It is currently Thu Apr 09, 2020 4:04 am

 All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]

 Page 3 of 4 [ 61 posts ] Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 Print view Previous topic | Next topic
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #41 Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 9:55 pm
 Honinbo

Posts: 9545
Liked others: 3017
Was liked: 3172
Kirby wrote:
Bill Spight wrote:
It is simple and accurate to say that when Black plays first she gets 7 pts., and when White plays first he gets 1 pt. There is no need to talk about gains. Especially as the confusion between swing values and gains is a known problem.

Using the term "gain" is inaccurate only if you take it on to have a particular meaning. You are using "gains" as a specific term, and I think it adds to the confusion, because it requires people to know about this terminology.

Actually, I am using gain in its simple, straightforward English meaning. I am doing so to dispel the confusion caused when people have been taught swing values. The confusion is that people use swing values when they should use gains.

Simple example: Suppose that with komi I am behind by 1½ pts. and get the last play, which has a swing value of 2 pts. I think that I will win by ½ pt., but, to my surprise, I lose by ½ pt. The reason is that the play only gained 1 pt. Simple, straightforward English.

Now, the errors that people make in real life because they confuse swing values with gains are usually more complicated, but the principle is the same. Gains and losses add and subtract; swing values do not, at least as people try to add and subtract them.

Ever since getting on rec.games.go around 25 years ago I have tried to dispel this confusion. To use gain to explain swing values, as you and Ed both have done, without noting that for gote there are two gains involved, one gain made by Black when she moves first, and one gain made by White when he moves first, makes it difficult for a beginner to avoid confusing swing values with gains, it seems to me. That is why I have asked you both not to do so.

_________________
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
----
Many are cold, but few are frozen.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #42 Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:03 pm
 Lives in sente

Posts: 800
Liked others: 61
Was liked: 274
@Jika: my reasoning is very down-to-earth. I just look at the triangled area

`[go]\$\$B \$\$ | . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . O . . . .\$\$ | . . . O . . .\$\$ | O O O X X . .\$\$ | T X X . . . .\$\$ | Q Q X . X . .\$\$ | T Q X . . . .\$\$ +--------------[/go]`

If Black moves first then Black captures 3 stones and gets 7 points in that area, so in that area, the score (Black's points minus White's points) is 7.

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

If White moves first then White gets 1 point, so the score (Black's points minus White's points) is -1.

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

The rest of the board doesn't change, so the difference between these two situations is 7-(-1) = 8.

 This post by jlt was liked by: Jika
Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #43 Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 7:22 am
 Lives in gote

Posts: 453
Liked others: 75
Was liked: 461
Rank: maybe 2d
I sort of agree with Bill. Saying a move "gains" X points suggests a few things to me, via the normal English language meaning of the word:

(#1) The difference in how much a position is "worth" before and after the move is X points.

(#2) If I were to pass instead, I should get a final result X points worse on average, because obviously a pass "gains" 0 points instead of X points.

It's not an absolute requirement of course, but it would still be nice to have the word "gain" mean something consistent with the above two intuitions. And in double-gote positions in real games, both of these intuitive meanings are satisfied by the half the swing value:

`[go]\$\$B \$\$ . . . . . . . . .\$\$ . . . . . . . . .\$\$ . . . . . . . . .\$\$ . O O O O O O O .\$\$ . X W X . X B X .\$\$ . X a X b X c X .\$\$ . X X X X X X X .\$\$ ---------------[/go]`

In situation "a" black has 0 points, in "c" black has 1 point. In situation "b", in real game situations like this, on average either player is equally likely to get it first. So on average black has 1/2 point.

If black does spend a move in situation "b", black will turn it into position "c". Black's move gains half of a point because before they had 1/2 point on average, afterward they have 1 point. The difference in how much these positions is worth is half a point. (matching intuitive meaning #1 above)

If black were to pass rather than playing, on average black would do 1/2 point worse. For example, if there were an odd number of positions like this left and nothing else, black end up a full 1 point worse. But if there were an even number of them, black would not end up worse at all for passing. In a real game, it's basically random whether there will be an even or odd number, so on average, black will be 1/2 point worse off by passing. (matching intuitive meaning #2 above)

