I just played a game on IGS and there I made a seki, the strange thing is that the IGS system counted white's false eye to the scrore.
Is that normal? I tryed different computer programms to see what each one says about the score:
1. glgo (IGS) = B+65.5
2. Smartgo = B+59.5
3. ManyFaces = B+66.5
4. CGoban (KGS) = B+72.5
5. Gnugo = B+77.5

Here is how the game looked, I was Black and the seki is in the LR-corner:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B After 273
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . O X X . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . O X X . O X X . . X X . |
$$ | . O O . . O . O O X X O O X X X O O . |
$$ | . X . O . O O O X X O O O O O X . X X |
$$ | . . X O X O X O . X O . O O O X X O . |
$$ | . O X O X O X O . X . O O X O O O O O |
$$ | O . O O O X X X X . X . O X X X X O X |
$$ | O O X X X . . . . X O X O O O X . X X |
$$ | O X X . . X . . . . . X O . O X O X . |
$$ | X . . X X X . . X X . X O X X X X X X |
$$ | . X . X O O X X O O X X X O . X X X X |
$$ | X X X O O X O O . . O O X O O O X O X |
$$ | O X O . . . X O O O O X X O O . O O O |
$$ | O O O O . . X X X O O O O . . O O O . |
$$ | O . O . O . . O O O X X X O O O X O O |
$$ | O O X O O O O O X X . . O X O X X X O |
$$ | O X X O X X O O O X . . X X O X . X O |
$$ | X X X X O X X O X X . . X . X O O X X |
$$ | . O . X O . . X . . . . . X X O . O . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

So what is right? Does IGS always count one eye of seki groups, even if it's a false eye?
Could it be that it isn't a seki? Because of the recapture that makes it the same position?

Why do you just post a diagram instead of the real SGF? The diagram loses information, for example the komi and prisoners.

1) What about prisoners? Or are there exactly one more black stone on the board than white stones on the board? If this isn't the case there will obviously be big differences between area and territory scoring.
2) What about komi? Did you set the same komi in all your programs?
3) Eyes in seki differ between rulesets. Japanese rules don't give you points for them.
Most area scoring systems do count them. Not counting eyes in sekis is an artificial rule in japanese style rule sets. And IMO it is stupid.

With 0 komi and 0 prisoners kgs with japanese-style rules gives me B+72. With chinese style rules it gives me B+68. Which clearly shows that you made a mistake with prisoners.

_________________
Sanity is for the weak.

Ups you are right! I totally forgot to post komi+prisoners
prisoners: Black has 4, White has 9
komi: 0.5 for white

Thanks to you I realized that in the SGF file the rules are not saved, which causes the programms not to know if it should count Japanese or something else, I think it has Japanese as default.

I only know the japanese rules so I never counted anything else as secure territory. I guess I get some information on the different rules now.

Thank you Li Kao you made me realize my mistake.

In AGA rules the seki eyes are counted.

IGS uses different rulesets. Therefore it depends on which ruleset you have chosen. Probably it was IGS Rules:

http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/igsrules.html

In other words, there can be territory in sekis. Lots of other go servers behave similarly: there can be territory in sekis.

However, this does NOT agree to Japanese style rules, which do not have territory in sekis.

IGS Rules are related to Japanese style rules but the territory in sekis is one of the exceptions where both rulesets differ.

Just because a server hasn't properly implemented a set of rules, that doesn't make it its own new set of rules. It just makes it a bug (which may not be deemed important enough to fix, yet).

I disagree but... more to the point: I talked with the programmer: it was intended!

all servers should have a function to change the seki points to dame.
i dont know igs, kgs, or aga rule.

i know that
in chinese rule they count them as a point.
in japanese rule they count them as dame.
also..ing's rule is also another version of chinese rule...

_________________
"The more we think we know about
The greater the unknown"
Words by neil peart, music by geddy lee and alex lifeson

Rather Ing Rules and Chinese Rules have in common that they use area scoring.

In Chinese-style counting it should be obvious that this is a point, because white is free to drop a stone in there at any point. In Japanese-style counting, there is no obvious answer, it has to be separately specified in the ruleset. This is one of the cases that makes my ratio prefer Chinese-style counting over Japanese-style counting. But... my irrational, "aesthetic" sense makes me prefer a Japanese-style counting system. Interesting

_________________
My name is Gijs, from Utrecht, NL.

When in doubt, play the most aggressive move

Here's a theory as to why that happens: you have learned the Japanese system first, and people tend to like whatever they learn first more than anything that comes after. Of course, this is hard to rationalize.

Well, I am kind of fond of territory scoring with "group tax", i. e., not counting eyes that you need for life. This eye is not needed for life, so it would count.

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.