There is no strategy, you just click where its obvious there is no bomb. Eventually you get to a point where you have no choice but to take a 50/50 guess. duh.

I don't agree. Yes, it is true that it is mostly a game of elimination and simple logic, but it gets interesting and is a good way to test your mathematical skills in one particular case, conditional probability (CP). i.e, when two bits of information overlap. This is the case where you know say that there are four uncovered places around a square that says 3 with one mine already established around that 3 (odds therefore are 2:4 of stepping on mine), call this square x, and there are seven uncovered squares around another square labeled 4, call this square y, and square y shares "safe squares" with x. Then, using some simple logic or some conditional probability, you can increase the odds of not stepping on a mine by using the additional information by playing on one of the shared squares. There is also another situation where instead of the 4, there is a 1 where the 4 used to be (square y above). Now you can see that your conditional odds are better to choose a square away from the 1. This is a very simple example of CP and I showed it to my daughter and she is now a pretty tough MS player Of course, what is interesting is the concept, not the game. People always say that Poker is the closest game to trading. I say Mine Sweeper has more in common with trading than poker. If you take the time element seriously, it then has many similarities with trading in a pit.

Another game that also gets a bad rap is dominoes. If played with American rules, the game becomes subtlety interesting. Non of these games compare to Chess or Go by a million miles, but their [strategical] relationship to the basics of trading are quite interesting.