Similarly, if you took random pro games with a position like "b" on the board (where neither black nor white had any liberty or eye issues, both white and black were already 100% alive), and let white get a free stone at "b" near the start of the endgame, not spending their turn, and then had both players finish the endgame normally and count, on average black would do 1/2 point worse, not 1 point worse. (another variation on intuitive meaning #2 above)

Explaining this requires precision on the part of the teacher, but I think if the teacher is precise, it's not particularly hard for the beginner to understand gains rather than swing values. When I teach beginners in-person, I do actually make sure to be precise when I explain move values, and the people I've taught seem to understand pretty well.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So back to the position at hand:

`[go]\$\$\$\$ | ? ? O ? ? ?\$\$ | ? ? O ? ? ?\$\$ | O O O , ? ? \$\$ | a X X X X ?\$\$ | O O X ? ? ?\$\$ | . O X ? ? ?\$\$ +------------[/go]`

With this position, if I was going to very wordily explain it in real life to someone, I'd say something like:

"If black plays first, black has 7 points in the corner. If white plays first, white has 1 point, which is the same as (-1) for black. If neither player has played here yet and is busy with fighting elsewhere on the board, we expect on average 3 points for black here since knowing nothing else, either player might get to move first. So relative to that, the value/gain/worth of a move here is 4 points. If black plays first, black will do 4 points better than that (7 points) and if white plays first, white will do 4 points better than that (-1 points). Either way, the value of a move here is 4 points."

And also in practice, if I was continuing to try to explain, I'd also say something like:

"Many people you talk to might call this 8 points, because they're counting the total swing between black playing first and white playing first as 8 points. Note that the 8 points is actually over two moves, yours and your opponents. For example, if it was your turn, and you passed up playing here to play somewhere else instead, and then your opponent then played here instead of you, you'd get to play somewhere else again, - you would be a total of 8 points worse here compared to playing here yourself, but you'd have gotten two moves elsewhere instead, not just one, so the per-move gain/loss is still 4.

Per-move values work better once you get into more complex positions that don't get finished in one move or two moves, or you start getting into cases where moves might be sente or forcing. But lots of people will talk in terms of total swing. If you personally also find it easier to think in terms of total swings for the simplest cases like this, that's also okay, just be aware of the difference and make sure you're consistent".

 This post by lightvector was liked by 2 people: Bill Spight, Jika
Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #44 Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 8:57 am
 Honinbo

Posts: 9545
Liked others: 3017
Was liked: 3172
Many thanks to lightvector for taking the time and effort to explain things so well.

Obviously, precision in endgame evaluation is not very important. I can easily construct a problem where a mistake of 1/64 pt. or less will lose the game, but how often will such a mistake matter in real life? Still, IMHO an amateur shodan should be able to play the small endgame almost perfectly. And endgame concepts can apply at any stage of the game.

I first learned endgame evaluation from the books of Sakata and Takagawa. Takagawa did a good job of evaluating plays, but both of them taught the evaluation of positions at the same time. I still remember all those Xs in Sakata's diagrams indicating points that would become territory if one player played first but would not become territory if the other player did.

From Jika's remarks I get the impression that 321go did not start with the evaluation of positions, or teach it together with the evaluation of plays. But if anything, the evaluation of positions should come first. The evaluation of positions provides the conceptual basis for understanding the evaluation of plays. That is why I posted the basic problem that I did.

_________________
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
----
Many are cold, but few are frozen.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #45 Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 9:47 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 151
Liked others: 145
Was liked: 14

First, I like Kirby's approach to explain things so simply that I might understand.

I get a bit confused by the more advanced discussions, but I don't really mind being confused.
I'm only worried I fail expectations and waste your time.

But, as I posted earlier, if I get the impression that my stupid questions spark discussions that are interesting to you all, it's good too. I can skim the discussion and if necessary ask again.

You might decide this is cluttering the beginners' section.
So, either one could split such a thread, or maybe I post in a different place?
Would a study journal be a better place?

But please know I'm happy and grateful for all answers, whether I understand them or not (in study journal I might revisit them later; only, it must be hard to keep track of all the information one gets).

Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #46 Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 9:51 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 151
Liked others: 145
Was liked: 14
Bill Spight wrote:
OK, Jika, let's get down to basics.

How much territory does White have?

Hi Bill,
I would have said "2".
But I never know how many possible future moves to think ahead.
In this case, there are not many possible moves, and I understand why there is miai.

