Japanese v.s. Chinese v.s. AGA scoring here we "Go" again...

If you're new to the game and have questions, post them here.
User avatar
jts
Oza
Posts: 2662
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 4:17 pm
Rank: kgs 6k
GD Posts: 0
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 632 times

Re: Japanese v.s. Chinese v.s. AGA scoring here we "Go" agai

Post by jts »

xed_over wrote:The beauty of using Chinese based rules for beginners is that you don't have to worry about if stones are alive or dead, you can just play it out and capture them (if you can), without loss in score.

At the same time, the deeper problem is that if Uzziel can't tell dead stones from living stones, then he is missing something very basic about go, in general, regardless of the scoring system. Honestly, I don't see any serious problem with beginners losing or not losing points for capturing the stones that they think are still alive. After all, if they genuinely think the stones can be saved they should have played to capture them before dame (probably significantly before dame) and they would have lost the points under either scoring system.

The serious problem is that many beginners are so sunk into a fog about whether stones can be captured or not that they do not bother to make defensive moves when a defensive move might be sensible (because there is some niggling worry that a defensive move might be unnecessary), and then go ahead and make the defensive move anyway at the last possible second (because there is some niggling worry that a defensive move might not be unnecessary). This fog should be something that needles beginners. Likewise, sometimes beginners are in a fog about life and death and feel the urge in the middle of the game to make discrete, 1-point eyes inside an enormous territory. Again, this should be something that needles beginners. In practice, I've found that losing the point for "filling in your own territory" bothers beginners way more than losing a point for not playing a dame, or even than losing 2-10 points for not making a normal move that affects territory. Exactly how many points the unnecessary defensive moves, extraneous eye moves, etc. costs a beginner does not particularly matter; being needled slightly by the way the Japanese rules frame the point loss is very valuable.

Uzziel, please: show us examples of games near the end where you can't tell whether a certain stone is dead or alive. Let's get to the bottom of this! :)
User avatar
Uzziel
Dies with sente
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 8:12 am
GD Posts: 0
KGS: Uzziel
Kaya handle: Uzziel
Location: Central Kansas, USA
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Re: Japanese v.s. Chinese v.s. AGA scoring here we "Go" agai

Post by Uzziel »

jts wrote:
xed_over wrote:The beauty of using Chinese based rules for beginners is that you don't have to worry about if stones are alive or dead, you can just play it out and capture them (if you can), without loss in score.

At the same time, the deeper problem is that if Uzziel can't tell dead stones from living stones, then he is missing something very basic about go, in general, regardless of the scoring system. Honestly, I don't see any serious problem with beginners losing or not losing points for capturing the stones that they think are still alive. After all, if they genuinely think the stones can be saved they should have played to capture them before dame (probably significantly before dame) and they would have lost the points under either scoring system.

The serious problem is that many beginners are so sunk into a fog about whether stones can be captured or not that they do not bother to make defensive moves when a defensive move might be sensible (because there is some niggling worry that a defensive move might be unnecessary), and then go ahead and make the defensive move anyway at the last possible second (because there is some niggling worry that a defensive move might not be unnecessary). This fog should be something that needles beginners. Likewise, sometimes beginners are in a fog about life and death and feel the urge in the middle of the game to make discrete, 1-point eyes inside an enormous territory. Again, this should be something that needles beginners. In practice, I've found that losing the point for "filling in your own territory" bothers beginners way more than losing a point for not playing a dame, or even than losing 2-10 points for not making a normal move that affects territory. Exactly how many points the unnecessary defensive moves, extraneous eye moves, etc. costs a beginner does not particularly matter; being needled slightly by the way the Japanese rules frame the point loss is very valuable.

