It is currently Fri Nov 27, 2020 4:36 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 #41 Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 9:15 am 
Lives in sente
User avatar

Posts: 761
Liked others: 152
Was liked: 204
Rank: the k-word
No.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #42 Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 7:29 pm 
Lives in sente
User avatar

Posts: 801
Location: Amsterdam (NL)
Liked others: 353
Was liked: 107
Rank: KGS 7 kyu forever
GD Posts: 460
palapiku wrote:
No.

You convinced me. :-?

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #43 Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:02 pm 
Lives in sente

Posts: 852
Location: Central Coast
Liked others: 201
Was liked: 333
Rank: KGS [-]
GD Posts: 428
palapiku wrote:
Superko would solve this, but most servers don't have superko and implementing it would be a serious change.


Is this true? I'll admit I primarily play on KGS and Dragon which both have Chinese rules as an option (though I've never actually seen a Chinese ruleset game on DGS), but I would think Chinese servers at least would have superko.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #44 Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 11:52 am 
Lives in sente

Posts: 1328
Liked others: 108
Was liked: 276
It is true that suicide can have practical value as a ko threat. However, is that really a reason to overturn years of tradition? Given the limited tactical value afforded by the allowance of suicide, I'd have to vote against its inclusion.

_________________
North Lecale

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #45 Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:11 pm 
Lives with ko

Posts: 206
Liked others: 33
Was liked: 60
GD Posts: 248
Javaness2 wrote:
It is true that suicide can have practical value as a ko threat. However, is that really a reason to overturn years of tradition? Given the limited tactical value afforded by the allowance of suicide, I'd have to vote against its inclusion.


To me, it seems inconsistant to have an additional rule making it illegal.

The rules allow you to play in a place where the stone, or stones would have no liberties if such a play kills the surrounding stones. This concept has to be understood already.

How is playing a stone where it kills itself different? Other than usually being stupid...but when it is not, why not.

Note that simply playing a single stone into a single suicide (really stupid) is already forbidden by the rule against repeating board positions.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #46 Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:15 pm 
Lives in sente
User avatar

Posts: 761
Liked others: 152
Was liked: 204
Rank: the k-word
Horibe wrote:
Javaness2 wrote:
It is true that suicide can have practical value as a ko threat. However, is that really a reason to overturn years of tradition? Given the limited tactical value afforded by the allowance of suicide, I'd have to vote against its inclusion.


To me, it seems inconsistant to have an additional rule making it illegal.

The rules allow you to play in a place where the stone, or stones would have no liberties if such a play kills the surrounding stones. This concept has to be understood already.

How is playing a stone where it kills itself different? Other than usually being stupid...but when it is not, why not.

Note that simply playing a single stone into a single suicide (really stupid) is already forbidden by the rule against repeating board positions.

As pointed out before, suicide actually requires an additional rule, which is that when placing a stone you first remove stones of opposite color with no liberties, and then stones of your own color with no liberties.

Regular go does not have that rule.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #47 Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:42 pm 
Lives in sente

Posts: 1328
Liked others: 108
Was liked: 276
Horibe wrote:
Javaness2 wrote:
It is true that suicide can have practical value as a ko threat. However, is that really a reason to overturn years of tradition? Given the limited tactical value afforded by the allowance of suicide, I'd have to vote against its inclusion.


To me, it seems inconsistant to have an additional rule making it illegal.

The rules allow you to play in a place where the stone, or stones would have no liberties if such a play kills the surrounding stones. This concept has to be understood already.

How is playing a stone where it kills itself different? Other than usually being stupid...but when it is not, why not.

Note that simply playing a single stone into a single suicide (really stupid) is already forbidden by the rule against repeating board positions.


I don't understand your point. The rule you're using appears to forbid suicide...

_________________
North Lecale

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #48 Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:45 pm 
Tengen

Posts: 5199
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 719
palapiku wrote:
suicide actually requires an additional rule,


Suicide requires an additional rule or definition or extension of a definition.

Prohibited suicide requires an additional rule or definition or extension of a definition.

Quote:
Regular go does not have that rule.


What is "regular" go in contrast to "irregular go" WRT to (no) suicide?

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #49 Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:43 pm 
Lives in sente

Posts: 1328
Liked others: 108
Was liked: 276
RobertJasiek wrote:
What is "regular" go in contrast to "irregular go" WRT to (no) suicide?


The tradition of go up until NZ Rules were invented?

I don't think suicide makes any difference anyway. Out of interest, did any professional game under Ing Rules ever experience suicide? I have a vague recollection of seeing it on KGS once...

_________________
North Lecale

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #50 Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 11:32 pm 
Tengen

Posts: 5199
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 719
Javaness2 wrote:
The tradition of go up until NZ Rules were invented?


I see. (Maybe Ing Rules suicide was earlier?) But do we really know what the tradition was? Probably we know it for Japan. I am not so sure about China in earlier centuries.

Quote:
Out of interest, did any professional game under Ing Rules ever experience suicide?