But in other situations I don't understand how big a territory is, probably because I don't know what will be territory in future.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #47 Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 10:05 am
 Lives in gote

Posts: 352
Liked others: 4
Was liked: 72
Rank: kgs 5 kyu
KGS: Pio2001
Bill Spight wrote:
Ever since getting on rec.games.go around 25 years ago I have tried to dispel this confusion. To use gain to explain swing values, as you and Ed both have done, without noting that for gote there are two gains involved, one gain made by Black when she moves first, and one gain made by White when he moves first, makes it difficult for a beginner to avoid confusing swing values with gains, it seems to me. That is why I have asked you both not to do so.

Thank you for your efforts, Bill. The writings about endgame values are very confusing, and it is very helpful to see that the obvious inconsistencies are not just a problem with our understanding.

Even today, I feel confused, even about the modern "miai values". For example, when I compare a sente move with a value of 1 point and a gote one with a value of 20 points.
If I apply the traditional rule that says that a sente move is worth twice a gote move, and even if I use the modern "tally" calculation, all the theory says that the gote move is worth much more that the sente move, while it is obvious to anyone that it is better to play the sente first, in order to get both.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #48 Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 10:15 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 151
Liked others: 145
Was liked: 14
To illustrate this
Quote:
...in other situations I don't understand how big a territory is, probably because I don't know what will be territory in future.

(and maybe drive you all nuts) a new example from 321go:
(sorry, Pio, have been typing all the time, my first uploaded diagrams were not displayed)

`[go]\$\$B \$\$ | . . . , . . . . . ,\$\$ | . . . . . . . . . .\$\$ | . O . . O . . . . .\$\$ | . . O . O . . . . .\$\$ | O O . O X X . . . .\$\$ | . O O X . . . . . .\$\$ | a O X X O . . . . ,\$\$ | O X . . X X . . . .\$\$ | X . X . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . . .\$\$ +--------------------[/go]`

They say, the value of playing at a is 2.
I would have said so intuitively, because black can capture a stone.
But... then I remembered that I must keep in mind that by doing so, he prevents white from getting 1 point.
So, should the answer not be 2-(-1)=3?
And I have no clue how far to count (see triangled intersections), given Bill/Ed's miai above...
They could be getting a point there in the future, but it is not certain, as it was in the miai Ed mentioned.

`[go]\$\$BmNaN \$\$ | . . . , . . . . . ,\$\$ | . . . . . . . . . .\$\$ | . O . . O . . . . .\$\$ | . . O . O . . . . .\$\$ | O O . O X X . . . .\$\$ | . O O X . . . . . .\$\$ | X O X X O . . . . ,\$\$ | M X T . X X . . . .\$\$ | X T X . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . . .\$\$ +--------------------[/go]`

`[go]\$\$BmNaN \$\$ | . . . , . . . . . ,\$\$ | . . . . . . . . . .\$\$ | . O . . O . . . . .\$\$ | . T O T O . . . . .\$\$ | O O T O X X . . . .\$\$ | M O O X . . . . . .\$\$ | O O X X O . . . . ,\$\$ | O X . . X X . . . .\$\$ | X . X . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . . .\$\$ +--------------------[/go]`

Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #49 Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 10:30 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 151
Liked others: 145
Was liked: 14
And, another 50k, why is my initial diagram a gote?
(People mentioned that here all the time, that's why I'm asking)

I've looked at the "who has the initiative" definition of sente and gote play, but as soon as SL go into positions, terms like reverse sente and jigo are included, and I'm lost.

So, is a gote position an attack into the opponent's territory he has to react to?

(May I get my own forum section, Jika's question(s) of the day?)

Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #50 Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 10:38 am
 Lives in gote

Posts: 460
Liked others: 1
Was liked: 129
Rank: KGS 2k
GD Posts: 100
KGS: Tryss
A gote move (or sequence of moves) is a sequence where the first player will also play the last move of the sequence : he will surrender the initiative to his opponent who can now play elsewhere
A sente move (or sequence of moves) is a sequence where the first player won't play the last move of the sequence : he'll keep the initiative, and will play elsewhere

Your initial diagram is a gote (for both player) because when the first player play, his opponent don't have to respond locally, so he'll choose where to play next.

