It is currently Sun Jan 24, 2021 12:15 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 92 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #21 Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:57 am 
Gosei
User avatar

Posts: 2005
Location: Groningen, NL
Liked others: 202
Was liked: 1081
Rank: Dutch 4D
GD Posts: 645
Universal go server handle: herminator
Alguien wrote:
RobertJasiek wrote:
Alguien wrote:
there has to be a very strong reason to create or maintain any rule.


The reason is: to complete the definition of 'play'. The definition can be made complete by specifying what happens in case of one's own stones still without liberties after any removals of opposing stones. Specifying what happens in this case can be made by a) allowing suicide or b) prohibiting suicide.


"What happens to a group without liberties" is already specified. It's kind of the second rule of go, after "play in turns and don't move stones around".

How do you teach the classic one stone kill without saying "a group without liberties dies"?



So if I play :w1: here:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$W
$$ . . . . . .
$$ . . O X . .
$$ . O X 1 X .
$$ . . O X . .
$$ . . . . . .[/go]


I then remove all groups without liberties and end up with this?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$W
$$ . . . . . .
$$ . . O X . .
$$ . O . . X .
$$ . . O X . .
$$ . . . . . .[/go]


If you don't want that, you have to add a rule to specify the order. E.g. New Zealand rules specify that you first remove opposing stones without liberties, then remove your own stones without liberties.

Japanese say: Remove opposing stones without liberties, then if any of your stones have no liberties, the move is illegal.

Either way, you have to add a rule on top of "remove opposing stones without liberties" (well actually you don't, of course, but then you get DelayedSuicide or, if you do want the above to happen, you get MutualCapture)

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #22 Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 11:26 am 
Lives in gote

Posts: 628
Liked others: 45
Was liked: 98
Rank: KGS 3k
Universal go server handle: Alguien
HermanHiddema wrote:
E.g. New Zealand rules specify that you first remove opposing stones without liberties, then remove your own stones without liberties.


Ok. In my head I've always understood it as New Zealand rules and that's how I've taught it.

I think the origin of it being intuitive, or natural, to me is that I think of stone removal a "YOU, remove the stones". i.e.: You play in your turn and remove white stones with no liberties and then, in his turn, white removes yours. Thus, establishing a natural priority.

It's never come up in a game I've played or witnessed so I guess I simply don't care enough. Maybe once I've reached a level where I can actually plan a game to win by half a point, I'll care more.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #23 Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 11:59 am 
Gosei
User avatar

Posts: 2005
Location: Groningen, NL
Liked others: 202
Was liked: 1081
Rank: Dutch 4D
GD Posts: 645
Universal go server handle: herminator
Alguien wrote:
HermanHiddema wrote:
E.g. New Zealand rules specify that you first remove opposing stones without liberties, then remove your own stones without liberties.


Ok. In my head I've always understood it as New Zealand rules and that's how I've taught it.

I think the origin of it being intuitive, or natural, to me is that I think of stone removal a "YOU, remove the stones". i.e.: You play in your turn and remove white stones with no liberties and then, in his turn, white removes yours. Thus, establishing a natural priority.

It's never come up in a game I've played or witnessed so I guess I simply don't care enough. Maybe once I've reached a level where I can actually plan a game to win by half a point, I'll care more.


Probably it has, but you never noticed :)

E.g. life by OshiTsubushi isn't very rare, it happens regularly. And, of course, you may have played ot witnessed games where it was possible to create oshi-tsubushi but a player didn't, because it had no extra value due to suicide being illegal anyway.

And, of course, there are other common situations where it makes a difference.

E.g:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$ a is a ko threat for white if suicide is allowed.
$$ -----------------------
$$ . . . X a O X . X O . .
$$ . . O O X X X X X O . .
$$ . . . . O O O O O O . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]


Last edited by HermanHiddema on Tue Nov 27, 2012 12:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #24 Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 2:07 pm 
Tengen

Posts: 5233
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 724
Alguien wrote:
a natural priority


Why should a priori the priority "remove opposing then own" be more natural than "remove own then opposing"?

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #25 Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 6:08 pm 
Lives in sente
User avatar

Posts: 761
Liked others: 152
Was liked: 204
Rank: the k-word
If you want suicide because it is more logical and less arbitrary, then you also have to allow single-stone suicide.


Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$ white to play
$$
$$ .X.
$$ XaX
$$ .X.[/go]


...and come on, that's just silly.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #26 Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 7:04 pm 
Tengen

Posts: 4344
Location: North Carolina
Liked others: 483
Was liked: 720
Rank: AGA 3k
GD Posts: 65
OGS: Hyperpape 4k
RobertJasiek wrote:
Alguien wrote:
a natural priority


Why should a priori the priority "remove opposing then own" be more natural than "remove own then opposing"?
The (active) placed stone acts upon the (passive) stone it is placed next to, reducing the enemy stone's liberties to zero, thereby capturing it.

A player being taught the rules might think of mutual capture as a possibility (I think that's happened to me while teaching), but while I can't prove it, I strongly believe that no player would think that only the placed stone is captured, leaving the enemy stone on the board.

So far as axiomatized rules go, either alternative is equally sensible. So far as human psychology goes, only one is a live possibility.

_________________
Occupy Babel!

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #27 Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:38 pm 
Lives in gote

Posts: 323
Location: Potsdam, Germany
Liked others: 198
Was liked: 76
Rank: 14 kyu
palapiku wrote:
If you want suicide because it is more logical and less arbitrary, then you also have to allow single-stone suicide.


Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$ white to play
$$
$$ .X.
$$ XaX
$$ .X.[/go]


...and come on, that's just silly.


So is doing this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B herp derp hurr durr
$$------
$$|. X 1 X O .
$$|X X X X O .
$$|O O O O O .
$$|. . . . . .[/go]


But the rules of go should not forbid stupid or pointless moves.

Besides, single stone suicide is exactly equivalent to rules where you hand over a stone for passing.

_________________
Poka King of the south east.


This post by TheBigH was liked by: Harleqin
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #28 Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:53 pm 
Lives in sente
User avatar

Posts: 761
Liked others: 152
Was liked: 204
Rank: the k-word
TheBigH wrote:
single stone suicide is exactly equivalent to rules where you hand over a stone for passing.

Passing gives you an opportunity to pass in return, ending the game.

Standard go rules have a nice property that if your opponent is trolling - not interested in playing but just making silly moves - then you can make all your groups unconditionally alive and then just keep passing, and eventually your opponent will run out of valid moves. With suicide, they can keep on making dumb moves forever. It would give every angry little kid an easy way to try to drive you out of a won game through sheer annoyance. Superko would solve this, but most servers don't have superko and implementing it would be a serious change.


This post by palapiku was liked by: luigi
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #29 Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 11:34 pm 
Tengen

Posts: 5233
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 724
palapiku wrote:
then you also have to allow single-stone suicide.


No. (Hint: there are also the ko rules.)

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #30 Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 11:36 pm 
Tengen

Posts: 5233
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 724
hyperpape wrote:
So far as human psychology goes, only one is a live possibility.


Ok, but this is about human psychology and not about what is natural on the board.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #31 Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:19 am 
Dies in gote
User avatar

Posts: 46
Liked others: 8
Was liked: 18
Rank: 23k
KGS: Gnostic
IGS: sydneytink
Kaya handle: Gnostic
palapiku wrote:
With suicide, they can keep on making dumb moves forever. It would give every angry little kid an easy way to try to drive you out of a won game through sheer annoyance. Superko would solve this, but most servers don't have superko and implementing it would be a serious change.


I'm not sure about forever, as players only have a max of 181 stones to begin with.

_________________
Central Mississippi Go Club
http://www.cmgo.org

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject:
Post #32 Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:27 am 
Honinbo
User avatar

Posts: 8832
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Liked others: 342
Was liked: 2072
GD Posts: 312
MS_Sydney wrote:
as players only have a max of 181 stones to begin with.
No.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re:
Post #33 Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:30 am 
Dies in gote
User avatar

Posts: 46
Liked others: 8
Was liked: 18
Rank: 23k
KGS: Gnostic
IGS: sydneytink
Kaya handle: Gnostic
EdLee wrote:
MS_Sydney wrote:
as players only have a max of 181 stones to begin with.
No.


Practical question, then. How, in the real world, does one proceed with the game when one has used all of one's actual stones?