Probably yes, but it is infrequent indeed.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #51 Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 5:19 am 
Lives with ko
User avatar

Posts: 161
Liked others: 26
Was liked: 18
Rank: KGS 10 kyu
KGS: Annihilist
IGS: Annihilist
DGS: Ubermensch
Kaya handle: Annihilist
It's interesting because under "pass stone" rules, it is pretty much legal. You place a stone in an opponent's eye, it gets captured - you give them your stone and give up your turn. Same thing, essentially. Passing is playing a dead stone.

I like the "no-suicide" rule, because it's another parameter which makes the game more challenging and interesting. Of course, for the most part, you wouldn't suicide anyway, so it's a superfluous rule. Sometimes you can suicide as a ko threat. But it seems almost like a cop-out move, really. I don't like the idea that you can kill yourself and reset the board - or parts of it. I like how the board always changes. And I think that's part of the point of the ko rule, as well as this one.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #52 Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 5:24 am 
Lives with ko
User avatar

Posts: 161
Liked others: 26
Was liked: 18
Rank: KGS 10 kyu
KGS: Annihilist
IGS: Annihilist
DGS: Ubermensch
Kaya handle: Annihilist
RobertJasiek wrote:
Javaness2 wrote:
The tradition of go up until NZ Rules were invented?


I see. (Maybe Ing Rules suicide was earlier?) But do we really know what the tradition was? Probably we know it for Japan. I am not so sure about China in earlier centuries.

Quote:
Out of interest, did any professional game under Ing Rules ever experience suicide?


Probably yes, but it is infrequent indeed.
You know about traditional chinese fuseki rules?

You know how go was traditionally played on 17x17?

I like to think we move on from tradition as we see what works and what doesn't. In all areas of life - not just go.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #53 Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 1:56 pm 
Tengen

Posts: 4337
Location: North Carolina
Liked others: 475
Was liked: 718
Rank: AGA 3k
GD Posts: 65
OGS: Hyperpape 4k
Annihilist wrote:
It's interesting because under "pass stone" rules, it is pretty much legal. You place a stone in an opponent's eye, it gets captured - you give them your stone and give up your turn. Same thing, essentially. Passing is playing a dead stone.

I like the "no-suicide" rule, because it's another parameter which makes the game more challenging and interesting. Of course, for the most part, you wouldn't suicide anyway, so it's a superfluous rule. Sometimes you can suicide as a ko threat. But it seems almost like a cop-out move, really. I don't like the idea that you can kill yourself and reset the board - or parts of it. I like how the board always changes. And I think that's part of the point of the ko rule, as well as this one.
That's a really interesting connection. But on the other hand, pass stones are a weird feature of the game. Although I now understand them (I think), every previous tournament I went to, there's this discussion before the first game: "isn't there something about White or Black playing last? Passing stones?" "Yeah, I think it's like this...but I don't know why".

_________________
Occupy Babel!


This post by hyperpape was liked by: Mef
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #54 Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 2:30 pm 
Lives with ko

Posts: 294
Liked others: 47
Was liked: 94
Universal go server handle: MSGreg
hyperpape wrote:
Annihilist wrote:
It's interesting because under "pass stone" rules, it is pretty much legal. You place a stone in an opponent's eye, it gets captured - you give them your stone and give up your turn. Same thing, essentially. Passing is playing a dead stone.
...
That's a really interesting connection. But on the other hand, pass stones are a weird feature of the game. Although I now understand them (I think), every previous tournament I went to, there's this discussion before the first game: "isn't there something about White or Black playing last? Passing stones?" "Yeah, I think it's like this...but I don't know why".


Pass stone and suicide are different if you suicide into your existing group (say, place a stone so that three of your stones get captured).

My (beginner) understanding is that a Pass Stone is so that area scoring and territory scoring have the same result (difference between black and white, not absolute values). For this to work, there must be the same number of moves from black and white. (Sensei's Library Equivalence Scoring). I usually frame this simply as "white pass after black". If black passes first, then white, then passing stones are superfluous. If the pass sequence is white, black, white, then white scores one extra point if no pass stones are used.

I haven't thought through the exact implications when handicap stones are used, komi is reducted and white goes first.

Sorry if everyone already knew this :-(

Edit: "Pass stone and suicide are different"

_________________
Founder, Central Mississippi Go Club
Free tips and resources for clubs and teaching
Go Kit Club Pack - pack of 13x13 go sets for clubs
Go Tin - very portable go


Last edited by msgreg on Tue Dec 11, 2012 2:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #55 Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 2:33 pm 
Lives with ko

Posts: 206
Liked others: 33
Was liked: 60
GD Posts: 248
Annihilist wrote:
It's interesting because under "pass stone" rules, it is pretty much legal. You place a stone in an opponent's eye, it gets captured - you give them your stone and give up your turn. Same thing, essentially. Passing is playing a dead stone.

