GT territory rule

For discussing go rule sets and rule theory
Post Reply
User avatar
Cassandra
Lives in sente
Posts: 1326
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:33 am
Rank: German 1 Kyu
GD Posts: 0
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 153 times

Re: GT territory rule

Post by Cassandra »

Gérard TAILLE wrote:I believe I am realist Jann, you have not to consider GT territory rule as a new rule but rather as a tool to have a better understanding of J89 and its weakness if not its inconsistencies.
There are NO inconsistencies in J89(<= 2007 revised edition)!

Quite apparently, no one, neither in JAPAN nor in KOREA, considered it worthwhile to use "normal" play in the phase of judging life and death UNDER TERRITORY RULES.
So why do you, as a European, who will never understand the underlying culture in every detail, attach so much importance to it?

Probably because you do NOT understand your OWN approach?
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ +----------------------
$$ | . O . X O X O . . . .
$$ | O X X X O X O O . . .
$$ | . X O O O X X O O . .
$$ | X X O O . O X X O , .
$$ | O O O . O X . X O . .
$$ | X X O O X . X X O . .
$$ | . X X O O X X O O . .
$$ | . . X X X O O O . . .
$$ | . . . . X X . . . . .
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]
J89's L&D example 18 again.
Question: Is the corner White territory under GT territory rules(before the earthquake; advantageous loop for the defender only)?
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B :b3: pass
$$ +----------------------
$$ | . O . X O X O . . . .
$$ | O X X X O X O O . . .
$$ | . X O O O X X O O . .
$$ | X X O O 1 O X X O , .
$$ | O O O . O X . X O . .
$$ | X X O O X 2 X X O . .
$$ | . X X O O X X O O . .
$$ | . . X X X O O O . . .
$$ | . . . . X X . . . . .
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B :w6: pass; :b7: pass
$$ +----------------------
$$ | . O . X O X O . . . .
$$ | O X X X O X O O . . .
$$ | . X O O O X X O O . .
$$ | X X O O X 4 X X O , .
$$ | O O O . O X . X O . .
$$ | X X O O 5 O X X O . .
$$ | . X X O O X X O O . .
$$ | . . X X X O O O . . .
$$ | . . . . X X . . . . .
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B :w10: pass; :b11: pass
$$ +----------------------
$$ | . O . X O X O . . . .
$$ | O X X X O X O O . . .
$$ | . X O O O X X O O . .
$$ | X X O O 9 O X X O , .
$$ | O O O . O X . X O . .
$$ | X X O O X 8 X X O . .
$$ | . X X O O X X O O . .
$$ | . . X X X O O O . . .
$$ | . . . . X X . . . . .
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]
The defender has an "advantageous loop", and therefore claims "permanently prohibited ko" for both ko-shapes.
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wm12 :b13: pass
$$ +----------------------
$$ | . O . X O X O . . . .
$$ | O X X X O X O O . . .
$$ | . X O O O X X O O . .
$$ | X X O O X 1 X X O , .
$$ | O O O . O X 3 X O . .
$$ | X X O O M O X X O . .
$$ | . X X O O X X O O . .
$$ | . . X X X O O O . . .
$$ | . . . . X X . . . . .
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]
Quod erat demonstrandum.
The really most difficult Go problem ever: https://igohatsuyoron120.de/index.htm
Igo Hatsuyōron #120 (really solved by KataGo)
Top
jann
Lives in gote
Posts: 445
Joined: Tue May 14, 2019 8:00 pm
GD Posts: 0
Been thanked: 37 times

Re: GT territory rule

Post by jann »

Gérard TAILLE wrote:
jann wrote:
  1. Bent4 with remote unremovable threat (or double ko seki)
  2. Bent4 with nearby unremovable threat (or double ko seki)
  3. Moonshine life with remote double ko seki
  4. Moonshine life with nearby double ko seki
Normal play says: All 4 alive.
REASON: cannot capture (without giving up something), so those are clearly not dead stones in territory.

