Japonese counting

kvasir · Post by **kvasir** » Thu Sep 16, 2021 8:07 pm

If I were to claim that the intention of j89 was very clear in this position, the x's being dead and o's alive, would that resolve the problem or put emphasis on that j89 is very troublesome?

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

I will give my reasons in two parts, first for the black stones and then the white.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W Black is dead. $$ ---------------------- $$ | O . O 1 X 3 . O O . O $$ | O O O X O X O O O O O $$ | X X X O . O O . O . . $$ | X . X O O O O O . . . $$ | . X X . . . . . . . . $$ | X X . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Now for the white stones the reason is that when black captures the white stones white is always able to reestablish stones that are alive.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$B :w4: pass $$ ---------------------- $$ | O . O 5 X 2 3 O O . O $$ | O O O X O X O O O O O $$ | X X X O 1 O O . O . . $$ | X . X O O O O O . . . $$ | . X X . . . . . . . . $$ | X X . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$ ---------------------- $$ | O 2 O X X 1 X O O . O $$ | O O O X 3 X O O O O O $$ | X X X O X O O . O . . $$ | X . X O O O O O . . . $$ | . X X . . . . . . . . $$ | X X . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

and

are reestablished stones and white's original stones are therefore alive.

Note if black tries to connect the ko that white passed for it doesn't help because of the shortage of liberties.

jann · Post by **jann** » Thu Sep 16, 2021 8:32 pm

kvasir wrote: and are reestablished stones and white's original stones are therefore alive.

You mean

only. Indeed, the enable rule may help in this particular example. The same problem was also shown in other positions though, even if not as clear-cut as this one, so the doubtfulness of pass-for-ko remains.

Gérard TAILLE · Post by **Gérard TAILLE** » Fri Sep 17, 2021 7:25 am

kvasir wrote:If I were to claim that the intention of j89 was very clear in this position, the x's being dead and o's alive, would that resolve the problem or put emphasis on that j89 is very troublesome?
$$B
$$ ----------------------
$$ | W C W C Z . . O O . O
$$ | W W W Z W Z O O O O O
$$ | X X X O . O O . O . .
$$ | X . X O O O O O . . .
$$ | . X X . . . . . . . .
$$ | X X . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B $$ ---------------------- $$ | W C W C Z . . O O . O $$ | W W W Z W Z O O O O O $$ | X X X O . O O . O . . $$ | X . X O O O O O . . . $$ | . X X . . . . . . . . $$ | X X . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]
I will give my reasons in two parts, first for the black stones and then the white.

$$W Black is dead.
$$ ----------------------
$$ | O . O 1 X 3 . O O . O
$$ | O O O X O X O O O O O
$$ | X X X O . O O . O . .
$$ | X . X O O O O O . . .
$$ | . X X . . . . . . . .
$$ | X X . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$W Black is dead. $$ ---------------------- $$ | O . O 1 X 3 . O O . O $$ | O O O X O X O O O O O $$ | X X X O . O O . O . . $$ | X . X O O O O O . . . $$ | . X X . . . . . . . . $$ | X X . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]
Now for the white stones the reason is that when black captures the white stones white is always able to reestablish stones that are alive.

$$B :w4: pass
$$ ----------------------
$$ | O . O 5 X 2 3 O O . O
$$ | O O O X O X O O O O O
$$ | X X X O 1 O O . O . .
$$ | X . X O O O O O . . .
$$ | . X X . . . . . . . .
$$ | X X . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B :w4: pass $$ ---------------------- $$ | O . O 5 X 2 3 O O . O $$ | O O O X O X O O O O O $$ | X X X O 1 O O . O . . $$ | X . X O O O O O . . . $$ | . X X . . . . . . . . $$ | X X . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

$$W
$$ ----------------------
$$ | O 2 O X X 1 X O O . O
$$ | O O O X 3 X O O O O O
$$ | X X X O X O O . O . .
$$ | X . X O O O O O . . .
$$ | . X X . . . . . . . .
$$ | X X . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$W $$ ---------------------- $$ | O 2 O X X 1 X O O . O $$ | O O O X 3 X O O O O O $$ | X X X O X O O . O . . $$ | X . X O O O O O . . . $$ | . X X . . . . . . . . $$ | X X . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]
and are reestablished stones and white's original stones are therefore alive.

