I promised an example for prisoners, so here it is. For the sake of simplicity, I let it look like an endgame position. Just imagine the local shape to be part of a middle game position.
INITIAL POSITION
POSITIONAL JUDGEMENT I - MISTAKE
Black's territory including the prisoners is
8 + 100 = 108 points.
Including the prisoners, White's territory is
8 + 100 = 108 points.
The territory count is Black's minus White's value:
108 - 108 = 0 points.
POSITIONAL JUDGEMENT II - CORRECT
Black's territory including the sequence's prisoners is
8 + 0 = 8 points.
Including the prisoners, White's territory is
8 - 0 = 8 points.
The territory count is Black's minus White's value and includes the initial prisoner difference:
8 - 8 + 100 = 0 + 100 = 100 points in Black's favour.
NAIVE PRINCIPLE
Count each prisoner only once.
BETTER PRINCIPLE
Count each prisoner only once, even if it occurs in different sequences that are not alternative variations.
REMARKS
Initial prisoners must be considered for each alternative variation. The sequences for determining either Black's or White's territory are not alternative to each other, but they coexist. We would be considering alternative variations if we continued the game from the initial position with different sequences and then make judgements of the black and white territories for the resulting game positions.
More principles for prisoners and positional judgement are needed but not discussed here at the moment.
Without knowing or thinking how and when to add or subtract prisoners during positional judgement, one can easily make mistakes and get wrong counts as a consequence of confusing addition and subtraction or counting prisoners several times that must be counted only once.
I have chosen the initial prisoner difference 100 to make it obvious why considering it twice is a mistake. If, however, the initial prisoner difference is small (a value such as 1) and more prisoners are made during one or both sequences, then it is easy to make wrong calculations because mistakes are not so obvious.
EDITS: corrections, early versions were wrong. More remarks.
How to learn to count during midgame
-
RobertJasiek
- Judan
- Posts: 6273
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:54 pm
- GD Posts: 0
- Been thanked: 797 times
- Contact:
-
RobertJasiek
- Judan
- Posts: 6273
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:54 pm
- GD Posts: 0
- Been thanked: 797 times
- Contact:
Re: How to learn to count during midgame
POSITIONAL JUDGEMENT III - OTHER MISTAKES
Black's territory including the prisoners is
8 + 100 = 108 points.
Including the prisoners, White's territory is
8 - 100 = -92 points. // Here I alter the mistakes.
The territory count is Black's minus White's value:
108 - (-92) = 108 + 92 = 200 points. // In effect, here we have counted the initial prisoners twice. In Positional Jugdement I, we did not count them at all:)
Black's territory including the prisoners is
8 + 100 = 108 points.
Including the prisoners, White's territory is
8 - 100 = -92 points. // Here I alter the mistakes.
The territory count is Black's minus White's value:
108 - (-92) = 108 + 92 = 200 points. // In effect, here we have counted the initial prisoners twice. In Positional Jugdement I, we did not count them at all:)
-
RobertJasiek
- Judan
- Posts: 6273
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:54 pm
- GD Posts: 0
- Been thanked: 797 times
- Contact:
Re: How to learn to count during midgame
It is particularly tempting to make the mistakes in Positional Jugdement I or III when one imagines prisoners as stones collected in the lids. Such "lid collections" do not distinguish between initial prisoners and prisoners made during imagined sequences! However, analysis such as positional judgement can require a more sophisticated calculation of prisoners!
-
schawipp
- Lives in gote
- Posts: 420
- Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 1:13 am
- Rank: EGF 4k
- GD Posts: 0
- Has thanked: 75 times
- Been thanked: 58 times
Re: How to learn to count during midgame
otenki wrote:...How did you learn to count well, and did this have impact on your game?