Korean rules say: #1 and #3 is dead, others alive.
REASON: we should look at L/D in regions separately.

Japanese rules say: All 4 dead.
REASON: we should look at L/D without relying on any ko fight.

Normal play with a moonshine ko rule: #3 and #4 is dead, others alive.
REASON: moonshine loops are forbidden (there is a rich theory behind this, see elsewhere).

Your rules: only #2 is alive.
REASON: ... ?
... the GT territory rule logic became:
To respect as far as possible the traditionnal japanese rule (I mean J89), except if the result given by J89 contradicts normal play inside "enable" region.
This isn't met in #4 above? J89 contradicts normal play there (even locally), yet you agree. What you say sounds like simple Korean rules (with consistent #2 and #4 handling).
Top
jann
Lives in gote
Posts: 445
Joined: Tue May 14, 2019 8:00 pm
GD Posts: 0
Been thanked: 37 times

Re: GT territory rule

Post by jann »

Cassandra wrote:no one, neither in JAPAN nor in KOREA, considered it worthwhile to use "normal" play in the phase of judging life and death UNDER TERRITORY RULES.
So why do you, as a European, who will never understand the underlying culture in every detail, attach so much importance to it?
I'm all in favor of modesty and careful approach to rules, but this is wrong.

The very difference between Japanese and Korean rules is that the latter doesn't use pass for ko and rely on normal play (in each region). If "normal play" means normal global play, then: it was mentioned that normal play can solve almost everything except a single problem (moonshine life).

If there were other problems then the game itself (using normal play) wouldn't work to begin with. And resumption is always an option, particularly playout in Chinese or with pass stones - this dictates REALITY, and your only hope is to get reasonably close to that. So obviously some kind of extra rule is necessary - preferably affecting that particular problem only.
Is the corner White territory under GT territory rules(before the earthquake; advantageous loop for the defender only)?
...
The defender has an "advantageous loop", and therefore claims "permanently prohibited ko" for both ko-shapes.
By this logic all double ko sekis die (I think you applied his ideas incorrectly here). Anyway, rules need much more careful (and principled) approach.
Last edited by jann on Thu Sep 09, 2021 8:43 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top
User avatar
Cassandra
Lives in sente
Posts: 1326
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:33 am
Rank: German 1 Kyu
GD Posts: 0
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 153 times

Re: GT territory rule

Post by Cassandra »

jann wrote:By this logic all double ko sekis die (I think you applied his ideas incorrectly here). Anyway, rules need much more careful (and principled) approach.
Indeed, this might be an unwanted side-effect.

By the way, "all" seems to be kind of exaggeration.
By the way #2, that unwanted side-effect mentioned above would not matter in a TWO-run process for status confirmation. Whether both DOUBLE-ko groups were "alive" or "dead" would result in the SAME conclusion of "seki".

Probably Gérard will find a modification without, who knows?
Everything needed has already been published...
The really most difficult Go problem ever: https://igohatsuyoron120.de/index.htm
Igo Hatsuyōron #120 (really solved by KataGo)
Top
Gérard TAILLE
Gosei
Posts: 1346
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2020 2:47 am
Rank: 1d
GD Posts: 0
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 57 times

Re: GT territory rule

Post by Gérard TAILLE »

jann wrote:
Gérard TAILLE wrote:
jann wrote:
  1. Bent4 with remote unremovable threat (or double ko seki)
  2. Bent4 with nearby unremovable threat (or double ko seki)
  3. Moonshine life with remote double ko seki
  4. Moonshine life with nearby double ko seki
Normal play says: All 4 alive.
REASON: cannot capture (without giving up something), so those are clearly not dead stones in territory.

Korean rules say: #1 and #3 is dead, others alive.
REASON: we should look at L/D in regions separately.

Japanese rules say: All 4 dead.
REASON: we should look at L/D without relying on any ko fight.

Normal play with a moonshine ko rule: #3 and #4 is dead, others alive.
REASON: moonshine loops are forbidden (there is a rich theory behind this, see elsewhere).