 This post by Tryss was liked by: Jika
Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #51 Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 12:10 pm
 Lives in gote

Posts: 352
Liked others: 4
Was liked: 72
Rank: kgs 5 kyu
KGS: Pio2001
Jika wrote:
They say, the value of playing at a is 2.
I would have said so intuitively, because black can capture a stone.

But you forgot that the eye that Black is getting is a false eye "by the second line". This intersection will eventually be filled. So the capture just gets you one point thanks to the prisoner, and no point of territory.

Jika wrote:
But... then I remembered that I must keep in mind that by doing so, he prevents white from getting 1 point.
So, should the answer not be 2-(-1)=3?

Right, except that this is now 1-(-1) = 2.

Jika wrote:
And I have no clue how far to count (see triangled intersections)

The intersections that change something must be counted. If you don't know if the triangled intersections will be affected, then you can't count the value of the endgame yet.

If the status of these intersections is unclear to you, you can try a variant of the game of go against the artificial intelligence in this page : https://www.crazy-sensei.com/location=rules

In this variant, instead of counting empty intersection plus prisoners, you just count the number of stones on the board. As long as you can add more stones, you go on, until you can't add anymore stone without being killed.

This will clearly show you why the triangled intersections are stable.

 This post by Pio2001 was liked by: Jika
Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #52 Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 12:32 pm
 Lives with ko

Posts: 151
Liked others: 145
Was liked: 14
Pio2001 wrote:
Jika wrote:
They say, the value of playing at a is 2.
I would have said so intuitively, because black can capture a stone.

But you forgot that the eye that Black is getting is a false eye "by the second line". This intersection will eventually be filled. So the capture just gets you one point thanks to the prisoner, and no point of territory.

But would not white win a prisoner too when beating black?

Uhm, where can she beat back?
Would black not connect?
So, by connecting, black looses territory, but wins a prisoner.

Quote:
Jika wrote:
But... then I remembered that I must keep in mind that by doing so, he prevents white from getting 1 point.
So, should the answer not be 2-(-1)=3?

Right, except that this is now 1-(-1) = 2.

So, if white could beat back, white looses mathematically nothing, 1 eye point for 1 prisoner, 1-0 =1 ?

And if black connects, it is 1-0; if white plays first, it is 0-1, so I also arrive at 1-(-1)=2?

Quote:
Jika wrote:
And I have no clue how far to count (see triangled intersections)

The intersections that change something must be counted. If you don't know if the triangled intersections will be affected, then you can't count the value of the endgame yet.

If the status of these intersections is unclear to you, you can try a variant of the game of go against the artificial intelligence in this page : https://www.crazy-sensei.com/location=rules

In this variant, instead of counting empty intersection plus prisoners, you just count the number of stones on the board. As long as you can add more stones, you go on, until you can't add anymore stone without being killed.

This will clearly show you why the triangled intersections are stable.

Yes, they are stable, but I do not know if they have to be counted now, or only when they are closed, or... counted as half a point or... whatnot...

Edit: sorry, I even don't know which diagram I'm talking about. I have a different one on my board, a new one from 321go, coming to results of 3 or 1.5... I'm getting a headache.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #53 Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 1:02 pm
 Honinbo

Posts: 9545
Liked others: 3017
Was liked: 3172
Jika wrote:
Bill Spight wrote:
OK, Jika, let's get down to basics.

How much territory does White have?

Hi Bill,
I would have said "2".

Well, that's how much secure territory that White has that cannot be taken away, even if White passes all the time. (Unless White fills his own eye, OC. ) So that's a good answer.

Quote:
But I never know how many possible future moves to think ahead.
In this case, there are not many possible moves, and I understand why there is miai.

Another, practical answer is how much territory can White defend if Black plays first? Since you get Ed's answer, you see that White can defend 3 pts. of territory.

A related question is how much territory can White make, playing first, even if Black responds with best play? Since you get the miai, you see that Black can prevent White from getting more than 3 pts.

OC, either player may choose to play elsewhere rather than responding locally, but White can guarantee 3 pts. of territory even if Black plays first and Black can hold White to 3 pts. of territory, even if White plays first. As a practical matter we can count White's territory as 3 pts.

Quote:
But in other situations I don't understand how big a territory is, probably because I don't know what will be territory in future.

Join the club.

----

Follow-up question:

How much territory does White have, on average, at each of the 1-3 points in the top left corner?