Note if black tries to connect the ko that white passed for it doesn't help because of the shortage of liberties.

White to play : the result for white is the following

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$ ---------------------- $$ | W C W W C W C W W C W $$ | W W W C W C W W W W W $$ | X X X W C W W C W . . $$ | X . X W W W W W . . . $$ | . X X . . . . . . . . $$ | X X . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Black to play : the result for white is the following

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$ ---------------------- $$ | . X . X X W C W W C W $$ | . . . X W C W W W W W $$ | X X X W C W W C W . . $$ | X . X W W W W W . . . $$ | . X X . . . . . . . . $$ | X X . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

When comparing these to results then the marked region of the last diagram is in any case under white control.
=> when looking for white "enable NEW stones" these NEW stones should be on the complementary following area

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

with this in mind the dead stones are the following:

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

=> seki

kvasir · Post by **kvasir** » Fri Sep 17, 2021 7:59 am

Gérard TAILLE wrote: When comparing these to results then the marked region of the last diagram is in any case under white control.
=> when looking for white "enable NEW stones" these NEW stones should be on the complementary following area

$$B
$$ ----------------------
$$ | W C W C B . . O O . O
$$ | W W W B O X O O O O O
$$ | X X X O . O O . O . .
$$ | X . X O O O O O . . .
$$ | . X X . . . . . . . .
$$ | X X . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B $$ ---------------------- $$ | W C W C B . . O O . O $$ | W W W B O X O O O O O $$ | X X X O . O O . O . . $$ | X . X O O O O O . . . $$ | . X X . . . . . . . . $$ | X X . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]
with this in mind the dead stones are the following:

I think I said something similar few posts ago, but like you pointed out it is not at all clear what new stones count in this case.

In example 2 it is claimed that the new stones at

and

make the black marked stones alive.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$B $$ ---------------- $$ | 4 Y O 1 O X . $$ | Y 2 O 3 O X . $$ | O O O O X X . $$ | X X X X . . . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]

Just as with double-ko that has the unfortunate pass-ko cycles we also seem to have an unfortunate side effect here, namely that new stones could be played in many positions because there is no clear rule about what counts as new alive stone. For example, if example 2 is anywhere on the board, can we now show that black can always play a new uncapturable stone at

and

in effected making all his stones alive everywhere?

I asked RHETORICALLY if claiming that j89 intention was very clear would resolve the issue or just demonstrate that j89 is very troublesome, because I don't think the intention was clear.

jann · Post by **jann** » Fri Sep 17, 2021 8:10 am

Gérard TAILLE wrote:=> when looking for white "enable NEW stones" these NEW stones should be on the complementary following area

There is no such requirement in the rules. The new stones must be related to the capture, made possible by it, that seems all. The Japanese text may be even broader slightly than Davies' "enable". Regardless of interpretation, new stone UNDER a removed stone (from the original position) certainly qualify (if the capture in question cannot be performed without this removal and re-play).

Gérard TAILLE · Post by **Gérard TAILLE** » Fri Sep 17, 2021 8:11 am

kvasir wrote: I think I said something similar few posts ago, but like you pointed out it is not at all clear what new stones count in this case.

In example 2 it is claimed that the new stones at and make the black marked stones alive.
$$B
$$ ----------------
$$ | 4 Y O 1 O X .
$$ | Y 2 O 3 O X .
$$ | O O O O X X .
$$ | X X X X . . .
$$ | . . . . . . .
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B $$ ---------------- $$ | 4 Y O 1 O X . $$ | Y 2 O 3 O X . $$ | O O O O X X . $$ | X X X X . . . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]

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

On

white must play this

and I do not see how black can force new stones.

kvasir · Post by **kvasir** » Fri Sep 17, 2021 8:15 am

Gérard TAILLE wrote:
kvasir wrote: I think I said something similar few posts ago, but like you pointed out it is not at all clear what new stones count in this case.