I still feel quite unsure in counting, and improvement in that aspect would for sure help a lot... What I sometimes try is to visualize the partly imaginary boundary lines (including boundary stones, if possible...) of black and white groups and see if they mutually cancel out (e. g. this W top left corner is about the same size as the two B groups at the right...). By this way I get at least a gut feeling about who is leading. Recently I finished a game where at the end (=after resigning) both players were still hallucinating about the L&D state of a large ~70pt group; thus L&D practice is also always helpful...
-
Magicwand
- Tengen
- Posts: 4844
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 5:26 am
- Rank: Wbaduk 7D
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: magicwand
- Tygem: magicwand
- Wbaduk: rlatkfkd
- DGS: magicwand
- OGS: magicwand
- Location: Mechanicsburg, PA
- Has thanked: 62 times
- Been thanked: 504 times
Re: How to learn to count during midgame
Professionals can not count 100% there are things you can corn and things you have to estimate. Count what u can and you decision is making estimate on what is left. First learn how to count what you can. Next is your feeling on what you can not count. Professionals call them alpha.
Edit. If any one is claiming that they have a formula for counting they are moran.
Edit. If any one is claiming that they have a formula for counting they are moran.
"The more we think we know about
The greater the unknown"
Words by neil peart, music by geddy lee and alex lifeson
The greater the unknown"
Words by neil peart, music by geddy lee and alex lifeson
-
topazg
- Tengen
- Posts: 4511
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 3:08 am
- Rank: Nebulous
- GD Posts: 918
- KGS: topazg
- Location: Chatteris, UK
- Has thanked: 1579 times
- Been thanked: 650 times
- Contact:
Re: How to learn to count during midgame
Magicwand wrote:Professionals can not count 100% there are things you can corn and things you have to estimate. Count what u can and you decision is making estimate on what is left. First learn how to count what you can. Next is your feeling on what you can not count. Professionals call them alpha.
Edit. If any one is claiming that they have a formula for counting they are moran.
I think there's a huge amount in what magicwand has said in this thread. The amount of professional games where, even whilst playing, the commentator will say something like "and White's 1.5-2.5 points ahead so doesn't need to play this ko". I've always been very impressed about the length and depth and accuracy of professional counting, and I don't believe for a second it's by some comprehensive and deep formula.
A good, precise endgame visualising what's going to happen to the end and counting the points. The more I've watched professional games and observed professional game commentaries, the more I see them doing exactly what magicwand says, and they never seem to be off the mark except where one player, knowing they're behind, complicates things for the sake of catching up.
-
RobertJasiek
- Judan
- Posts: 6273
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:54 pm
- GD Posts: 0
- Been thanked: 797 times
- Contact:
Re: How to learn to count during midgame
Magicwand wrote:Professionals can not count 100% there are things you can corn and things you have to estimate. [...] If any one is claiming that they have a formula for counting
Nobody can count 100%, but the point of positional judgement is the construction of move sequences so that estimates and guesses can be replaced by good approximations of regions that can be counted.
If there is a player's region that can be counted, then (basically) the "formula" is very easy: each empty intersection is 1 point, each dead opposing stone intersection is 2 points, each opposing prisoner removed from that region is 1 point.
There are more complicated cases: e.g., teire is 0 points, a gote endgame option is 1/2 of its points etc.
they are moran
What is moran?:) Poor Magicwand does not realise that positional judgement "formula" are very simple, see above, in most practical cases. The difficulty lies elsewhere: in constructing suitable sequences to transform fighting positions into easily countable positions.
-
RobertJasiek
- Judan
- Posts: 6273
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:54 pm
- GD Posts: 0
- Been thanked: 797 times
- Contact:
Re: How to learn to count during midgame
topazg wrote:the more I see them doing exactly what magicwand says
What exactly does he say? He remains nebulous or contradicts himself when saying both "good endgame counting is necessary" and "they just guess instead of using a formula".
What exactly do you see the pros doing? Usually, pros I have seen would, if at all, only state some resulting count number but say nothing about how they got it.
