Re: What do various \rulesets say about the score of the seki?


>> Chris Dams <C.Dams@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Black disagreed that his stones in the lower right were dead.

> "-" wrote:
>> Pass stones would be insufficient. In the example game
>> you had provided (readers need to backtrack to find this) the
>> player "O" needs to expend points to illustrate a lesson to "#".
>> This is unfair to "O" and reduces the score of "O" significantly.

Chris Dams <C.Dams@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Well, with pass stones one has to be a bit careful, of course.
> By further demanding that the number of stones played during
> dispute resolution is even and being careful that the number
> of dame is even when you pass such problems do not occur.


After posting previously I again thought about expanded use
of the "pass stones" as you are suggesting, so this way of going
about Go is also workable. It just does not occur generally if a
"pass stone" was previously passed and the Chinese Counting
method always remains as a "fall back option" when the trays
of prisoners get overturned or mixed up with other sets, etc.
Dame is usually filled previous to the "pass stone" convention
prior to first "game stop." The number of stones played does not
need to be even because the player requesting resumption of
play allows the opponent to move first, who very likely passes.
Question: how could there be any _dame_ next to a group
that is being claimed as alive or in a region where both players
prefer to pass? Does hypothetical play require -no- pass stones?




>> Resumed play then ends with "pass ... pass" (or "pass ...
>> pass ... pass") as before except that the status of stones is
>> determined and the situation reverts to the -original- "Marker"
>> point of the initial game stop.

> That is also a possible way automizing the game end. I do not
> have a strong preference for one or another way to handle this.
> If this was to be chosen one gets something like J2003 with
> determination whether something is possible by play-out instead
> of by perfect play, removal of capturable-2/3 rules and removal of
> the "no points in a seki"-rule. Capturable-1 is necessary to handle
> the rather frequent case of snap- back. Also one would want to have
> only one hypothetical sequence per string, so alive would mean a
> stone somewhere in local-1 at the end of a hypothical sequence.


These are rules to disambiguify a position without information
of prior position(s), actually an effort to generalize, owing to the
arguments possible with superko constructions. With superko
a "game stop" does not interrupt records of prior board positions.




>> If there has been multiple changes in status, or something that
>> approaches superko repetition, the server software can disallow
>> the repetition move and display an explanatory message on the
>> player's terminal in their native language with appropriate font.

> I think the most logical way to handle this in view of J2003 is that if
> during all of repeating part of the hypothetical sequence a stone is
> present in local-1 of the final-string, the final-string is alive.
> Otherwise it is dead.


Surely an attractive prospect. Let's have a few examples (again).




>> Having a "Marker" point emplaced in the game record allows
>> unlimited maneuvers for forcing all stone captures so as the
>> argumentative player who was both ignorant and wrong can
>> endure the maximum squirming and cringing before cavitating.
>> That way the player in "teacher" role is not penalized for having
>> to supply lesson stones that resolve an "ambiguous" position.

> The proposal of having a play-out sequence for each final-string
> has of course the problem that if a player acting in bad faith could
> make the scoring procedure take a very long time. I do not think
> this is a very serious disadvantage because I do not think it is very
> likely that this is going to happen much. It is difficult to imagine
> what kind of fun somebody would get out of disputing the status
> of every string on the board.


I've watched Chess Players behave that way ... curious.




>> "Michael Alford" <malf@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Play on IGS, escaping is not possible, read the help file stored.

>> Escaping is possible, however the escaper forfeits the game.

> Although I play on IGS, I think the lack of a proper game end procedure
> is a serious disadvantage. The escaper-prevention rules made me loose
> a game on IGS a few times because my internet connection died, but
> I think this is only a small disadvantage. After all, it's a game.


The other guy's internet connection can die as well. Other
sorts of interruptions: guessed that there might be time for play
but guessed wrong, telephone interruption, etc. While IGS does
not allow "free" games the Server should not adjudicate escapers.




- regards
- jb

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Mad Cow Disease Becomes Common In US Dog Population
http://www.rense.com/general67/dog.htm
-------------------------------------------------------------------

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Rules FAQ
    ... > The game is played on a grid board. ... > intersections, ... Two players compete. ... > The first player uses black stones, ...
    (rec.games.go)
  • YAAP: Extinctionist - long!: Zan-Wiz-Fem-Orc-Cha / nostalgia.suroot.com
    ... An extinctionist game with Demo, ... The rest was the continous act of summoning and killing monsters, ... Level 10: dragons ... 65 uncursed fluorite stones ...
    (rec.games.roguelike.nethack)
  • Rules FAQ
    ... tournament players and organizers chapter 6. ... The game is played on a grid board. ... intersections, ... The first player uses black stones, ...
    (rec.games.go)
  • Rules FAQ
    ... tournament players and organizers chapter 6. ... The game is played on a grid board. ... intersections, ... The first player uses black stones, ...
    (rec.games.go)
  • Rules FAQ
    ... tournament players and organizers chapter 6. ... The game is played on a grid board. ... intersections, ... The first player uses black stones, ...
    (rec.games.go)