AGA rules and cultural barriers

[RobertJasiek]

1) There are two different kinds of elegance WRT AGA Rules: the elegance of area scoring (one playout solves it all, visual impression equals scoring, the score is related to the available board intersections) and the elegance of the equivalence that both area count and territory count determine the area score. Therefore, your mentioning of just "elegance" does not describe the rules nature well enough.

2) Easy to use for beginners means "easy to use for beginners". It does not mean "easy to use for tournament players too lazy to inform themselves which rules are being used at all. The latter stir up trouble under any ruleset. However, from my observations, tournament players unfamiliar with AGA style rules but willing to learn their application do it right from their second game under AGA style rules on. This shows just how easy to learn AGA style rules are for tournament players, except those unwilling to learn at all.

3) What would be "the practical aesthetic of Japanese rules"? Before you start to argue, think, and you will notice that, if anything, not Japanese rules might claim some sort of practical aesthetic, but Japanese-derived go server rules might, namely when they allow omission of dame filling and so cause the unaesthetic confusion about which teire might be necessary. Needless to say, such an attempt of argument is only one possible aspect of what a few might consider aesthetics. Other aspects for Japanese style rules include a) missing identity of visual impression (stone colour) and scoring (unaesthetic), b) scoring complexity (unaesthetic), c) perfect play requirement (could be perceived as aesthetic), d) missing relevant of only the players' skill (unaesthetic), e) destroyed position during traditional counting (unaesthetic), f) speed of counting (Why is speed aesthetic or unaesthetic at all? Why is a speed similar to a possible speed for area scoring (using point-by-point half counting) any more or less aesthetic?), g) typical nearest scores (Why is being typical a matter of aesthetics?). I.e., there are points for practical aesthetics and points for practical unaesthetics. Claiming the former cannot be justified as a clear advantage in view of the latter.

4) You try to construct why theoretical elegance could or could not outweigh practical elegance. More relevantly, one can discuss whether the practical aspects of (in)elegance in area scoring and in Japanese style territory scoring can be compared.

5) Religious? Come on. Japanese style proponents' reasoning easily becomes religious when there is, e.g., talk of beauty of neutral points. Therefore you attempt of perceiving "religion" only for mathematicians preferring area scoring must fail. Religion is a right not only of mathematicians;)

6) Small flaws? Uh, but what about the extraordinarily great flaws? Admit it: Japanese culture prefers to avoid great flaws!

7) AGA Rules are becoming more and more popular. Presumably they won't claim the world any time soon, but neither scoring system will. So what.

[msgreg]

Some information that's more suitable for display (and translation?) at tournaments can be seen via this page: http://www.britgo.org/rules/aga.html

Cheers

Jon

The AGA invented this rule set. I don't understand why they don't have something similar on their own website.

Well done BGA!

Especially this summary page. All we need is 1) a list of the common options that TD's may choose, and 2) diagrams (maybe?).

It is common for there to be a vertically-oriented half sheet of Letter/A4 size paper next to each board explaining how to program the clock. There could also be this crib sheet in multiple languages that players can point at to communicate. Attached a simple example (it's not formatted exactly right for printing and cutting, but it demonstrates the idea).

[mhlepore]

$$B white to play
$$ +-----------+
$$ | . . X X X |
$$ | O X X X . |
$$ | O O O X . |
$$ | . O O X . |
$$ | O . O X . |
$$ +-----------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B white to play
$$ +-----------+
$$ | . . X X X |
$$ | O X X X . |
$$ | O O O X . |
$$ | . O O X . |
$$ | O . O X . |
$$ +-----------+[/go]

Suppose for the sake of argument:
1) there are no prisoners
2) komi in this game = 1.5.

My understanding is that White's ability to throw in at the 1-2 point is relevant in certain rulesets but not others.

The "elegance" of one ruleset over another in these situations is interesting only to rules buffs. Strong players from a variety of countries seem to just want to play Go.

