If God played Go, where would He play Black's first move?

[RBerenguel]

[...] I don't know the situation about backgammon, but we are spoiled to have as many records of chess and go games dating back a long time.[...]

I answer this, since I don't know the zen answer

From the backgammon books I have read, backgammon didn't get a competitive edge (i.e. becoming a more brainy game instead of a pure luck game) until last century's 50s, or around that time. Also, the introduction of the doubling cube in the 20s changed the shape of the game forever (I think a doubling cube would be neat for for-territory-go-matches, too.) So, even if there are no records I don't think the general backgammon-playing people care that much.

[Mike Novack]

Why do you think that there is only one? Or if there is one, it isn't the 5-5, for instance?

If there is one optimal first move (as opposed to four or eight equally good first moves) then it has to be the center point. That's simply a matter of the symmetries.

I did of course understand the original question in the sense intended, that those other first moves for which there are either 3 or 7 exact equivalents, still could be referred to as the best first move, the set of four or of eight equivalents.

However even so, as the game of go is defined, a win being a win regardless of by 1/2 point or by 30 points, etc. how we define "best" is tricky. If "best first move" is simply "a first move such that with perfect play the player making that first move wins" there might not be a unique best first move. There might be more than one.

[shapenaji]

I feel like it has to be tengen. On a 9x9, tengen is brutal, splits all of white's plans, I feel like the same is true on a 19x19, but the method is considerably harder.

[Bill Spight]

Why do you think that there is only one? Or if there is one, it isn't the 5-5, for instance?

If there is one optimal first move (as opposed to four or eight equally good first moves) then it has to be the center point. That's simply a matter of the symmetries.

I did of course understand the original question in the sense intended, that those other first moves for which there are either 3 or 7 exact equivalents, still could be referred to as the best first move, the set of four or of eight equivalents.

That was my understanding, as well.

[Krama]

Tengen is indeed powerful on a small board however as the board gets larger, the balance of the game switches from the center towards corners and sides thus a tengen isn't as powerful.

I think I would have to go with the 4-4 stones since a 5-5 is too far away from the corner and puts more emphasize to the center (which on 19x19 is not as important as corners and sides), and 3-3 doesn't give enough importance to the center.

Then you have 3-4 moves which actually switch the game from the center by a small margin towards the corner and a little bit on the side.

And then you have 3-5 moves which switch the game towards the sides more than the corners however since it is still low it doesn't put enough emphasize on the center.

But all in all 4-4 is the ultimate balance and if I had to go with one move it would be 4-4.

However in truth I think we could say that 4-4, 3-4, 3-5 are all good starting points and could be starting points for perfect play.

However Corners - sides - center , this is what a common chain of order is.

So no pros would fight for the center and leave all the juicy corners then again taking all the corners has proved not to be so good ether since it is impossible (opponent won't easily allow it) or leaves better plays for opponent.

Does that mean that the game is shifted towards the sides more?

Could it mean that for example a side is worth of 1 (one) of something (points), corners are worth 1.5 and the center is worth 0.5?

It is very hard to find a true point system that we could use to describe this but let's just move with it for now.

If we can assume that both players want to win the game they would all most likely want to have as much as corner points with access to the sides and then maybe a small access to the center?

If so then we can say that the opponent wants the same thing and thus they will not allow each other to get the b est possible outcome?

I think the game is not about corners, sides or center but about the balance between the three. However since you don't want to be stuck with the worst (center), nor will opponent allow you to get the best (corner) you and your opponent actually shift towards the sides more?

Try to see it in pro games, because it would take me another 2000 words to describe all of this and I simply can't imagine myself doing this on new years eve.

Maybe the 5-3 stone, the stone which doesn't give much in the corner but focuses on side more which is in the middle has the greatest value? Maybe I am wrong, only God knows.

[Kirby]

If God played Go, always playing the optimal moves (i.e. the moves which would lead to the greatest winning margin if his opponent also plays optimal moves)...

