine

[Flag_This]

"My brother and I would hide out in North America or Australia"

I was always partial to the South American redoubt.

[Dr. Sivana]

he always tried to capture Asia.

I have seen players win with Asia.

Two points:

1. Don't make it clear what you are up to right away. This works well if you slowly pick off Asia territories one at a time while you let someone else stop takeovers of Australia, North America and South America. Ideally you would accumulate more armies by having more territories no one else wants AND being attacked less.

2. Sit heavy in Ukraine. That keeps you from having to split armies in Ural and Afghanistan. Ideally you can feign a move for Europe, but mostly you want to keep others from getting Europe while you buildup in Asia.

[Red6]

He’s right.

Not to sound arrogant, but I noticed that early on.

Trump is a nationalist and strategic in thinking.

His decision making is like a he’s running a business. He looks at ROI and risk, unlike most politicians who apply no such concepts or are outright ideologues (no common sense or pragmatism) like Obama was. He’s results oriented and the means to the end are less important.

He’s the best thing since sliced bread, even for those to stupid to see this, for the USA and its citizens.

[j.havenfarm]

In college I’m sure I played at least 250 times. Often we’d play two or three times, into the wee hours.

With all due respect to your late father, he violated the number one rule in the real world: NEVER WAGE A LAND WAR IN ASIA. I preferred, of course onsite and fortify New Guinea and Australia so as to get that small but consistent boost in armies to conduct operations elsewhere

[John Milner]

He’s already shown he can dominate at real world Monopoly.

Makes sense in his powerful political position, that Risk would be next.

There’s also those who claim he plays 3-D chess like a master, but I don’t see it in some of the moves.

[6ppc]

Nobody can hold Asia. We called the Middle East “The sweaty armpit of the world”.

[Bernard]

I would always start with Australia and South America. Fewer access points for the other players. Even Africa has too many places to concentrate on for defense.

[Skywise]

So all Trump has to do is capture Australia and build troops up there?

[alternatives?]

It always seemed in our games whoever got control of Europe won the game.

[j.havenfarm]

We had our catch phrases and customs as well. On taking Argentina, it was customary to sing the first line of “Don’t cry for me, Argentina.” When Congo was captured, the first line or two of this:
https://youtu.be/0uR0vgzXKvI?si=MFBLbgjjZ7gXn9Pj

[dfwgator]

Ukraine is game to you?

[maddog55]

Yep.. I’m guessing Trump is playing Risk with Rubio and he’s basing his world dominance as the game progresses.

Seems like a solid theory.

[Red6]

Asia and Europe have too many connections to be attacked, from to many places.

I find it best to go after a place I can take and hold, and consolidate power in, then break out and go for the rest of the board.

Maybe not realistic in the real world, but I have conquered the board from Africa many times. North America seems to be problematic since others want to take it. Australia and South America don’t give you the sort of power (accumulation of armies) needed. Europe, you get attacked from every side. Asia is extra powerful if you could take and hold it, but everyone will try to stop that.

[Dr. Sivana]

Asia and Europe have too many connections to be attacked, from to many places.

If you have Kamchatka, Siam, Ukraine, and Middle East, that makes only four attack points. If you have Alaska and Indonesia, you still have four attack points, but also break up all continents except Africa and S.A.

The problem with Asia isn't attack points. It is the sheer number of territories to hold and defend.

BTW, I said I have seen it work. A lot depends on which territories you start with, the personalities of your opponents, and whether the # of armies gotten for cards goes on up to infinity.

I have seen plenty of wins with Africa. North Africa is a key territory.

Another thing about Asia is if you have a heavy presence there, you might protect a weak opponent's armies in some out of the way place (e.g. Irkutsk) to keep them in the game until YOU can get him and his cards. The armies look defensive, but are still yours and can be converted quickly through free moves.

[Dr. Sivana]

Asia is extra powerful if you could take and hold it, but everyone will try to stop that.

Smart players make OTHER players do the stopping.

[dennisw]

Kamchatka!