I remember years ago the Seattle Go Center having monthly tournaments where we played rated games but we did not have the White passes last requirement. Everyone was always thankful to her that when it was announced, regardless of its impact on the territory vs. area scoring equivalence.

[RobertJasiek]

we did not have the White passes last requirement.

Did you or did you not use pass stones?

[oren]

I remember years ago the Seattle Go Center having monthly tournaments where we played rated games but we did not have the White passes last requirement. Everyone was always thankful to her that when it was announced, regardless of its impact on the territory vs. area scoring equivalence.

The Seattle Go Center tournaments have always been Japanese rules. (At least 8 years anyway and I'd be surprised if it was different before)

[daniel_the_smith]

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

...

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.

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

...

I brought this to the attention of the relevant people last week and I now hear that there are plans afoot to make this happen.

[mitsun]

$$B
$$ +-------------+
$$ | X . X . X . |
$$ | O X X . . . |
$$ | O O X X X . |
$$ | . O O O X X |
$$ | O . O . O X |
$$ | . O X . O . |
$$ +-------------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +-------------+
$$ | X . X . X . |
$$ | O X X . . . |
$$ | O O X X X . |
$$ | . O O O X X |
$$ | O . O . O X |
$$ | . O X . O . |
$$ +-------------+[/go]

B to play and win. Both sides have played 12 stones. B has captured one W stone in the upper left corner. W has 1 point komi.

Oops, bad problem (W has a ko threat). See the next post.

[HermanHiddema]

$$B
$$ +-------------+
$$ | X . X . X . |
$$ | O X X . . . |
$$ | O O X X X . |
$$ | . O O O X X |
$$ | O . O . O X |
$$ | . O X . O . |
$$ +-------------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +-------------+
$$ | X . X . X . |
$$ | O X X . . . |
$$ | O O X X X . |
$$ | . O O O X X |
$$ | O . O . O X |
$$ | . O X . O . |
$$ +-------------+[/go]

B to play and win. Both sides have played 12 stones. B has captured one W stone in the upper left corner. W has 1 point komi.

Black can't win

$$B W+1
$$ +-------------+
$$ | X 1 X . X . |
$$ | O X X . . . |
$$ | O O X X X . |
$$ | . O O O X X |
$$ | O . O . O X |
$$ | . O X . O 2 |
$$ +-------------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B W+1
$$ +-------------+
$$ | X 1 X . X . |
$$ | O X X . . . |
$$ | O O X X X . |
$$ | . O O O X X |
$$ | O . O . O X |
$$ | . O X . O 2 |
$$ +-------------+[/go]

$$B takes ko at
$$ +-------------+
$$ | B 2 X . X . |
$$ | O X X . . . |
$$ | O O X X X . |
$$ | . O O O X X |
$$ | O . O 4 O X |
$$ | . O X 3 O 1 |
$$ +-------------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B takes ko at
$$ +-------------+
$$ | B 2 X . X . |
$$ | O X X . . . |
$$ | O O X X X . |
$$ | . O O O X X |
$$ | O . O 4 O X |
$$ | . O X 3 O 1 |
$$ +-------------+[/go]

$$B pass, connects, W+3
$$ +-------------+
$$ | X 8 X . X . |
$$ | O X X . 7 6 |
$$ | O O X X X . |
$$ | . O O O X X |
$$ | O . O O O X |
$$ | . O . . O X |
$$ +-------------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B pass, connects, W+3
$$ +-------------+
$$ | X 8 X . X . |
$$ | O X X . 7 6 |
$$ | O O X X X . |
$$ | . O O O X X |
$$ | O . O O O X |
$$ | . O . . O X |
$$ +-------------+[/go]

But with a slight change:

$$B
$$ +-------------+
$$ | X . X . . . |
$$ | O X X . X . |
$$ | O O X X X . |
$$ | . O O O X X |
$$ | O . O . O X |
$$ | . O X . O . |
$$ +-------------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +-------------+
$$ | X . X . . . |
$$ | O X X . X . |
$$ | O O X X X . |
$$ | . O O O X X |
$$ | O . O . O X |
$$ | . O X . O . |
$$ +-------------+[/go]