In Go, playing optimal moves does not equate to playing the moves that would lead to the greatest winning margin. It is a zero-sum game, where a win by several points is equivalent to a win by 1/2 point. Under this premise, for a given value of komi, I'd assume that there are several first moves that lead to the same result, but it would be dependent upon komi. Eg., for a large enough value of komi, all first moves would be equivalent - leading to a loss for black.

Assuming that fair komi is around 6.5 or 7.5 points, my most educated guess would be that a black play at the 3-4 or 4-4 would be the move. This is simply based on the observation that many pros play this way today under these komi constraints, with similar win ratio between black and white. Pros are not gods, but to guess a different first move would seem to suggest that I am closer to understanding optimal strategy than pros themselves.

Now, given your question as stated, trying to win by the greatest margin (which I don't think is the same thing as go), I would guess that God would play according to the person, since he would know how the opponent would play, and therefore, could annihilate each opponent according to their own weakness.

[EdLee]

• "greatest winning margin": does this mean the final score of the game?

• since he would know how the opponent would play, and therefore, could annihilate each opponent according to their own weakness.

  But such an entity would know the entire finite game tree, so would simply pick the correct next move; the opponent's strengths and weaknesses are irrelevant.
• Such an entity would also know the result beforehand.
• If such an entity plays against itself, who would win? Same question as solving Go?

[Kirby]

• since he would know how the opponent would play, and therefore, could annihilate each opponent according to their own weakness.

  But such an entity would know the entire finite game tree, so would simply pick the correct next move; the opponent's strengths and weaknesses are irrelevant.

What I mean is that if, as the OP seems to suggest, optimal play is winning by the greatest margin - the greatest number of points, then you can gain more points by playing the incorrect move, sometimes (eg. overplays).

For example, if the opponent is 30k, and doesn't know how to protect after atari of his big group, and if God knows this, he can play the atari even if it's not the best move on the board. That's because it would create a "greater margin" in the difference in score.

OTOH, I see that the OP also said that the opponent would "play optimally as well", so I guess this wouldn't fit the scenario that I was trying to (somewhat jokingly) point out.

[Mef]

• since he would know how the opponent would play, and therefore, could annihilate each opponent according to their own weakness.

  But such an entity would know the entire finite game tree, so would simply pick the correct next move; the opponent's strengths and weaknesses are irrelevant.

What I mean is that if, as the OP seems to suggest, optimal play is winning by the greatest margin - the greatest number of points, then you can gain more points by playing the incorrect move, sometimes (eg. overplays).

For example, if the opponent is 30k, and doesn't know how to protect after atari of his big group, and if God knows this, he can play the atari even if it's not the best move on the board. That's because it would create a "greater margin" in the difference in score.

OTOH, I see that the OP also said that the opponent would "play optimally as well", so I guess this wouldn't fit the scenario that I was trying to (somewhat jokingly) point out.

The way this distinction is usually made in these sorts of discussions is the "God of go" vs. the "Devil of go". The "God of go" being the one who plays the optimum move assuming we overcome our faults and find the perfect response, while the "Devil of go" plays into our weaknesses.

[Kirby]

The way this distinction is usually made in these sorts of discussions is the "God of go" vs. the "Devil of go". The "God of go" being the one who plays the optimum move assuming we overcome our faults and find the perfect response, while the "Devil of go" plays into our weaknesses.

Thanks, I wasn't familiar with the reference. In any case, assuming we're discussing the "God of go" and not the "Devil of go", and assuming that optimal play means anything to win the game, I suspect there are several first moves that would work equally well.

[Matti]

Which move would the devil play?

[DrStraw]

Which move would the devil play?

Same thing. God and the devil are two manifestations of the same entity.

[oca]

Which move would the devil play?

Same thing. God and the devil are two manifestations of the same entity.

Well, this is also what I think, but that leads to so may other questions...
but that entity will play at tengen, so you know... but all the other posibilities are just manifestations of the same position anyway ...

[HKA]

Which move would the devil play?

Same thing. God and the devil are two manifestations of the same entity.

For the first move...perhaps - but the devil would soon resort to hamete...

[tchan001]

Which move would the devil play?

Obviously the devil would cheat.