_________________
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
----
Many are cold, but few are frozen.

 This post by Bill Spight was liked by: Jika
Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #54 Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 1:28 pm
 Honinbo

Posts: 9545
Liked others: 3017
Was liked: 3172
Pio2001 wrote:
Bill Spight wrote:
Ever since getting on rec.games.go around 25 years ago I have tried to dispel this confusion.

Thank you for your efforts, Bill. The writings about endgame values are very confusing, and it is very helpful to see that the obvious inconsistencies are not just a problem with our understanding.

Quote:
Even today, I feel confused, even about the modern "miai values". For example, when I compare a sente move with a value of 1 point and a gote one with a value of 20 points.
If I apply the traditional rule that says that a sente move is worth twice a gote move, and even if I use the modern "tally" calculation, all the theory says that the gote move is worth much more that the sente move, while it is obvious to anyone that it is better to play the sente first, in order to get both.

The traditional "rule" is incorrect. In terms of gains, it is the reverse sente that gains something. Playing a local sente with sente gains nothing, in terms of points. That is, making the threat and answering it gain the same amount, so their gains cancel out. All we know about how much they gain is that it is more than how much the reverse sente gains. That is why we may assume that the sente will normally be played, since the sente player can normally play it with sente before her opponent can afford to play the reverse sente.

So if we have a 1 pt. sente, we know that the reverse sente gains 1 pt. Making the threat may gain 25 pts., or it may gain 1.5 pts., we don't know. If making the threat gains more than 20 pts. we know that the opponent will reply to the threat rather than taking a gote that gains only 20 pts., as a rule. So we can play the sente first.

That does not mean that we actually do so. For instance, we may want to save the sente as a possible ko threat. Or we may want to preserve some aji. Otherwise, playing the sente is technically correct.

_________________
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
----
Many are cold, but few are frozen.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #55 Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 6:42 pm
 Lives in gote

Posts: 453
Liked others: 75
Was liked: 461
Rank: maybe 2d
Bill Spight wrote:
Playing a local sente with sente gains nothing, in terms of points.

For those who are confused about this detail - have you ever noticed that when pros or top amateurs estimate the score, they always pre-subtract out the sente pushes and other sente intrusions, even if the opponent hasn't played them yet? (See any number of online Go commentary videos, or if you've been to a Go club or Congress you may have seen strong dan players or pros do this in-person). Pretty much every strong amateur or pro that I've ever encountered counts this way.

That's because a very good "baseline" is that whenever a player has a clear sente move, they assume for estimation purposes that player will get it. So when that player actually does play that move in sente, there is no gain. Relative to that baseline, they have only gotten exactly what they already counted that player to get!

That's basically what "sente gains nothing" means.

Pio2001 wrote:
Even today, I feel confused, even about the modern "miai values". For example, when I compare a sente move with a value of 1 point and a gote one with a value of 20 points.
If I apply the traditional rule that says that a sente move is worth twice a gote move, and even if I use the modern "tally" calculation, all the theory says that the gote move is worth much more that the sente move, while it is obvious to anyone that it is better to play the sente first, in order to get both.

The simple answer is that you might be mistaken about what "modern" counting theory says . There are TWO important values for locally-sente moves, not one - the reverse sente value (also known as the miai value, or the per-move gain), and the threat value - the gain of the followup move if unanswered.

So let's say in your example the local-sente move has a reverse-sente value of 1 point and a threat value of 7 points. In that case, modern theory says to play it any time when the biggest moves elsewhere on the board are worth between 1 and 7 points. Ideally as late as possible to preserve ko threats, but definitely don't let it sit until moves elsewhere are all worth less than 1 point, then the opponent will be able to take it and you will lose out.

If you played it while there was a 20 point gote on the board, that would be a huge mistake, since the opponent would ignore it and take the 20 point gote. If on the other hand, the threat value was 30 points, then you could certainly play it now if you didn't mind using up the ko threat - in that case, theory would say to play it any time when moves elsewhere are worth between 1 and 30 points instead of 1 and 7 points. But you could also still wait, so long as there would still be other moves worth between 1 and 30 points after the 20-point gote was gone.

Does that make sense? (This is basically what Bill said, but restated in case a different way of wording it helps it stick).

 This post by lightvector was liked by 2 people: Bill Spight, dfan
Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #56 Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 10:58 pm
 Lives with ko

Posts: 151
Liked others: 145
Was liked: 14
@Bill, post 53:

Quote:
Follow-up question:

How much territory does White have, on average, at each of the 1-3 points in the top left corner?