Now black can win:

$$B at , pass, connect, B+1
$$ +-------------+
$$ | B 2 X . . . |
$$ | O X X . X . |
$$ | O O X X X . |
$$ | . O O O X X |
$$ | O . O 4 O X |
$$ | . O X 3 O 1 |
$$ +-------------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B at , pass, connect, B+1
$$ +-------------+
$$ | B 2 X . . . |
$$ | O X X . X . |
$$ | O O X X X . |
$$ | . O O O X X |
$$ | O . O 4 O X |
$$ | . O X 3 O 1 |
$$ +-------------+[/go]

[daniel_the_smith]

Thoughts on this variation?

$$B
$$ +-------------+
$$ | . . X . . . |
$$ | O X . . X . |
$$ | O X X X X . |
$$ | O O O O X X |
$$ | O . O . O X |
$$ | . O . . O X |
$$ +-------------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +-------------+
$$ | . . X . . . |
$$ | O X . . X . |
$$ | O X X X X . |
$$ | O O O O X X |
$$ | O . O . O X |
$$ | . O . . O X |
$$ +-------------+[/go]

Black to play and win. Komi is 2.5.

[snorri]

$$B black to play
$$ +-----------+
$$ | . . O O . |
$$ | X X X O . |
$$ | . . X O O |
$$ | X . X O . |
$$ | . X . O . |
$$ +-----------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B black to play
$$ +-----------+
$$ | . . O O . |
$$ | X X X O . |
$$ | . . X O O |
$$ | X . X O . |
$$ | . X . O . |
$$ +-----------+[/go]

AGA rules, black to play, what is the best move?

$$B B+1
$$ +-----------+
$$ | . a O O . |
$$ | X X X O . |
$$ | . . X O O |
$$ | X . X O . |
$$ | . X b O . |
$$ +-----------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B B+1
$$ +-----------+
$$ | . a O O . |
$$ | X X X O . |
$$ | . . X O O |
$$ | X . X O . |
$$ | . X b O . |
$$ +-----------+[/go]

if black a and white b, black has 8+5 points and white 8+4 points (area),
or 5 to 4 (territory) -- B+1

if black b and white a, then black takes last dame in the corner next to a, and white passes last stone, so
black has 9+4 points and white 8+4 (area),
or 4 to 3 (territory; because of pass stone) -- B+1

Either a or b yields the same result. Am I missing your point? (or did I miscount)

edit: I didn't look at it earlier, but black count play in the corner next to a first and the result is still the same.

Correct. All of a, b or the upper left 1-1 point give the same result.

The point was that this is, IMO, a weakness of area scoring rules.

You didn't state the komi.

Remember that when comparing area rules to territory rules, it's important to apply odd komi. With komi = -0.5 or 1.5, with either Japanese rules or AGA rules, either black wins or white wins. To be specific, if komi=-0.5, black wins even when playing the "inferior" move of a dame instead of making an eye in the corner in both rulesets, and when komi=1.5, white wins even if black plays the intuitively optimal move, in both rulesets.

[snorri]

The point was that this is, IMO, a weakness of area scoring rules.

Sure, I don't disagree this point.

I do disagree. I think Herman's example is misleading people to think that inferior play is somehow allowed under this position under AGA rules but not under Japanese rules. In fact, with odd komi, as is appropriate for the comparison, inferior or superior play for black with respect to choosing to make a point or play a dame has the same effect in both AGA and Japanese rulesets.

If you want to play a Edo-era style jubango with your rival and use komi = 0, allowing jigo, by all means use Japanese rules. You should also set seiza style, etc. I intend to do this myself whenever I get a suitable opponent and someone to serve the tea. AGA rules do have that weakness that Herman mentions for that situation.

But for situations where the goal is to determine the winner, the position posted is a red herring.