Your rules: only #2 is alive.
REASON: ... ?
... the GT territory rule logic became:
To respect as far as possible the traditionnal japanese rule (I mean J89), except if the result given by J89 contradicts normal play inside "enable" region.
This isn't met in #4 above? J89 contradicts normal play there (even locally), yet you agree. What you say sounds like simple Korean rules (with consistent #2 and #4 handling).
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$W
$$ -------------------------
$$ | X X O X . X . X O . . |
$$ | . X O O X X X X O . . |
$$ | X X O . O X O O O . . |
$$ | . X O O X X O . . . . |
$$ | X O O . O X O . . . . |
$$ | O O O O O O X . . . . |
$$ | X X X X X X X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ -------------------------[/go]
In one hand it is true that in normal play black stones in the corner cannot be killed but in the other hand it looks to me that the author of the J89 rule wanted really to see black group dead. Obviously this is an advantageous loop. You can note in particular that in normal play white can force a NO RESULT game and, then white can also force the stop of the game. Providing you do not accept an infinite number of resumption then black cannot force a NO RESULT game. In this context, because my idea was really not to change the basis of J89, I chose to give the same result as J89 => black stones are dead.
It looks to me a very specific situation comparing to situations where the result in normal play is reached without a loop or is reached by a loop that cannot be interrupted (solid triple ko, chosei ...)
Top
Gérard TAILLE
Gosei
Posts: 1346
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2020 2:47 am
Rank: 1d
GD Posts: 0
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 57 times

Re: GT territory rule

Post by Gérard TAILLE »

jann wrote:
Cassandra wrote:Is the corner White territory under GT territory rules(before the earthquake; advantageous loop for the defender only)?
...
The defender has an "advantageous loop", and therefore claims "permanently prohibited ko" for both ko-shapes.
By this logic all double ko sekis die (I think you applied his ideas incorrectly here). Anyway, rules need much more careful (and principled) approach.
Thank you Jann for your comment.
OC I could not answer Thomas because I always try to follow the golden rule in a forum: never answer a post containing a personnal attack or a pure provocation.

Procedure to create "permanently prohibited ko"13:
As soon as a "critical position" is reached the defender14 may (it is not mandatory) claim for creating a "permanently prohibited ko":
1) The defender proves that she can either reach her objective or reach "critical positions" an infinite number of times
2) The defender proves she is able to prevent the attacker to make an infinite number of passes
3) If the attacker agrees to point 1) and 2)15 then the hypothetical play continues up to the following "critical position"
4) As soon as a new critical position is reached a "permanently prohibited ko" is automatically created for the ko capture made by the attacker before the last pass
5) Then the hypothetical play continues taking into account the "permanently prohibited ko" created and the defender may later create another16 "permanently prohibited ko" using again the procedure above.

I cannot imagine Thomas has not seen points 1), 2) and 3) (and the corresponding comments) defining what a advantageaous loop is => the sequence given by him is a pure provocation for a non sense result => no answer.
Top
jann
Lives in gote
Posts: 445
Joined: Tue May 14, 2019 8:00 pm
GD Posts: 0
Been thanked: 37 times

Re: GT territory rule

Post by jann »

Maybe your rules are simply too complicated and prone to honest misunderstandings and application errors.
Gérard TAILLE wrote:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$W
$$ -------------------------
$$ | X X O X . X . X O . . |
$$ | . X O O X X X X O . . |
$$ | X X O . O X O O O . . |
$$ | . X O O X X O . . . . |
$$ | X O O . O X O . . . . |
$$ | O O O O O O X . . . . |
$$ | X X X X X X X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ -------------------------[/go]
In one hand it is true that in normal play black stones in the corner cannot be killed but in the other hand it looks to me that the author of the J89 rule wanted really to see black group dead.
Your example seems defective in the same way as what prompted J89 to revise LD #18 (double ko useless). I assume you mean a more complex version here, similar to the revised J89 one.
Obviously this is an advantageous loop. You can note in particular that in normal play white can force a NO RESULT game and, then white can also force the stop of the game. Providing you do not accept an infinite number of resumption then black cannot force a NO RESULT game. In this context, because my idea was really not to change the basis of J89, I chose to give the same result as J89 => black stones are dead.
I'm aware of the pecularities (one-sidedness etc) of moonshine kos and cycles. I also understand your personal instinct for treating B dead. But then your weakness remains: no logical explanation for treating #2 differently to both #1 and #4 at the same time (other combinations have simple and strong logic).
Top
Gérard TAILLE
Gosei
Posts: 1346
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2020 2:47 am
Rank: 1d
GD Posts: 0
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 57 times