-
topazg
- Tengen
- Posts: 4511
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 3:08 am
- Rank: Nebulous
- GD Posts: 918
- KGS: topazg
- Location: Chatteris, UK
- Has thanked: 1579 times
- Been thanked: 650 times
- Contact:
Re: How to learn to count during midgame
RobertJasiek wrote:topazg wrote:the more I see them doing exactly what magicwand says
What exactly does he say? He remains nebulous or contradicts himself when saying both "good endgame counting is necessary" and "they just guess instead of using a formula".
What exactly do you see the pros doing? Usually, pros I have seen would, if at all, only state some resulting count number but say nothing about how they got it.
It's all in the thread so I don't see any point in rehashing it, but you're pretty badly misinterpreting (and rephrasing) what he's saying.
-
RobertJasiek
- Judan
- Posts: 6273
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:54 pm
- GD Posts: 0
- Been thanked: 797 times
- Contact:
Re: How to learn to count during midgame
topazg wrote:you're pretty badly misinterpreting (and rephrasing) what he's saying.
Ok, let me cite of what he says:
"you must factor thickness, weakness, aji, etc."
This is nebulous because he does not say at all HOW to do so.
"they look at each position by deciding who has more rights to the position"
This is nebulous because he does not say at all HOW to determine who has more rights.
***
"i would like to compare it with other good endgame books i have read. [...] I suggest everyone to study endgame before counting. you must have basic knowledge on endgame in order to apply counting."
Here he suggests that good endgame knowledge / study is needed.
"If any one is claiming that they have a formula for counting they are moran."
Here he suggests that using formula for counting aka positional judgement is bad. This contradicts his previous statements referring to good endgame knowledge / study (everybody knows that endgame knowledge relies on formula etc. such as forming averages for Black versus White first). So let us assume that he does not mean this contradiction. The other way he offers is guessing:
"things you have to estimate"
However, this also contradicts his endgame knowledge statement because guessing does not need any endgame knowledge!
-
Uberdude
- Judan
- Posts: 6727
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 11:35 am
- Rank: UK 4 dan
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: Uberdude 4d
- OGS: Uberdude 7d
- Location: Cambridge, UK
- Has thanked: 436 times
- Been thanked: 3718 times
Re: How to learn to count during midgame
I am thoroughly confused by all of Robert's talk about the difficulty of counting prisoners. His long post made me even more confused. When I count I count 2 points for dead stones still on the board, and 1 for territory where there was a captured stone, adding on the prisoners in the bowl afterwards. Why is it so hard?
-
RobertJasiek
- Judan
- Posts: 6273
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:54 pm
- GD Posts: 0
- Been thanked: 797 times
- Contact:
Re: How to learn to count during midgame
Uberdude wrote:Why is it so hard?
It is not hard, but, if you have never thought about it before, it is also easy to make mistakes such as those I showed. It requires thinking that initial prisoners are accounted AFTERWARDS, that the initial prisoner difference (i.e. white prisoner stones minus black prisoner stones, i.e. the difference viewed from Black's perspective) is ADDED (not subtracted), that the prisoners of the sequences for determining Black's or White's territory are (preferably) accounted NOT afterwards but for either sequence (and NOT combined with the lids' prisoners), that the prisoner difference of the sequence for determining Black's territory is ADDED, that the prisoner difference of the sequence for determining White's territory is SUBTRACTED (not added) etc. All this is easy, but if you do not know yet when to account which prisoners and which to add / subtract / not count twice, you can still make easy mistakes in particular for every consideration in bold font.
It is even easier to delude oneself into the thinking that it would be easy. While writing the book, I have made and corrected every possible easy mistake at least once. That's how not so easy it is!
It is easier if one does what typically professionals do in their teaching: pretend that the initial prisoner difference always is 0 (by showing only examples where it is not even mentioned), pretend that considering only one local territory region of only one player would suffice (instead of concentrating on whole board examples and always determining both Black's and White's territories), pretend that special cases such as remaining gote endgame options, remaining basic endgame kos or remaining teire would never occur, pretend that in the two sequences for determining Black's and White's territories always only different prisoners would be made etc.