[snorri]

$$B white to play
$$ +-----------+
$$ | . . X X X |
$$ | O X X X . |
$$ | O O O X . |
$$ | . O O X . |
$$ | O . O X . |
$$ +-----------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B white to play
$$ +-----------+
$$ | . . X X X |
$$ | O X X X . |
$$ | O O O X . |
$$ | . O O X . |
$$ | O . O X . |
$$ +-----------+[/go]

Suppose for the sake of argument:
1) there are no prisoners
2) komi in this game = 1.5.

My understanding is that White's ability to throw in at the 1-2 point is relevant in certain rulesets but not others.



The "elegance" of one ruleset over another in these situations is interesting only to rules buffs. Strong players from a variety of countries seem to just want to play Go.

I remember years ago the Seattle Go Center having monthly tournaments where we played rated games but we did not have the White passes last requirement. Everyone was always thankful to her that when it was announced, regardless of its impact on the territory vs. area scoring equivalence.

Thanks for using komi = 1.5. This example is a true difference. Under Japanese rules, white has no way to win this game. Under AGA rules, white can make the ko and win it, forcing black to either play in his own territory or pass one more stone than white, leading to W+0.5. White can win with the same strategy under Chinese rules. Anyone know how to post a 5x5 sgf, BTW?

Edit: fixed SGF

(;GM[1]FF[4]CA[UTF-8]AP[CGoban:3]ST[2]
RU[Japanese]SZ[5]KM[1.50]
DT[2013-08-19]PC[http://lifein19x19.com/]AW[ab][ac][bc][cc][bd][cd][ae][ce]AB[ca][da][ea][bb][cb][db][dc][dd][de]C[See viewtopic.php?p=145911#p145911]PL[W]MULTIGOGM[1]
(;W[aa]C[Black wins this way in Chinese, Japanese, and AGA rules.]
;B[ba]
;W[]
;B[]
;W[]C[AGA:

White score = 2 territory + 1.5 komi + 1 pass stone prisoner = 4.5
Black score = 4 territory + 2 pass stone prisoners = 6
AGA Result: B+1.5

Japanese:

White score = 2 territory + 1.5 komi = 3.5
Black score = 4 territory = 4
Japanese Result: B+0.5

Chinese:
Black score = 4 territory 10 stones = 14
There are 25 points on the board, so half board to beat is (25 / 2 = 12.5) (half-komi 1.5 / 2 = 0.75) = 13.25.
Chinese Result: B+0.75])
(;W[ba]C[White wins this way in Chinese and AGA rules, but still loses under Japanese rules.]
;B[aa]
;W[ed]
;B[ec]
;W[ba]
;B[]
;W[aa]
;B[]
;W[]C[AGA Rules:

White score = 2 points territory + 2 pass stone prisoners + 1.5 komi = 5.5
Black score = 3 points territory + 1 white dead stone + 1 pass stone prisoner = 5
AGA Result: W+0.5

Japanese:

Black score = 3 points territory + 1 dead white stone = 4
White score = 2 points territory + 1.5 komi = 3.5
Japanese Result: B+0.5

Chinese:

Black score = 10 stones + 3 points territory = 13
There are 25 points on the board, so half board to beat is (25 / 2 = 12.5) + (half-komi 1.5 / 2 = 0.75) = 13.25.
Chinese Result: W+0.25]))

[jts]

http://eidogo.com/#2eU7YGld6

I suspect that it's a problem with our sgf tags rather than with Eidogo, since Eidogo is able to host 9x9 and 13x13 games.

[ez4u]

I think eidogo can not handle a 5X5 game (SZ[5] tag). Cgoban chokes on the original file that I downloaded from post #42 since it contains two SZ tags (both SZ[5]). Removing either one with a text editor allowed Cgoban to handle it properly. Drago ignored the duplication and ran the original file correctly. Eidogo could not handle the file as a 5X5 game regardless of what I did with it.

[RobertJasiek]

These late game ko examples are not specific to AGA Rules or culture, but a general feature of area scoring strategy:

http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/kodame.pdf