Re: Can every game be unambigeously reconstructed from the set of board positions occuring therein?

stuart yeates wrote:
> sebastianwinkel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > ... the question if the footprint of a game uniquely determines the
> > sequence of moves. By "footprint", I am referring to the set of
> > positions the game consists of, and the game may comply with chinese
> > rules (positional superko).
> >
> > I suppose that each set of positions can be arranged in at most one
> > legal order.
>
> I know that in the New Zealand rules there is often more that one
> way to move from a game position to the same game position in the
> next move, a pass and a one stone suicide.
>
> This seems to stymie footprint uniqueness for these games.
>
> cheers
> stuart
> [Yes, I'm a kiwi, so I'm allowed to use the New Zealand rules]

Sorry for not stating this explicitely: I don't treat passes as moves
here. Instead, I allow the color of moves to be arbitrary.

My original question apparently is covered by John's counterexample
even in its "NZ version", anyway.

Btw, amongst the somewhat established rulesets, NZ's one is my
favorite, too (even though I slightly prefer positional to situational
superko, despite it's peculiarities). :)

.

Relevant Pages