If all this were so easy indeed, then why don't professionals just always teach it when teaching positional judgement? Since I could not learn that from professional sources, I had to study most and find out by myself. Everything is pretty easy, but it is also easy to overlook one or another of the easy aspects. Overall, it is "so hard" because one must avoid overlooking part of the one or two dozen easy aspects.
-
RobertJasiek
- Judan
- Posts: 6273
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:54 pm
- GD Posts: 0
- Been thanked: 797 times
- Contact:
Re: How to learn to count during midgame
topazg wrote:exactly what magicwand says
PART of what he says is correct:
"count what is definit[e] resolved territory."
Of course. The problem is: What is definite, resolved territory? Without further specification, this is only clear in the case of already tightly surrounded territory without or with only trivial remaining endgame (although, strictly, this is not definite and not resolved yet):
Already when it is less definite, it is unclear whether he would count territory or include it in his estimate for the rest of the board where there is not definite territory:
He also says that one must have endgame knowledge, so maybe he would count this.
However, what he says is completely unclear in situations like this:
Does part of the black region have definite territory? Which part? Or no part? Simply include the entire region in the estimate for the rest of the board? This is where Magicwand's suggestions are not exact at all but highly ambiguous.
"howmany points you or opponent need to cashout in order to make the game balanced."
Of course. If a player is X (or alpha, to use his preferred parameter) points ahead, then the opponent needs at least X points on the rest of the board to catch up. This is common, correct knowledge. The problem with Magicwand's application of that knowledge is that too much of a position is unclear. Because for too much he does not specify whether one should consider it definite or not definite territory, there will be a too great part "in the estimate", i.e. belong to the rest of the board for which the estimate X needs to be made.
I prefer to specify clearly what is "definite" (the "current territory" http://senseis.xmp.net/?CurrentTerritory) and to assess also the territorial value of moyos or of territorial regions being territory at one end but moyo at another end. Thereby the rest of the board, for which an estimate X might have to be made, shrinks to a reasonable size.
Now Magicwand and topazg cry "formula - never!". I say: The following simple formula should be used for moyos or territories ending in moyos: Count 100% of the current territory and count 50% of the 'half territory', that is, the territory the defender gets additionally by making one extra play. If you reject this formula, then you should also reject the same formula for the simplest gote endgame options: Count 50% of the territory the defender gets additionally by making one extra play.
Each of the marked intersections is worth 1/2 point for Black.
Formula warning! You need to divide by 2! Danger!;)
-
snorri
- Lives in sente
- Posts: 706
- Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 8:15 am
- GD Posts: 846
- Has thanked: 252 times
- Been thanked: 251 times
Re: How to learn to count during midgame
RobertJasiek wrote:I promised an example for prisoners, so here it is. For the sake of simplicity, I let it look like an endgame position. Just imagine the local shape to be part of a middle game position.
The position seems needlessly complex to show the point you are making. In any case, in the position shown the prisoner count does not change during the hypothetical play and you are only disclosing the difference in the number of prisoners.
RobertJasiek wrote:Black's territory including the prisoners is
8 + 100 = 108 points.
Why would anyone conclude that if they only know the prisoner difference?
RobertJasiek wrote:Including the prisoners, White's territory is
8 + 100 = 108 points.
Of course not! This +100 can't be a positive number for both black and white. This kind of difficulty only arises if you are:
1. Trying to keep track of a prisoner difference.
2. Trying to make a prisoner difference count as part of a particular color's territory.
3. Somehow losing track of the fact that you made choices 1 and 2.
1) is arguably unnecessary, 2) is dubious, and 3) is just getting confused.
Keeping track of prisoner differences locally (e.g., to associate it with specific territories) is required when analyzing josekis, but I am not convinced of its utility during actual game play. Remember this is in the Beginners forum, so to me it would seem natural to go with the assumption that one applies (or computes) the prisoner difference at the end with the komi adjustment, in which case this problem is not going to arise.