Re: GT territory rule

Post by Gérard TAILLE »

jann wrote:Maybe your rules are simply too complicated and prone to honest misunderstandings and application errors.
Gérard TAILLE wrote:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$W
$$ -------------------------
$$ | X X O X . X . X O . . |
$$ | . X O O X X X X O . . |
$$ | X X O . O X O O O . . |
$$ | . X O O X X O . . . . |
$$ | X O O . O X O . . . . |
$$ | O O O O O O X . . . . |
$$ | X X X X X X X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ -------------------------[/go]
In one hand it is true that in normal play black stones in the corner cannot be killed but in the other hand it looks to me that the author of the J89 rule wanted really to see black group dead.
Your example seems defective in the same way as what prompted J89 to revise LD #18 (double ko useless). I assume you mean a more complex version here, similar to the revised J89 one.
Obviously this is an advantageous loop. You can note in particular that in normal play white can force a NO RESULT game and, then white can also force the stop of the game. Providing you do not accept an infinite number of resumption then black cannot force a NO RESULT game. In this context, because my idea was really not to change the basis of J89, I chose to give the same result as J89 => black stones are dead.
I'm aware of the pecularities (one-sidedness etc) of moonshine kos and cycles. I also understand your personal instinct for treating B dead. But then your weakness remains: no logical explanation for treating #2 differently to both #1 and #4 at the same time (most other combinations have simple and strong logic).
Oops, CORRECTION.
jann wrote:
  1. Bent4 with remote unremovable threat (or double ko seki)
  2. Bent4 with nearby unremovable threat (or double ko seki)
  3. Moonshine life with remote double ko seki
  4. Moonshine life with nearby double ko seki
Normal play says: All 4 alive.
Taking your point 4) above I do not manage to build an example in which in normal play all groups are alive.
For point 3) it is obvious but for point 4) it is not clear.
Top
jann
Lives in gote
Posts: 445
Joined: Tue May 14, 2019 8:00 pm
GD Posts: 0
Been thanked: 37 times

Re: GT territory rule

Post by jann »

Something like J89 has for bent4, or simply yours modified?
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$W
$$ ---------------------------
$$ | . X . X X O X . X . X O . . |
$$ | X O X . X O O X X X X O . . |
$$ | O O X X X O . O X O O O . . |
$$ | . O O O X O O X X O . . . . |
$$ | . . . O X O . O X O . . . . |
$$ | . . . O X O O O O X . . . . |
$$ | . . . O O X X X X X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------[/go]
Top
User avatar
Cassandra
Lives in sente
Posts: 1326
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:33 am
Rank: German 1 Kyu
GD Posts: 0
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 153 times

Re: GT territory rule

Post by Cassandra »

Gérard TAILLE wrote:OC I could not answer Thomas because I always try to follow the golden rule in a forum: never answer a post containing a personnal attack or a pure provocation.
It's a shame, you seem to love the packaging a lot more than the contents.

After your unspeakable series of Hamete you will probably not expect in all seriousness that I will serve you the solution of your Tsume-Go on the silver tray.
It's like a game of Go: everything is open already, you just have to want to see the hidden clues.