Uzziel, please: show us examples of games near the end where you can't tell whether a certain stone is dead or alive. Let's get to the bottom of this! :)


Example 1:



--Deleted Example 2 as it wasn't a good example :P
Last edited by Uzziel on Fri Sep 06, 2013 12:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
skydyr
Oza
Posts: 2495
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2012 8:06 am
GD Posts: 0
Universal go server handle: skydyr
Online playing schedule: When my wife is out.
Location: DC
Has thanked: 156 times
Been thanked: 436 times

Re: Japanese v.s. Chinese v.s. AGA scoring here we "Go" agai

Post by skydyr »

Uzziel wrote:
jts wrote:
xed_over wrote:The beauty of using Chinese based rules for beginners is that you don't have to worry about if stones are alive or dead, you can just play it out and capture them (if you can), without loss in score.

At the same time, the deeper problem is that if Uzziel can't tell dead stones from living stones, then he is missing something very basic about go, in general, regardless of the scoring system. Honestly, I don't see any serious problem with beginners losing or not losing points for capturing the stones that they think are still alive. After all, if they genuinely think the stones can be saved they should have played to capture them before dame (probably significantly before dame) and they would have lost the points under either scoring system.

The serious problem is that many beginners are so sunk into a fog about whether stones can be captured or not that they do not bother to make defensive moves when a defensive move might be sensible (because there is some niggling worry that a defensive move might be unnecessary), and then go ahead and make the defensive move anyway at the last possible second (because there is some niggling worry that a defensive move might not be unnecessary). This fog should be something that needles beginners. Likewise, sometimes beginners are in a fog about life and death and feel the urge in the middle of the game to make discrete, 1-point eyes inside an enormous territory. Again, this should be something that needles beginners. In practice, I've found that losing the point for "filling in your own territory" bothers beginners way more than losing a point for not playing a dame, or even than losing 2-10 points for not making a normal move that affects territory. Exactly how many points the unnecessary defensive moves, extraneous eye moves, etc. costs a beginner does not particularly matter; being needled slightly by the way the Japanese rules frame the point loss is very valuable.

Uzziel, please: show us examples of games near the end where you can't tell whether a certain stone is dead or alive. Let's get to the bottom of this! :)


Example 1:



Example 2:



Which stones or groups in those two examples are the ones you are unsure of?
Bill Spight
Honinbo
Posts: 10905
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 1:24 pm
Has thanked: 3651 times
Been thanked: 3373 times

Re: Japanese v.s. Chinese v.s. AGA scoring here we "Go" agai

Post by Bill Spight »

Uzziel wrote:I have been trying to figure out which scoring I want to learn.


To any beginner who asks which scoring system to learn, I say AGA/Chinese/area scoring, since if there are any questions about life and death at the end of the game, the players can just play it out.

I have already searched the forums on this issue, and after seeing a few threads
where the discussion ended up with no summation or conclusion I am hoping that
maybe in this thread we can outline the fundamental differences between the different
methods of scoring.


If there are no kos or sekis, then territory scoring is area scoring with a penalty of 1 point for each stone played. In that case correct strategy under territory scoring is also correct strategy for area scoring. (But not vice versa.) The result of an even game will be the same, or Black will score one more point.

If there is a ko, then it is possible for one player to gain more from taking and winning the ko under area scoring than under territory scoring, because the other player must fill territory instead of playing Japanese dame. That can affect stategy.

If there is a seki with eyes or one way dame, which are scored under area scoring but not under Japanese scoring, then that can affect strategy. (Note: There are forms of territory scoring that also score such points, but they are not popular.)

Although I have already decided to learn Japanese rules because they "feel" right, I am also
confused on how the other scoring systems were created as well as the contrasting affect
that they have on how the game of Go is scored.


The oldest known game records apparently used territory scoring, but the oldest description of go rules apparently describes area scoring.

BTW, there are forms of scoring that fall between the two. :) See http://senseis.xmp.net/?ButtonGo
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.
User avatar
Uzziel
Dies with sente
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 8:12 am
GD Posts: 0
KGS: Uzziel
Kaya handle: Uzziel
Location: Central Kansas, USA
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Re: Japanese v.s. Chinese v.s. AGA scoring here we "Go" agai

Post by Uzziel »

The example 2 I put up was not very good after all.

In example one Black 33/35 would trip me up i think.