-
RobertJasiek
- Judan
- Posts: 6273
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:54 pm
- GD Posts: 0
- Been thanked: 797 times
- Contact:
Re: How to learn to count during midgame
snorri wrote:Remember this is in the Beginners forum,
It is always a problem that discussions evolve. Some become more advanced, others become more basic. Others fluctuate in both directions. It would just add unnecessary confusion if forums would be changed frequently while the same thread of discussion is being developed.
The position seems needlessly complex to show the point you are making.
Really? I have already simplified it well. I have not wanted it to simlify it to an extent that it would entirely look like an endgame position.
in the position shown the prisoner count does not change during the hypothetical play
Yes. I have wanted to keep things simple and start illustrating only one aspect of prisoners.
and you are only disclosing the difference in the number of prisoners.
Exactly. This has advantages: 1) One needs to keep in mind only one instead of two numbers. 2) The number can be smaller in many cases; the overhead of further prisoners of both players need not be carried along. 3) The difference of prisoners is already calculated; one need not do that in future.
Why would anyone conclude that if they only know the prisoner difference?
Because numbers and signs don't bite back and warn the player using them! If he does make such mistakes, then he needs to become aware of them by himself. He must understand whether his calculations are done correctly. Chances are that he does not necessarily notice if is already making the mistakes. It is better if he develops the related understanding before starting calculations.
This +100 can't be a positive number for both black and white.
It is good to see that you have enough understanding to find your own mistakes! Was your understanding also good enough to describe prisoner handling during the previous weeks, while I waited to see if somebody could describe it? Now, that I have offered some description, suddenly everybody comes and proclaims how simple and obvious everything is. I said so weeks ago:)
This kind of difficulty only arises if you are:
No. The difficulty arises also if you keep track of two different prisoner numbers (#black stones and #white stones) for every purpose. E.g., alternatively you could mentally store two numbers for the initial prisoner difference, two numbers for the prisoners removed during the imagined sequence for determining black territory, two numbers for ... sequence for... white territory. (I prefer 3 instead of 6 numbers for prisoners.)
1. Trying to keep track of a prisoner difference.
Keeping track is necessary anyway (if we do territory counting). Why one number 'prisoner difference' instead of two numbers 'black prisoner stones' and 'white prisoner stones', see above!
2. Trying to make a prisoner difference count as part of a particular color's territory.
How do you do it in writing? Do you prefer to state two numbers instead of one number?
3. Somehow losing track of the fact that you made choices 1 and 2.
Mistakes as I have described them do not occur because one expresses prisoner numbers as prisoner differences. The same kind of mistakes can occur also when one expresses prisoner numbers as numbers of black prisoner stones and white prisoner stones. Always does one have to add / subtract correctly.
The perspectives vary: When determining Black's territory, then it is Black's perspective. When determining White's territory, then it is White's perspective (opposing sign!). When both are already known and the total is calculated, then, by convention, from Black's value one subtracts White's value, that is, it is Black's perspective.
Black's perspective means, if you manage two values on every occasion, to add white prisoner stones and to subtract black prisoner stones. White's perspective means the opposite: subtract / add.
1) is arguably unnecessary,
Argubly, yes, because one can also do all the calculations with two instead of one value for the prisoners.
2) is dubious,
Suppose you are determining a particular player's territory. Why dubious? Are you suggesting to ignore all prisoners? Sure?;) Of course, you must consider prisoners! So, please, specify your preferred method for this case of application!
Keeping track of prisoner differences locally (e.g., to associate it with specific territories) is required when analyzing josekis, but I am not convinced of its utility during actual game play.
Imagine any example of territory with dead stones in atari and near the boundary of a region. When the opponent reduces that region, you create prisoners.
Proceed to a more complicated kind of examples: teire with throw-ins. You will see that simply keeping dead stones on the board would be an insufficient model in general for assessing a region's territory value.
in which case this problem is not going to arise.
Of course, one can pretend simplicity for its own sake;)