I like the "no-suicide" rule, because it's another parameter which makes the game more challenging and interesting. Of course, for the most part, you wouldn't suicide anyway, so it's a superfluous rule. Sometimes you can suicide as a ko threat. But it seems almost like a cop-out move, really. I don't like the idea that you can kill yourself and reset the board - or parts of it. I like how the board always changes. And I think that's part of the point of the ko rule, as well as this one.


Well, I really do not agree with anything in this post.

First - "pass stone" rules do not make suicide legal. The AGA rules have the pass stone, but explicitly state that suicide is not allowed. If you played your pass stone as you suggest, under AGA rules you would suffer the penalty for an illegal move, as if you had retaken a ko without a threat. What you mean to say is the result is the same, but that same result could only occur when all the dame are filled, no sooner. I urge players with white who are compelled to make that dreaded first pass - do not hand over as stone, do not play an illegal move - just defend something, even if you do not think black and do anything. I have killed stuff after recieving a pass stone before.... You must pass to end the game, not play a stone with the same scoring impact...you must pass, or the game is not over.

Second - if you kill yourself by resulting in more than one stone dying - then you have not reset the board - the board position has changed, one or more of your stones are gone.

Finally - I do not see how disallowing suicide makes the game less interesting or challenging. Use of suicide moves would be another weopon, another challenge (admittedly a rare one) to master.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #56 Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2012 6:53 pm 
Tengen

Posts: 4337
Location: North Carolina
Liked others: 475
Was liked: 718
Rank: AGA 3k
GD Posts: 65
OGS: Hyperpape 4k
Msgreg, that matches what I understand, but whether I can remember why that works is iffy on any given day.

_________________
Occupy Babel!

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #57 Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:23 am 
Lives in sente

Posts: 852
Location: Central Coast
Liked others: 201
Was liked: 333
Rank: KGS [-]
GD Posts: 428
msgreg wrote:
Pass stone and suicide are different if you suicide into your existing group (say, place a stone so that three of your stones get captured).



I think Annihilist's point was "If you allow multi-stone suicide, and pass stones, that is equivalent to allowing all suicides", because a single stone suicide is identical to passing and giving up a pass stone.


Quote:
I usually frame this simply as "white pass after black". If black passes first, then white, then passing stones are superfluous. If the pass sequence is white, black, white, then white scores one extra point if no pass stones are used.


In yet another semi-esoteric consideration for pass stones....the white passes last rule is also needed to prevent pass fights. Without it, you can effectively create a "ko" over passing order.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #58 Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 6:55 am 
Lives with ko

Posts: 294
Liked others: 47
Was liked: 94
Universal go server handle: MSGreg
Mef wrote:
msgreg wrote:
Pass stone and suicide are different if you suicide into your existing group (say, place a stone so that three of your stones get captured).



I think Annihilist's point was "If you allow multi-stone suicide, and pass stones, that is equivalent to allowing all suicides", because a single stone suicide is identical to passing and giving up a pass stone.


Quote:
I usually frame this simply as "white pass after black". If black passes first, then white, then passing stones are superfluous. If the pass sequence is white, black, white, then white scores one extra point if no pass stones are used.


In yet another semi-esoteric consideration for pass stones....the white passes last rule is also needed to prevent pass fights. Without it, you can effectively create a "ko" over passing order.

Good points... I appreciate the link to pass fights.

_________________
Founder, Central Mississippi Go Club
Free tips and resources for clubs and teaching
Go Kit Club Pack - pack of 13x13 go sets for clubs
Go Tin - very portable go

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #59 Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 3:06 pm 
Lives in sente

Posts: 1328
Liked others: 108
Was liked: 276
Annihilist wrote:
You know about traditional chinese fuseki rules?

You know how go was traditionally played on 17x17?

I like to think we move on from tradition as we see what works and what doesn't. In all areas of life - not just go.


Yes, the rules have evolved. However, is there any compelling reason for them to include suicide as an option? From my observation, the game is not crying out for this change. If anyone can show me a pro game that used suicide, I'd love to see it. Moving to 19x19 and removing fixed starting positions made the game much richer. In contrast, suicide would add almost nothing to the theory of Go.

As an aside, I'd love to play a game here with Tibetan rules.

_________________
North Lecale

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Go 'Suicide'?
Post #60 Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 3:40 pm 
Lives with ko
User avatar

Posts: 161
Liked others: 26
Was liked: 18
Rank: KGS 10 kyu
KGS: Annihilist
IGS: Annihilist
DGS: Ubermensch
Kaya handle: Annihilist
Javaness2 wrote:
Annihilist wrote:
You know about traditional chinese fuseki rules?

You know how go was traditionally played on 17x17?

I like to think we move on from tradition as we see what works and what doesn't. In all areas of life - not just go.


Yes, the rules have evolved. However, is there any compelling reason for them to include suicide as an option? From my observation, the game is not crying out for this change. If anyone can show me a pro game that used suicide, I'd love to see it. Moving to 19x19 and removing fixed starting positions made the game much richer. In contrast, suicide would add almost nothing to the theory of Go.

As an aside, I'd love to play a game here with Tibetan rules.
Yes I definitely agree. There is no need for such a rule.

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