Sorry for the lousy examples I did not record games back when first started often
and I ran into this issue more when I played a game that was not turn based ,which was recorded, (KGS)
than when it was.
User avatar
Dusk Eagle
Gosei
Posts: 1758
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 4:02 pm
Rank: 4d
GD Posts: 0
Has thanked: 378 times
Been thanked: 375 times

Re: Japanese v.s. Chinese v.s. AGA scoring here we "Go" agai

Post by Dusk Eagle »

In example 1 it looks like black won by resign. You don't need to mark the dead stones in that case. If white hadn't resigned, then there are still a few more points that need to be played before the game can be scored properly. If scored as it is, white has no territory, because white hasn't sealed up any area. Once white plays G9, black actually has to respond on the right side, otherwise white can capture some stones. See the SGF attached.



After that, if both players pass, the game is in a state where it can be scored sensibly.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wc
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . X . O . O O X |
$$ | . X . X O b O X X |
$$ | . W X X O a . O X |
$$ | . X O O O O O O X |
$$ | . X O O , X O X X |
$$ | . X X O X . X . X |
$$ | . W X O X X X . X |
$$ | . X W X W X W X . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . |
$$ -------------------[/go]

Notice that the :wc: stones are completely surrounded, and black can capture them no matter what white does. Therefore they are counted as dead and are treated as black's prisoners. The middle white group is not dead, as no matter what black does white can forever avoid capture (by forming two eyes - if black 'a', then white plays 'b', and vice versa). The black groups are all alive as white cannot capture any of them.

In the position above, white actually does have the opportunity to make a couple more points - first, by playing at :w1: below. Notice this puts the :bc: stones into atari. So black is forced to play a move inside his territory at :b2: in order to remove the atari, which costs him one point.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wc
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . X 1 O . O O X |
$$ | . X . B O . O X X |
$$ | 2 O B B O . . O X |
$$ | . X O O O O O O X |
$$ | . X O O , X O X X |
$$ | . X X O X . X . X |
$$ | . O X O X X X . X |
$$ | . X O X O X O X . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . |
$$ -------------------[/go]


Secondly, if white plays at :w3: below, then black's :bc: stone is in atari, and black is forced to fill in one point of his territory, costing him one additional point.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wcm3
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . X O O . O O X |
$$ | . X . X O . O X X |
$$ | X . X X O . . O X |
$$ | . X O O O O O O X |
$$ | . X O O 1 B O X X |
$$ | . X X O X 2 X . X |
$$ | . O X O X X X . X |
$$ | . X O X O X O X . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . |
$$ -------------------[/go]


Now there's no more that white can do, so this is the correct time for white to pass. He could pass in the first diagram, but then he would've missed out on two points.

One thing I would recommend is to always fill all of the dame (i.e. neutral points, the intersections that are neither player's territory) before passing. You don't have to, but by doing so, you will often force your opponents to fill in a bit of their own territory. Plus, when you play in real life (as opposed to online), everyone always fills in all the dame so that when they move the stones around during the counting phase no points are accidentally counted for one side that actually belonged to neither.
Attachments
uzziel.sgf
(979 Bytes) Downloaded 1533 times
We don't know who we are; we don't know where we are.
Each of us woke up one moment and here we were in the darkness.
We're nameless things with no memory; no knowledge of what went before,
No understanding of what is now, no knowledge of what will be.
User avatar
Uzziel
Dies with sente
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 8:12 am
GD Posts: 0
KGS: Uzziel
Kaya handle: Uzziel
Location: Central Kansas, USA
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Re: Japanese v.s. Chinese v.s. AGA scoring here we "Go" agai

Post by Uzziel »

Dusk Eagle wrote:In example 1 it looks like black won by resign. You don't need to mark the dead stones in that case. If white hadn't resigned, then there are still a few more points that need to be played before the game can be scored properly. If scored as it is, white has no territory, because white hasn't sealed up any area. Once white plays G9, black actually has to respond on the right side, otherwise white can capture some stones. See the SGF attached.