`[go]\$\$B \$\$ +------------------\$\$ | a O b O . X . . .\$\$ | O O O C X . X . .\$\$ | c O . O X . . . .\$\$ | T O O O X . . . .\$\$ | X X X X X . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]`

Do you mean those?

a: 1
b: 1/2
c: 1/2
Correct??

After playing at either Triangle or Circle, she would have 1+1+0=2 (I'm not counting the other eye, because you said "upper left" (then, OC, it would be 3, as seen earlier).

(PS Sorry that I'm using he and she opposite to you - I'm reading "How to play Go", and they call white "she"; it would be confusing to use the opposite of what I'm reading.)

Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #57 Posted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 1:23 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 151
Liked others: 145
Was liked: 14
@Pio2001:

Quote:
But you forgot that the eye that Black is getting is a false eye "by the second line". This intersection will eventually be filled. So the capture just gets you one point thanks to the prisoner, and no point of territory.

...

Right, except that this is now 1-(-1) = 2.

Now after a night's sleep I'm getting it!

By "be filled" you meant connecting.

(I have a very similar exercise, same situation, now, and I did not get why that one was "2" too, until I replayed your scenario.)

I'm quite slow.
Thanks a lot!!

Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #58 Posted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:35 am
 Honinbo

Posts: 9545
Liked others: 3017
Was liked: 3172
Jika wrote:
@Bill, post 53:

Quote:
Follow-up question:

How much territory does White have, on average, at each of the 1-3 points in the top left corner?

`[go]\$\$B \$\$ +------------------\$\$ | a O b O . X . . .\$\$ | O O O C X . X . .\$\$ | c O . O X . . . .\$\$ | T O O O X . . . .\$\$ | X X X X X . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]`

Do you mean those?

a: 1
b: 1/2
c: 1/2
Correct??

Very good.

I meant b and c, which may be called 1-3 points or 3-1 points. a is a 1-1 point.

Quote:
(PS Sorry that I'm using he and she opposite to you - I'm reading "How to play Go", and they call white "she"; it would be confusing to use the opposite of what I'm reading.)

That's fine. We are all female under the skin. (A little biological joke.
Biologically, there is one human race, and the basic human body plan is female.
)

_________________
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
----
Many are cold, but few are frozen.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #59 Posted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 7:57 am
 Lives in gote

Posts: 352
Liked others: 4
Was liked: 72
Rank: kgs 5 kyu
KGS: Pio2001
I have splitted our advanced discussion about move values here : https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=16804

Top

 Post subject: Re: Please help with this exercise III #60 Posted: Sun Jul 28, 2019 10:31 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 151
Liked others: 145
Was liked: 14
@Bill:
Quote:
I meant b and c, which may be called 1-3 points or 3-1 points. a is a 1-1 point.

Sorry! I did not understand "1-3" was go-speak, but thought it meant "the value of the points 1 to 3" (therefore my question: which three points)

 This post by Jika was liked by: Bill Spight
Top

 Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
 Page 3 of 4 [ 61 posts ] Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

 All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]

#### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

 You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
 Jump to:  Select a forum ------------------ Life In 19x19.com General Topics    Introductions and Guidelines    Off Topic    Announcements    General Go Chat    Beginners    Amateurs    Professionals       Lee Sedol vs Gu Li    Go Rules    Forum/Site Suggestions and Bugs    Creative writing    Tournaments       Ride share to tournaments Improve Your Game    Game Analysis    Study Group    Teachers/Club Leaders       Teacher advertisements    Study Journals L19²GO (Malkovich)    1-on-1 Malkovich games    Big Brother Malkovich games    Rengo Games    Other versions of turn-based games Go Gear    Go Books    Go Book Reviews    Computer Go    Gobans and other equipment    Trading Post    New Products/Upgrades/Sales Go Club Forums    Go Club Discussions       Honinbo Go League    American Go Association Forum       Go Congress 2011 volunteers       AGA volunteers ( non-congress)    Australian Go Association    European Go Federation Forum    Singapore Weiqi Association    KGS    ASR League    IGS    OGS    Tygem    WBaduk    Turn Based Servers    Insei League Events    Kaya.gs       King of the Hill