The analysis of the past doesn’t have the single role for us to approach history, because it provides us the capability to conceive strategies for the future. And a distinctive example is the Gallipoli campaign. Even if it is presented as a controversial move, because it didn’t have the results estimated then. The truth though is that it provoked great cost to the Ottoman Empire which lived its final years. And if many times we speak of the victims of the Alliance we must not forget that the dead of the Ottoman Empires were by far more. In essence we see that due to the structure of the Alliance, namely the trinity of England, France and Russia, Constantinople constituted a connecting link as a passage which created a bridge between two seas. And while simplistically its approach seems that it must be done through the land, the Gallipoli Campaign, especially with the action of the submarines proves that its best way to approach it is through the sea. And this on a strategic level is reasonable since Europe is a natural dividing line between Thrace and Asia. This way the reinforcement must be implemented through the two sees and then only through the land. Because the first stage allows the blocking of Asia as a contact zone, while the second is the final phase of the reconquista. If we add on the issue of the air force by which the recognitions were taking place with the current data it can play a role even more significant. But in any case the use of the passage by sea will be the application of the mental scheme of the game Hex due to the coherence which has to break the front which doesn’t rely on natural boundaries.