After that, if both players pass, the game is in a state where it can be scored sensibly.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wc
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . X . O . O O X |
$$ | . X . X O b O X X |
$$ | . W X X O a . O X |
$$ | . X O O O O O O X |
$$ | . X O O , X O X X |
$$ | . X X O X . X . X |
$$ | . W X O X X X . X |
$$ | . X W X W X W X . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . |
$$ -------------------[/go]

Notice that the :wc: stones are completely surrounded, and black can capture them no matter what white does. Therefore they are counted as dead and are treated as black's prisoners. The middle white group is not dead, as no matter what black does white can forever avoid capture (by forming two eyes - if black 'a', then white plays 'b', and vice versa). The black groups are all alive as white cannot capture any of them.

In the position above, white actually does have the opportunity to make a couple more points - first, by playing at :w1: below. Notice this puts the :bc: stones into atari. So black is forced to play a move inside his territory at :b2: in order to remove the atari, which costs him one point.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wc
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . X 1 O . O O X |
$$ | . X . B O . O X X |
$$ | 2 O B B O . . O X |
$$ | . X O O O O O O X |
$$ | . X O O , X O X X |
$$ | . X X O X . X . X |
$$ | . O X O X X X . X |
$$ | . X O X O X O X . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . |
$$ -------------------[/go]


Secondly, if white plays at :w3: below, then black's :bc: stone is in atari, and black is forced to fill in one point of his territory, costing him one additional point.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wcm3
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . X O O . O O X |
$$ | . X . X O . O X X |
$$ | X . X X O . . O X |
$$ | . X O O O O O O X |
$$ | . X O O 1 B O X X |
$$ | . X X O X 2 X . X |
$$ | . O X O X X X . X |
$$ | . X O X O X O X . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . |
$$ -------------------[/go]


Now there's no more that white can do, so this is the correct time for white to pass. He could pass in the first diagram, but then he would've missed out on two points.

One thing I would recommend is to always fill all of the dame (i.e. neutral points, the intersections that are neither player's territory) before passing. You don't have to, but by doing so, you will often force your opponents to fill in a bit of their own territory. Plus, when you play in real life (as opposed to online), everyone always fills in all the dame so that when they move the stones around during the counting phase no points are accidentally counted for one side that actually belonged to neither.


Thanks for telling me about Dame I will definitely write it down, and make a mental note to do that next game.

As far as the prisoners how are they dealt with? Are the dead stones picked up, and then all stones are rearranged using the prisoners to add to each players territory for the count?

How would it look after the stones have been re-arranged?
xed_over
Oza
Posts: 2264
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 11:51 am
Has thanked: 1179 times
Been thanked: 553 times

Re: Japanese v.s. Chinese v.s. AGA scoring here we "Go" agai

Post by xed_over »

Uzziel wrote:As far as the prisoners how are they dealt with? Are the dead stones picked up, and then all stones are rearranged using the prisoners to add to each players territory for the count?

How would it look after the stones have been re-arranged?

http://senseis.xmp.net/?ExampleGame

and the links at the bottom of that page
http://senseis.xmp.net/?ChineseCountingExample
http://senseis.xmp.net/?JapaneseCountingExample
User avatar
Dusk Eagle
Gosei
Posts: 1758
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 4:02 pm
Rank: 4d
GD Posts: 0
Has thanked: 378 times
Been thanked: 375 times

Re: Japanese v.s. Chinese v.s. AGA scoring here we "Go" agai

Post by Dusk Eagle »

Obviously what I'm about to say only applies to playing on a real board; on a computer everything is done for you.

When you capture a stone from your opponent during the game you'll store it to the side, traditionally in the flipped-over lid of the bowl your stones are in. At the end of the game the dead stones are removed and added as prisoners for each player. Then, you'll take the stones that you've captured and use them to fill in your opponent's territory. This is because one prisoner is worth one point for you, so the same effect can be achieved by using the prisoner to remove one point from your opponent. Atari and liberties and other such rules are ignored during this; we're simply adding the prisoners to the board to make counting easier.

After this, you'll rearrange stones within an area to try to make boxes, which are easier to count. For example, the three stones below may be rearranged within black's area to make it easier to count the territory (ignore the outside white area for this example).

