Abstract
It was recently shown that every totally tight two-person game form is acyclic, dominance-solvable, and hence, Nash-solvable too. In this paper, we exhibit an example showing that the first two implications fail for the three-person (n=3) game forms. Yet, we show that the last one (total tightness implies Nash-solvability) still holds for n=3 leaving the case n>3 open.