In general, to get the last play at the level of the plays,

For instance, suppose that the last two plays are a gote that gains 1 point and a reverses sente that gains 1 point. If you take the reverse sente, you gain 1 point, but then the opponent takes the gote to gain 1 point, as well. Net result: 0. But if you take the gote, you gain 1 point, and then the opponent takes his sente, for no gain. Net result: 1 point for you. Note that in the second line of play you get the last play (the reply to the sente).

See, I'd read "Four 2 point gote moves, each as big as the other, doesn't matter which one to play" and just play them out

No-one has answered this part of the OP's question, but it represents the real problem succinctly. The real problem is one of terminology, and even the Basic Endgame Theory page on SL manages to start off on entirely the wrong foot.

The first point is that it is more correct to talk about "boundary plays" (= yose) and these can occur even in the opening. They are common in the middle game. Conversely, the endgame can include plays (e.g. ko fights) that are not boundary plays.

The second point is that discussion of the topic is riddled with confusing usages of terms such as count, size, move, point, tally, etc. It is usually futile to start reading anything, even by an expert, about counting boundary plays unless you know for certain how these various terms are being used. It is not just that writer A may use one term and writer B another. It is that writer A may use the same term in two ways even in the same sentence. For example, with count you need to know whether the de-iri count or the miai count is being referred to. Context can help, but as the earlier posts in this thread show, it is unsafe to make assumptions about the context.

Even if you do come to terms, so to speak, with counting you need to remember that this is just one part of boundary play study. For instance, you need to be familiar with the many tesujis for this aspect of the game - not so very different from middle-game or life-and-death tesujis, but instead of good shape or life the goal is to gain extra points.

A further aspect of study is really for dan players, and that is thickness (i.e. solidity). Often you will want to play the most secure move rather than the one that looks biggest. This applies usually to boundary plays in the middle game (and ability here is one of the markers for very strong players), but it can occur quite late in the game, too, for example when there are still ko fights lurking.

There are also other kinds of boundary play strategy. One centres round the tedomari - getting the last move of a certain level. Just as in the opening where, say, there are three big 20-point big points you will usually try to improvise a plan to get two out of three of these, so with boundary plays: if there are three 2-point gote plays you will want to ensure you get two of them (this is often where thickness comes in). Timing is general is an important element of boundary play strategies.

Proverbs don't really cope with such a wide range of requirements, although sayings such "the monkey jump is worth 7 (or 8) points" are useful in various ways. I think the most unuseful advice is to stress the importance of sente. It is often plain wrong - usually the biggest move is best, often the thickest move is best, and often the tedomari is your goal. Sente is just a means. The end (or boundary ) matters more than the means.

When you see a pro described as "good at the endgame", remember that this should be "good at boundary plays". In fact it really means he is good at the middle game. It does not mean he is good at counting local positions - all pros can do that and they have very many standard counts stored in their heads. It means rather that he is good at evaluating boundary plays, potential as well as actual, at an early stage and so can make the right decisions as regards timing or thickness.

Keep bearing with me Bill, this is fabulous stuff, I'm just slow!

I consider "a" a 3 point gote move, because it's 2 initial points and 2 for a followup gote move, whereas "b" I consider a 2 point gote move.

However, I'm aware that "a" is in reality also a 1 point sente move move if Black _does_ respond, and that's the tricky point for me intuitively.

So, if White captures, it feels necessary to consider the recapture against "c" for Black. "c" is obviously 2 points gote, and the recapture is 2 points gote, so it doesn't make much odds for Black which he takes. To assume Black treats it as gote (may as well under the circumstances), we have White gaining 2 points at the top, Black gaining two points at the bottom, and White gaining another point at the top (net gain of 1 point), against White gaining two points at the bottom and Black gaining 2 points at the top (net gain of 0 points). So capturing the two stones is worth one more point.

You have the order wrong. If White plays at "a" first, the remaining plays are miai, so if Black gains two points at the bottom White gains two points at the top. That means that White's first play gained 1 point, not the second one. (OC, as I see it each of the plays gains 1 point.) We both agree that if White plays at "b" first and then Black plays at "a", the net result of the play is 0.

ok, this sounds reasonable. When i have a rs of 2pts and a gote of 1pt, so i should go rs first. Then it's like when the pts of rs=gote, gote is preferred to rs?

Bill and Topaz, you guys make my head hurt.

bill:
can you give me a simple diagram of reverse sente vs gote?
i can not understand why gote is prefered.

Okay, I think I mostly understand this, finally? I had never seen game trees before, and was about to ask, but decided it would be polite to research the basics first. Those are here: http://senseis.xmp.net/?MiaiCountingWithTrees. So if I'm not mistaken, the left leaf is black filling, totalling zero points there. The branch at B is if black takes 'c' on the board? White takes so, black gets either -1 or -3 points, depending on if black captures back. Is this a correct interpretation of the tree you drew?

Thanks to both sides, this discussion is educational.

Ah, Magic Man!

See #17 in this thread: http://www.lifein19x19.com/forum/viewto ... 9605#p9605

i never used formula to calculate the values.
but it looks intresting.

i know for fact that there are 9 dans who doesnt know such formula and are strong at endgame.
i believe the experience and intuation alone will be enough to compare the value of 2 different endgame.
although it is intresting i think people need to learn to feel the end game first.

in my opinion the formula confuses me more and take longer to calculate.

So the left branch is if white lets black fill?

The right branch is if white captures. The left branch is if black gets the next local play (capturing back to -1 points) and the right is if white gets to connect.

Now am I correctly interpreting the tree?

thank you for your info.
but that is an example of 2 point gote vs 1 point RS.
if it was equal valued point then RS is always bigger. (excluding miai)