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . X O . .
$$ | . B . B . X O . .
$$ | . . B . . X O . .
$$ | X X . . . X O . .
$$ | O O X X X O O . .
$$ | . O O O O . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . X O . .
$$ | . . . . . X O . .
$$ | . . . . . X O . .
$$ | X X B B B X O . .
$$ | O O X X X O O . .
$$ | . O O O O . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]


Beginners often feel hesitant to move to many stones around, and that's okay. This is done purely for convenience. If you don't make perfect rectangles, you just have to count a little more carefully.
We don't know who we are; we don't know where we are.
Each of us woke up one moment and here we were in the darkness.
We're nameless things with no memory; no knowledge of what went before,
No understanding of what is now, no knowledge of what will be.
User avatar
Dusk Eagle
Gosei
Posts: 1758
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 4:02 pm
Rank: 4d
GD Posts: 0
Has thanked: 378 times
Been thanked: 375 times

Re: Japanese v.s. Chinese v.s. AGA scoring here we "Go" agai

Post by Dusk Eagle »

xed_over wrote:
Uzziel wrote:As far as the prisoners how are they dealt with? Are the dead stones picked up, and then all stones are rearranged using the prisoners to add to each players territory for the count?

How would it look after the stones have been re-arranged?

http://senseis.xmp.net/?ExampleGame

and the links at the bottom of that page
http://senseis.xmp.net/?ChineseCountingExample
http://senseis.xmp.net/?JapaneseCountingExample

I was looking for pages like these earlier, but couldn't find any. I'll try to remember these pages next time this question gets asked.
We don't know who we are; we don't know where we are.
Each of us woke up one moment and here we were in the darkness.
We're nameless things with no memory; no knowledge of what went before,
No understanding of what is now, no knowledge of what will be.
hyperpape
Tengen
Posts: 4382
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 3:24 pm
Rank: AGA 3k
GD Posts: 65
OGS: Hyperpape 4k
Location: Caldas da Rainha, Portugal
Has thanked: 499 times
Been thanked: 727 times

Re: Japanese v.s. Chinese v.s. AGA scoring here we "Go" agai

Post by hyperpape »

There should be a YouTube video for this. Actually, there probably is. But I'm about to go to sleep, and I'm not gonns look for it.
DrStraw
Oza
Posts: 2180
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 4:09 am
Rank: AGA 5d
GD Posts: 4312
Online playing schedule: Every tenth February 29th from 20:00-20:01 (if time permits)
Location: ʍoquıɐɹ ǝɥʇ ɹǝʌo 'ǝɹǝɥʍǝɯos
Has thanked: 237 times
Been thanked: 662 times
Contact:

Re: Japanese v.s. Chinese v.s. AGA scoring here we "Go" agai

Post by DrStraw »

xed_over wrote:The beauty of using Chinese based rules for beginners is that you don't have to worry about if stones are alive or dead, you can just play it out and capture them (if you can), without loss in score.

With Japanese rules, if you play inside your own territory (to capture already dead stones), and your opponent doesn't respond (he passes), then you will lose points.

With Chinese rules, you won't lose any points for the same actions.

With AGA rules, your opponent would have to give you a prisoner each time he passes, so you still won't lose any points -- and you can count the score using the more popular Japanese scoring method.


The ugliness of Chinese-based rules for beginners is that you don't have to worry about if stones are alive of dead, you can just play it out and capture them (if you can), without bothering to learn the essentials of what make stones dead or alive.

With Japanese rules, if you play inside your own territory (to capture already dead stones), and your opponent doesn't respond (he passes), then you quickly learn the essentials of what is alive and what isn't, because you lose points, and games, because of it..

With Chinese rules, you have no incentive to read things out and become stronger.
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).
DrStraw
Oza
Posts: 2180
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 4:09 am
Rank: AGA 5d
GD Posts: 4312
Online playing schedule: Every tenth February 29th from 20:00-20:01 (if time permits)
Location: ʍoquıɐɹ ǝɥʇ ɹǝʌo 'ǝɹǝɥʍǝɯos
Has thanked: 237 times
Been thanked: 662 times
Contact:

Re: Japanese v.s. Chinese v.s. AGA scoring here we "Go" agai

Post by DrStraw »

jts wrote:
xed_over wrote:The beauty of using Chinese based rules for beginners is that you don't have to worry about if stones are alive or dead, you can just play it out and capture them (if you can), without loss in score.