_________________
Central Mississippi Go Club
http://www.cmgo.org

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject:
Post #34 Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:42 am 
Honinbo
User avatar

Posts: 8832
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Liked others: 342
Was liked: 2072
GD Posts: 312
MS_Sydney wrote:
How, in the real world, does one proceed with the game when one has used all of one's actual stones?
(a) Have enough extra stones to minimize this happening
(b) Re-cycle captured stones
(c) Borrow from the next table

In the past 10 years, with (a), I only had to use (b) or (c) less than 10 times.
With (a), (b), and (c), I've never run out of stones in my games, and I've never seen
anybody else (including all casual games and tournaments) either, not even once ever (the past 10 years).

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re:
Post #35 Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:44 am 
Dies in gote
User avatar

Posts: 46
Liked others: 8
Was liked: 18
Rank: 23k
KGS: Gnostic
IGS: sydneytink
Kaya handle: Gnostic
EdLee wrote:
MS_Sydney wrote:
How, in the real world, does one proceed with the game when one has used all of one's actual stones?
(a) Have enough extra stones to minimize this happening
(b) Re-cycle captured stones
(c) Borrow from the next table

In the past 10 years, with (a), I only had to use (b) or (c) less than 10 times.
With (a), (b), and (c), I've never run out of stones in my games, and I've never seen
anybody else (including all casual games and tournaments) either, not even once ever (the past 10 years).


A somewhat more satisfying response than "No."

_________________
Central Mississippi Go Club
http://www.cmgo.org

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject:
Post #36 Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:47 am 
Honinbo
User avatar

Posts: 8832
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Liked others: 342
Was liked: 2072
GD Posts: 312
MS_Sydney wrote:
A somewhat more satisfying response than "No."
I feel the opposite. :) As my understanding is the supply of stones is supposed to be infinite. (Aside from ING rules, etc.)

Sort of related: sometimes, glass stones sets come with a few extra.
With shell and slate sets, they tend to be very accurate: 181 B and 180 W (maybe with 1 or 2 extras).

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re:
Post #37 Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:52 am 
Dies in gote
User avatar

Posts: 46
Liked others: 8
Was liked: 18
Rank: 23k
KGS: Gnostic
IGS: sydneytink
Kaya handle: Gnostic
EdLee wrote:
MS_Sydney wrote:
A somewhat more satisfying response than "No."
I feel the opposite. :) As my understanding is the supply of stones is supposed to be infinite. (Aside from ING rules, etc.)


I'm a computer programmer, so an assumption of infinity is troubling to my worldview and impressively easy to correct for in the code.

In any event, angry teenagers can *already* play dumb moves to wear down the patience of opponents regardless of suicide rules.

_________________
Central Mississippi Go Club
http://www.cmgo.org

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject:
Post #38 Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:56 am 
Honinbo
User avatar

Posts: 8832
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Liked others: 342
Was liked: 2072
GD Posts: 312
MS_Sydney wrote:
I'm a computer programmer, so an assumption of infinity is troubling to my worldview and impressively easy to correct for in the code.
I share the same background, and my worldview happily includes infinite infinities. :)


This post by EdLee was liked by: topazg
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Re:
Post #39 Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 6:47 am 
Gosei
User avatar

Posts: 2005
Location: Groningen, NL
Liked others: 202
Was liked: 1081
Rank: Dutch 4D
GD Posts: 645
Universal go server handle: herminator
MS_Sydney wrote:
I'm a computer programmer, so an assumption of infinity is troubling to my worldview and impressively easy to correct for in the code.

In any event, angry teenagers can *already* play dumb moves to wear down the patience of opponents regardless of suicide rules.


Perhaps a better term is "unlimited". Players have an unlimited number of stones at their disposal.

As a computer programmer myself, I think there is a lot of truth to the adage: There are only three numbers in computer science: 0, 1 and N (aka unlimited, any, many, etc).

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #40 Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 9:06 am 
Lives in sente
User avatar

Posts: 801
Location: Amsterdam (NL)
Liked others: 353
Was liked: 107
Rank: KGS 7 kyu forever
GD Posts: 460
infinity in math is defined by identifying it with a set of integers with no upperbound. That is a set unlimited from above. I guess your (HH) number unlimited has the same properties as this set. And hence that unfinite and unlimited are the same animals.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 92 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group