It is currently Sat Mar 23, 2019 7:18 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Ikeda's superko?
Post #1 Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 12:32 pm 
Lives with ko

Posts: 243
Location: Spain
Liked others: 149
Was liked: 24
Rank: Low
GD Posts: 10
Footnote (by James Davies) found in Ikeda Toshio's On the Rules of Go:

Quote:
Actually, under Ikeda's formulation of the super-ko rule Black A is allowed because it is not a capturing move. Rule 4 in Part I states that, "If playing on a grid point places any stones of the other color in a removable state, the configuration resulting from removal of those stones must not be identical to a configuration that has already appeared in the game." Rule 4 may have been worded in this way to avoid awkward sentence structure in Japanese. Judging from Dia. 3-2-10 and the discussion in section 3.3, Ikeda intended the super-ko restriction to apply to all moves, not just capturing moves.

I never thought of applying superko to capturing moves only, but it does seem interesting, even if it's not what Ikeda meant. For one, it blends in nicely with the ko rule and makes illegal moves a bit easier to spot. I haven't seen this rule discussed anywhere, though.

_________________
Sum ergo non ero.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ikeda's superko?
Post #2 Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2018 4:41 pm 
Dies with sente

Posts: 102
Liked others: 16
Was liked: 18
luigi wrote:
I never thought of applying superko to capturing moves only, but it does seem interesting, even if it's not what Ikeda meant. For one, it blends in nicely with the ko rule and makes illegal moves a bit easier to spot. I haven't seen this rule discussed anywhere, though.

Ing ko rules work that way, though in a modified way. (Of corse, this would be a bad example, if you want to show that this rule makes it more easy :)

I believe your idea would work fine and would lead to the same outcome as a normal superko rule in allmost all positions. Probably it would make a smaller difference than switching between PSK and SSK.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ikeda's superko?
Post #3 Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2018 6:38 pm 
Lives with ko

Posts: 290
Liked others: 1
Was liked: 62
Rank: kgs 5 kyu
KGS: Pio2001
The bad side is that the definition is more complicated than positional superko.
What is the good side ?

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ikeda's superko?
Post #4 Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 6:15 am 
Dies with sente

Posts: 102
Liked others: 16
Was liked: 18
I wouldn't call this rule more complicatet.
You need only to check for super-ko, when you make a capturing move. If a move is a capturing move is trivial to check. So you will have either less work (for the moves that doesn't capture anything) or you will have to do the same work (for the capturing moves).

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ikeda's superko?
Post #5 Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 7:29 pm 
Beginner

Posts: 5
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 1
Rank: Eternal KGS 4d
KGS: redreoicy
Online playing schedule: T-f
This superko rule breaks eternal life, which normally becomes equivalent to a ko under superko rules.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ikeda's superko?
Post #6 Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 5:13 am 
Dies with sente

Posts: 102
Liked others: 16
Was liked: 18
redreoicy wrote:
This superko rule breaks eternal life, which normally becomes equivalent to a ko under superko rules.

I think this version of superko would only shift the points, when the players need to make a ko-threat, so this should be still equivalent to a simple ko.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

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