At the same time, the deeper problem is that if Uzziel can't tell dead stones from living stones, then he is missing something very basic about go, in general, regardless of the scoring system. Honestly, I don't see any serious problem with beginners losing or not losing points for capturing the stones that they think are still alive. After all, if they genuinely think the stones can be saved they should have played to capture them before dame (probably significantly before dame) and they would have lost the points under either scoring system.

The serious problem is that many beginners are so sunk into a fog about whether stones can be captured or not that they do not bother to make defensive moves when a defensive move might be sensible (because there is some niggling worry that a defensive move might be unnecessary), and then go ahead and make the defensive move anyway at the last possible second (because there is some niggling worry that a defensive move might not be unnecessary). This fog should be something that needles beginners. Likewise, sometimes beginners are in a fog about life and death and feel the urge in the middle of the game to make discrete, 1-point eyes inside an enormous territory. Again, this should be something that needles beginners. In practice, I've found that losing the point for "filling in your own territory" bothers beginners way more than losing a point for not playing a dame, or even than losing 2-10 points for not making a normal move that affects territory. Exactly how many points the unnecessary defensive moves, extraneous eye moves, etc. costs a beginner does not particularly matter; being needled slightly by the way the Japanese rules frame the point loss is very valuable.

Uzziel, please: show us examples of games near the end where you can't tell whether a certain stone is dead or alive. Let's get to the bottom of this! :)


Very well put. I teach all my students that they will never learn anything if they never make mistakes. Seeing things go wrong because of an error made under Japanese scoring is part of the learning process. Under Chinese scoring nothing can go wrong by playing inside a territory so they don't learn.
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).
RobertJasiek
Judan
Posts: 6273
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:54 pm
GD Posts: 0
Been thanked: 797 times
Contact:

Re: Japanese v.s. Chinese v.s. AGA scoring here we "Go" agai

Post by RobertJasiek »

This is not an ugliness of the Chinese rules, but a simplicity.

The incentive to learn about LD under area scoring rules is to improve one's score! Instead of making 0 new points strategically by removing already dead stones prematurely, making P>0 new points strategically by playing elsewhere in still unclaimed or unsettled regions improves one's score. This is so even for beginners.

It becomes - on the strategic level - ugly only if you fail to teach it to beginners. Quite like it would become - on the strategic level - ugly if you fail to teach for territory scoring rules that making -1 new point by filling one's territory and approaching the liberties of already dead stones prematurely is worse than instead making P>=0 new points strategically by playing elsewhere in still unclaimed or unsettled regions to improve one's score.
User avatar
shapenaji
Lives in sente
Posts: 1103
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 10:58 pm
Rank: EGF 4d
GD Posts: 952
Location: Netherlands
Has thanked: 407 times
Been thanked: 422 times

Re: Japanese v.s. Chinese v.s. AGA scoring here we "Go" agai

Post by shapenaji »

DrStraw wrote:
The ugliness of Chinese-based rules for beginners is that you don't have to worry about if stones are alive of dead, you can just play it out and capture them (if you can), without bothering to learn the essentials of what make stones dead or alive.

With Japanese rules, if you play inside your own territory (to capture already dead stones), and your opponent doesn't respond (he passes), then you quickly learn the essentials of what is alive and what isn't, because you lose points, and games, because of it..

With Chinese rules, you have no incentive to read things out and become stronger.


I disagree, the incentive is still there. The only possible issue is if they wait until all dame are filled, and then start capturing, otherwise their opponent is always getting an advantage for slack play.

The advantage for two beginners to be able to just sit down and play and be able to resolve a game without outside arbitration is worth a little slack play at the end.

(And I doubt that slack play will last long, it's just too time consuming to capture everything, they'll figure it out)
Tactics yes, Tact no...
Post Reply