As I see it, the classification of shapes is irrelevant for the rules. There is only 'alive' and 'dead'. 'Alive' is what will not be killed in the playout. The easiest way to get this is to make the "complete game" go until all dead stones have been captured, but allow the players to agree on some shortcut procedure that does not alter the score.

_________________
A good system naturally covers all corner cases without further effort.

The rules define correct play. A number of supposed rules anomalies show that some set of rules gives a strange result for some end position, but, according to those rules, somebody made a mistake and should not have passed or otherwise ended play. IMHO, altering the rules to yield somehow more reasonable results is not normally a good idea. Who knows what mistakes can give rise to other anomalies? You can't go chasing anomalies. Now, some people, like John Tromp, don't care about anomalies, but if you do, the only ones you have to own are those that result from correct play.

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Bill, I do not quite agree that one could not chase all anomalies:) But... it is still a huge task to find all remaining, yet undiscovered anomalies. And, of course, rulesets designed around all anomalies would be EXTREMELY nasty and long.

suppose you have the endposition in a game. and you know the komi.

For area scorinbg you can decide the outcome, nothing more is nescesary.

For territory scoring you need to know how many prisoners are taken and that is information of the game history.


Suppose a position can be reached via 2 different paths
in the first path White has captured a black stone.
In the second path black has made a pass.

The position is the same but (for terriotory scoring) the score/ outcome is different. (in path 1 there is one black prisoner more than in path 2)

for area scoring the score is the same so if the position is the same the score is the same.

Example (added later) (beccause you requested it



For area scoring it is simple
Black
* 18 territory (empty points)
* 11 live stones
Total 29 points

White
* 9 territory (empty points)
* 11 live stones
* 9 komi
Total 29 points

Result Draw

for territory scoring:

How many prisoners have been taken?
It is not clear of the position, you need the game record.
But if that record is unavailable you cannot decide the result

And not suposing optimimal play you can construct game records for any result here...

_________________
Promotor and Librarian of Sensei's Library

For the purpose of result determination, it suffices to consider numbers of prisoners as being part of the current (final) game situation.

I cannot see your position; I see mostly just a grey box.

EDIT: Now I do not even see the box any longer.

I think we disagree here

For me rules decide about what is legal and illegal. Not about optimal and "normal".

correct play is a bit hazy concept. for me correct is all that is not illegal. pussing correct to the limit woulld mean (and i know i am exagerating here) , You have to play there, other moves allow your opponent kill your group and the rules do not allow you to let that happen. as a matter of fact you are not even allowed to lose. because losing is incorrect play.

_________________
Promotor and Librarian of Sensei's Library

It is not that easy:

What do you mean by "complete games"

Playout is a complicated thing . I suppose you mean playout is continuing the game by optimal play and the optimal result is the result of the game. (if it is not by optimal play there can be different outcomes)

A case in point the non filling of ko.
How to continue? May the ko be recaptured now? (so the koban is lifted)

_________________
Promotor and Librarian of Sensei's Library

A game without the players agreeing on a shortcut. A game is then complete when there are no dead stones on the board anymore, so that the players only need to agree that the game is ended, not on any removal procedure.



I do not prescribe optimal play. "Playout" is simply the part of the game that would usually not be played; i.e. the part of the game after the point where passing does not alter the score. Ikeda calls the last move before that point the "last competitive move".



I have written before that a ko ban should not be affected by passing. If an open ko mouth cannot be forced to be protected, it can be territory.

_________________
A good system naturally covers all corner cases without further effort.

I was planning a more comprehansive reply but i could not fine the "last competitive move" in my translation of the ing rules can you give me a link to which ing rules you mean? (Then at least we talk about teh same rules)



Then in the situation below (where the opponent has no other option than to pass) it is always a point of territory.

_________________
Promotor and Librarian of Sensei's Library

I was not talking about Ing but Ikeda (yes, both start with an 'I', but...). There is a translation of his series "On the Rules of Go" at gobase.org: http://gobase.org/studying/rules/ikeda/.



In the result, yes (I cautiously said "can be territory" because I did not want to have a discussion about life and death of the surrounding groups).

I say "in the result" because I do not think that any number of passes should automatically end the game. I rather see a pass as a convenient point to allow the players to agree on the game end.

_________________
A good system naturally covers all corner cases without further effort.

Thanks your post makes much clear.

But i am not so sure if i agree with you. but will put open ko mouths where it is impossible for one player to play in the complicated positions rule. (that is i think the right spot for all contriversial positions)



Oops I was one of the persons that thought they were the same rules.

(Made a page on Sensei's Library for it and made much reference that the Ikeda rules are not the ING rules) (but it was more that they were both rules from the east, but only now i realised In g was Chinese and Ikeda was Japanese)
Feel free to add to the sensei's page.

Edit: I saw that the position I described is comparible with Ikeda's description on
http://gobase.org/studying/rules/ikeda/?sec=e3040000
Diagram 3-3-4.
It is a bit uncear to me how area rules I and II differ. (or must i asume that in area rules I there is no space for komi, it just lookes like playiong till somebody cannot move anymore)

_________________
Promotor and Librarian of Sensei's Library