There was a lot of confusion this year at the US Go Congress in Tacoma.

I witnessed a lot of players not passing stones at the end. And most of those not knowing that it was part of the rule set they were playing under. And for many, there was no common language between them. Take away their own familiar rule set by throwing the AGA rule set at them, and suddenly it seems they don't even have Go as a common language.

The Koreans were getting offended because the Chinese were just tossing the prisoners back into their bowls. Both were confused by pass stones -- did they win by one and a half, or by just a half? Toss in some occasional tardiness and clock mismanagement, and everyone seemed too overly stressed to play their best game.

Sure, there's a one line mention in the Congress Handbook -- AGA rules.
But for the players who don't read or speak English, they didn't seem to be aware they they were playing under a different rule set than they were used to. Heck, often our own players who speak English, don't even seem to understand our own rule set.

At the very least, something should have been written in each language highlighting the main differences of the AGA rule set. And eventually, we should also have the Rules themselves published in each of these languages.

This seems like common sense, especially for events where there is a large international presence expected, but also for smaller events where one would like to draw in the participation of the various go-playing ethnic communities in the area.

In our area, we have sometimes resorted to taking pictures of the board and prisoners at the end so that it can be counted both ways if necessary.

If you write it down, people won't read it. There should also be a brief announcement at the beginning of the open in multiple languages.

Of course, if you announce it, people won't listen either. But if you write it down, announce it, and have people there to resolve things, there should be enough awareness that everyone can figure something out with a little bit of bumbling around.

_________________
Occupy Babel!

Yeah, I've seen this at all 3 congresses I've been to and at virtually every tournament played by AGA rules. Note that I'm not criticizing the AGA rules--I actually like them, and confusion would occur no matter what rule set was adopted if participants are from different backgrounds.

I also see confusion every year over the self-paired rules in the booklet that suggest handicap values must be determined by the exact point value of your AGA rank. When I asked a TD about it one year, he said just use the players' AGA rating as translated into kyu/dan, and not to worry about the decimals. I think it should be clarified.

As for AGA rules, I agree that having the most fundamental rules explained in at least English, Chinese, Japanese, and Korean would be of great value. If nothing else, it could be used to resolve some disputes.

Yeah, we should have our official rules translated into all three languages!

I happened to be near one of the strong Korean players discussing pass stones with the US Open TD; I got to explain that AGA rules are area rules, and therefore the pass stones don't change the result. We should make this easier for people to understand.

_________________
That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.
--
My (sadly neglected, but not forgotten) project: http://dailyjoseki.com

When I try to explain my hobby to non-go players, they are sometimes incredulous. I can remember one asking: "You've been playing this for 3000 years and you still don't know what the rules are???"

_________________
Help make L19 more organized. Make an index: https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5207

You make it sound like politics.

_________________
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 I recall, the TD did announce on the first day about pass stones.

Don't forget Spanish (I played some kids from Mexico). Aside from the pass stones, what other common rule differences could be printed in a chart?

It's hard to convey
"Area scoring; either territory counting with captures or area counting without."

Something like the information in the AGA column of this table might be useful.
http://www.britgo.org/rules/compare.html

_________________
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

What do you mean by "area rules"? If you mean "area counting" then I don't think that's right. The AGA Rules allow for either area counting or territory counting, and territory counting is the default rule.

Because of the "pass stone" rule, the result will be the same under either counting method. (Assuming players keep track of prisoners and don't miss any dame points).

I think it's fair to say that AGA rules take area scoring and provide a way to get the same score with slightly mangled territory scoring, rather than the other way around.

I believe the default is that you use territory counting to get the score unless both sides agree to use area counting beforehand. The score, of course, agrees with the score as counted using traditional area scoring.

I don't have an opinion on that statement one way or the other. I was just asking if he was referring to the counting method, because the idea that AGA rules require area counting is a misconception.

Oh, I guess we read it differently. I'm fairly sure daniel_the_smith said 'I got to explain that AGA rules are area rules' (emphasis mine) because he means they literally are ultimately an area scoring ruleset, not because you have to count them using area scoring. The territory scoring procedure is specifically not 'normal' (pass stones, I guess eyes in seki count etc.) in order to match the area scoring result.

With AGA rules, it doesn't matter if the players use area or territory counting; the effect of the pass stone/white pass last combo is that they'll get the same winner no matter how they count.

It's important to realize that--if you happen to have one of those rare games in which (without pass stones) area and territory counting choose different winners--AGA rules choose the side which wins under area counting, NOT the side which wins with territory counting. AGA rules make territory counting give the same result as area counting. Dame are points!

This is confusing to the unsuspecting because people in the US ordinarily use territory counting!

Arg, amnal sniped me; all that to say, yes, I call them area rules because they give the result of area counting no matter how you actually count.

_________________
That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.
--
My (sadly neglected, but not forgotten) project: http://dailyjoseki.com

Thanks for clarifying. Again, I just wanted to make sure you didn't mean to suggest that area counting is required.

This, in my opinion, is exactly why territory counting should be used. Plus, area counting encourages lazy reading at the end of the game - no penalty for protecting a cut even if not needed - and that is a big negative.

_________________
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).

To get to the point where the protection can be lazy, you first have to play out all the dame without protecting (or lose a point), exposing yourself to the maximum danger possible. You only get a chance for a free lazy move if your opponent gets the last dame and that's the one that might be threatening. So I can't really see that this is anything larger more a really small negative...it's misleading to suggest it even permits significant laziness, never mind that people actually bother. I don't think I've ever seen it make a difference to peoples behaviour.

On the other hand, if this is a 'really big' negative, I guess the ease of understanding how to decide stones are dead (for beginners...or for anyone when the situation gets icky) is a truly massive positive

I suppose one could argue that territory counting encourages laziness by not requiring you to determine if it's safe to fill in dame (since the game could end before dame are filled)... But I think we stray from the point.

_________________
That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.
--
My (sadly neglected, but not forgotten) project: http://dailyjoseki.com

And?

_________________
Occupy Babel!

Talking with some of those involved in running the open, I think there will be some added changes next year.

Simply getting up and declaring that "white must pass the last stone," will not sink in for everyone. Especially 1) those with limited English ability, 2) those who have never done anything more than hit the Pass button on their favorite internet server, and 3) those who learned to play a few weeks ago and are in their first tournament as a 30 kyu.

Also, the clock was a big problem for several foreigners, who did not have knowledge of how the byoyomi system worked. I think some kind of visual demo (maybe a video?) should be done to illustrate the concept of main time and overtime.