Reading about button Go and granularity, I had this idea. What if the AGA ruleset was modified to komi 7 and first to pass wins in case of a tie. Would such a ruleset be applicable?

_________________
“Discussion is an exchange of knowledge; argument an exchange of ignorance.” ― Robert Quillen

I prefer "last to pass wins ties" (which requires removing the "white must pass last" rule, of course)

Do you have a reason for this change?

It seems a change for the sake of change without a benefit as I read it.

The texts are a bit ambiguous, so I am not sure if I understand their intention correctly. If they want to create a ruleset with pass stones and without an equal number of black and white moves (territory scoring?), this might result in pass-fights and therefore such a rule design does not work. However, maybe a clarification avoids such?

This is like button go with 7 point komi, since the only time the 1/2 point button matters to winning or losing is if there is a tie otherwise.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

The point of this theoretical ruleset is that during endgame, the players are encouraged to play more carefully, since not only the area controled matters, but also the player to play the last worthwhile move. Normally in case of an even number of dame points, the player to move can reinforce for free. This is avoided by this simple rule addition.

To make it more clear, all usual AGA rules including pass stones and white to pass last still apply. The only difference is the komi value and the additional rule regarding draws.

I am not proposing this as a ruleset to be adopted, I am just curious if it would work and what would be the consequences.

_________________
“Discussion is an exchange of knowledge; argument an exchange of ignorance.” ― Robert Quillen

I'm not sure if you're referring to my post too, but let me respond:

If there are pass stones, no rule that white must play last, an integer komi, and a rule that the last player to pass wins ties, then there are no pass fights. This is equivalent to the rule I dubbed "reverse button go" on SL (except I worded it: last player to pass gets 1/2 a point)

Explanation, assuming two consecutive passes end the game:

Case 1. Suppose the last dame has just been played by black, and there is a tie (including the integer komi). White passes. Now black can pass and win, due to the "last pass wins ties" (both have given one pass stone)

Case 2. Suppose the last dame has just been played by black, and white is one point ahead (including the integer komi). White passes. Now if black passes, he loses. If he starts a pass fight (B ko-threat, W response, B pass, W pass) he gains one point (due to the extra pass stone). But since now it is white who passed last, white still wins.

Note that you can change the number of passes to end the game to whatever number you like, without causing pass fights.

This rule can basically serve as a drop in replacement for the "white passes last" rule, with the advantage that you only have to think about it in case of ties, which are rare.

Since Black wins in the manner, White tries something better than passing: White tenuki, Black pass (pass stone), White pass (pass stone and tie and White wins the tie as the last passing player).

Therefore Black must also improve his strategy: White tenuki, Black tenuki,... and we have a pass-fight.

***

How do you solve played out removals?

Could you please also comment on the original proposal: all rules from the AGA ruleset apply, except for an odd integer komi (7) and first to pass wins ties?

_________________
“Discussion is an exchange of knowledge; argument an exchange of ignorance.” ― Robert Quillen

Territory counting is used, so tenuki costs a point.

Territory counting with the implication of territory scoring, I see.

However, a rigorous proof is missing why tenukis played in the opponent's territory combined with approach plays to achieve removals can never be an advantage for a tenuki player.

We only have Berlekamp's / my proposition that, for a static territory region, an equal number of black and white plays in it do not affect the region's score. So how do you prove that, in each territory region, there is the equal number? Without equal number, a player's tenuki(s) might swap the last passing player, and we might have a pass-fight.



Please define "to win a tie".

Tenuki doesn't cost anything, but passing could.

_________________
Still officially AGA 5d but I play so irregularly these days that I am probably only 3d or 4d over the board (but hopefully still 5d in terms of knowledge, theory and the ability to contribute).

If the net score is 0, a certain player wins the game.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

I expect "the first to pass wins in case of a tie" can lead to pass-fights. However, matters are worse because an early pass could become a tedomari in anticipation of a later tie.

I don't think pass fight can occur because only the first pass of the entire game matters. As for an early pass: under any area ruleset any early passing costs points, so it is better to play dame (or some other point gaining move) than to pass in anticipation of a tie.

_________________
“Discussion is an exchange of knowledge; argument an exchange of ignorance.” ― Robert Quillen

The first pass is worth no more than a Japanese dame and at least as much as later passes. Since, by AGA rules, White must make the last pass, there can be no pass fight over who gets the last pass. And if a player wants the first pass, she can simply make it. But taking a dame is always at least as good as making the first pass.

I know that you regard some things as pass fights which others do not, but what kind of pass fight do you foresee?

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Bill, I have understood tiger314 so that the game ends on the first pass, but maybe he means something else? As I say, disambiguation is necessary.

tiger314, "only the first pass" matters is a typical trigger for pass-fights under some other rulesets. Why is your ruleset still area scoring? Please write it down carefully.

All, tedomari means that a pass can be valuable before, e.g., playing dame, e.g., when there are an even number of dame. Therefore, do not try to argue that a pass would be played after all dame because a SINGLE dame is more valuable. Tedomari is not about a single dame.

The ruleset is identical to the AGA complete ruleset (including pass stones, white to pass last, 2 or 3 passes to end the game, suicide prohibited, play it out to determine life...) except for the following changes:
-rule 3: the compensation value is changed to: 7 for an even game, X for a handicap game
-a rule is added that in case of both players having an equal number of points (after adjusting for any compensation according to rule 3) the player to have played the first pass of the game (regardless of whether it was followed by another pass or not) is the winner

Consider even games only, I still haven't thought about the komi value for handicap games.


The AGA ruleset is an area ruleset since it has all the features of an area ruleset. The area properties are not changed by altering komi or using the additional rule to solve equal point situations.


Passing before filling dame can never create a better result than passing after it has been filled, but some sequences can achieve the same result with an earlier pass. As you have pointed out, one player can pass instead of filling dame when there is an even number of dame points, but the same player would have been the first to pass after filling dame anyway. This player cannot reinforce for free if the game is too close, unlike under the unaltered AGA ruleset.

_________________
“Discussion is an exchange of knowledge; argument an exchange of ignorance.” ― Robert Quillen

tiger314, for your rule, I do not (now) see pass-fights. You do not retain area scoring but create a new scoring system related to area scoring.

As far as I can tell, it produces the same win-loss results as area scoring with a half point button.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.