But quite apparently you do NOT want to see. You are probably still too annoyed about the "mirrored" game you LOST with White against me by two points (no komi, no prisoners, only local ko-threats are legal). Common Go sense would have expected a different result...
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . O . X O X X X X O . O ? ? ? ? ? ? ? |
$$ | O X X X O X X X X O O O ? ? ? ? ? ? ? |
$$ | . X O O O X X X X O . O ? ? ? ? ? ? ? |
$$ | X X O O . O X X X O O O ? ? ? ? ? ? ? |
$$ | O O O . O X . X X O ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? |
$$ | X X O O X . X X X O ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? |
$$ | . X X O O X X X X O ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? |
$$ | X . X X X O O O O O ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? |
$$ | X X X ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? |
$$ | ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? |
$$ | ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? O O O |
$$ | ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? X X X O O O . O |
$$ | ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? X X O O X X O O . |
$$ | ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? X O O . O X X O O |
$$ | ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? X O . O X X X X X |
$$ | ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? X X X O O X X , X O O |
$$ | ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? X . X O X . X X X O . |
$$ | ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? X X X O O X X O O O X |
$$ | ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? X . X X O O X O . X . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]
The really most difficult Go problem ever: https://igohatsuyoron120.de/index.htm
Igo Hatsuyōron #120 (really solved by KataGo)
Top
Gérard TAILLE
Gosei
Posts: 1346
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2020 2:47 am
Rank: 1d
GD Posts: 0
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 57 times

Re: GT territory rule

Post by Gérard TAILLE »

jann wrote:Something like J89 has for bent4, or simply yours modified?
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$W
$$ ---------------------------
$$ | . X . X X O X . X . X O . . |
$$ | X O X . X O O X X X X O . . |
$$ | O O X X X O . O X O O O . . |
$$ | . O O O X O O X X O . . . . |
$$ | . . . O X O . O X O . . . . |
$$ | . . . O X O O O O X . . . . |
$$ | . . . O O X X X X X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------[/go]
jann wrote:Something like J89 has for bent4, or simply yours modified?
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$W
$$ ---------------------------
$$ | . X . X X O X . X . X O . . |
$$ | X O X . X O O X X X X O . . |
$$ | O O X X X O . O X O O O . . |
$$ | . O O O X O O X X O . . . . |
$$ | . . . O X O . O X O . . . . |
$$ | . . . O X O O O O X . . . . |
$$ | . . . O O X X X X X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------[/go]
Oh yes I see. It looks like the example 16 and it was difficult for me to make a decision. Now I see your point:
If I say that we have to follow the result of normal play then black cannot be killed. But in the other hand, by choosing this example, the author of J89 claimed that the expected result should be that black is dead and, by using the pass-for-ko the author proved she can reach this expected result.
I had to find a way to resolve this problem and be sure it was not that easy.
My proposal was to identify "advantageous" loop and that sounds in my head as something like:
If a player has a advantageous loop and this loop cannot be break in normal play that means that firstly this player cannot lose this game (she can always force a NO RESULT game) and secondly that means that this player can always stops the game (the game cannot continue forever providing the number of resumption is not unlimited). In such specific situation, in GT territory rule, I can say black stones may be considered as dead in order to give a reward in the confirmation phase, reward that normal play fails to recognize (no superko).

The GT territory rule logic becomes:
To respect as far as possible J89 in all situations were an advantageous loop is detected and in all other situations except if the result given by J89 contradicts normal play inside "enable" region.

The point is always the same : the idea is not to change J89 but, because a lot of problems has been detected (in particular by Robert Jasiek) the idea is to present the rule differently to try and resolve these problems. Yes the goal is not that ambitious because in practice I am sure J89 works perfectly. Though my preference goes to an area rule I found interesting to go deeper in J89 to try and propose a different view with the same objective.
jann wrote:Maybe your rules are simply too complicated and prone to honest misunderstandings and application errors.
I have well noted this point Jann. I am working for a still less ambitious rule with the objective to clarify J89 ambiguities and to be far less complicated.
Top
Post Reply

Return to “Go Rules”