In example 2 it is claimed that the new stones at and make the black marked stones alive.
$$B
$$ ----------------
$$ | 4 Y O 1 O X .
$$ | Y 2 O 3 O X .
$$ | O O O O X X .
$$ | X X X X . . .
$$ | . . . . . . .
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B $$ ---------------- $$ | 4 Y O 1 O X . $$ | Y 2 O 3 O X . $$ | O O O O X X . $$ | X X X X . . . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]

$$B
$$ ----------------
$$ | . X O 1 O X .
$$ | X . O 2 O X .
$$ | O O O O X X .
$$ | X X X X . . .
$$ | . . . . . . .
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B $$ ---------------- $$ | . X O 1 O X . $$ | X . O 2 O X . $$ | O O O O X X . $$ | X X X X . . . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]
On white must play this and I do not see how black can force new stones.

Sorry, I misquoted the diagram. It is supposed to be white trying to capture the black stones. That is show that white can not capture the 2 stones without black being able to play new stones.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$ ---------------- $$ | 3 X O 2 O X . $$ | X 1 O 4 O X . $$ | O O O O X X . $$ | X X X X . . . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]

Gérard TAILLE · Post by **Gérard TAILLE** » Fri Sep 17, 2021 8:22 am

kvasir wrote:
Gérard TAILLE wrote:
kvasir wrote: I think I said something similar few posts ago, but like you pointed out it is not at all clear what new stones count in this case.

In example 2 it is claimed that the new stones at and make the black marked stones alive.
$$B
$$ ----------------
$$ | 4 Y O 1 O X .
$$ | Y 2 O 3 O X .
$$ | O O O O X X .
$$ | X X X X . . .
$$ | . . . . . . .
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B $$ ---------------- $$ | 4 Y O 1 O X . $$ | Y 2 O 3 O X . $$ | O O O O X X . $$ | X X X X . . . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]

$$B
$$ ----------------
$$ | . X O 1 O X .
$$ | X . O 2 O X .
$$ | O O O O X X .
$$ | X X X X . . .
$$ | . . . . . . .
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B $$ ---------------- $$ | . X O 1 O X . $$ | X . O 2 O X . $$ | O O O O X X . $$ | X X X X . . . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]
On white must play this and I do not see how black can force new stones.
Sorry, I misquoted the diagram. It is supposed to be white trying to capture the black stones. That is show that white can not capture the 2 stones without black being able to play new stones.

$$W
$$ ----------------
$$ | 3 X O 2 O X .
$$ | X 1 O 4 O X .
$$ | O O O O X X .
$$ | X X X X . . .
$$ | . . . . . . .
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$W $$ ---------------- $$ | 3 X O 2 O X . $$ | X 1 O 4 O X . $$ | O O O O X X . $$ | X X X X . . . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]

yes I agree but how this sequence may impact another other part of the board? Neither white nor black can force a new stone.
IOW if white wants to kill a black group of stones somewhere else on the board then white has only to avoid playing this

here and black will not be able to claim she has got a new stone.

Gérard TAILLE · Post by **Gérard TAILLE** » Fri Sep 17, 2021 8:35 am

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

BTW this position looks an unfinished position:
In this position black has a big ko threat at "a". OC it is not an "ideal" ko threat because using it cost black one point (a captured stone) but it is anyway a possibility for black.
In normal play, as soon as temperature drops under 6 it is good practice for white to play:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$ ---------------- $$ | 3 X O 4 O X . $$ | X 1 O 2 O X . $$ | O O O O X X . $$ | X X X X . . . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]

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

In the resulting position black has lost her big ko-threat and white has gained a small but ideal ko threat at "a".

For that reason the initial position is in practice an unfinished position.

kvasir · Post by **kvasir** » Fri Sep 17, 2021 7:15 pm

It is interesting to consider such positions.

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

The pattern is to leave one liberty for white and an eye for black.

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

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

We can also make it work when white needs three moves to capture on the inside using a ko.

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

We can also think of positions in which black has a chance to fight the ko because white is behind in the race to capture.

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

White in confirmation.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$ ---------------- $$ | 1 X X X X X X X X X X X 5 X . X X O O O X . $$ | X O 3 O O O O O O O O O X X X X O 2 4 O X . $$ | O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O X X . $$ | X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]

Black in confirmation

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

The reason black may not want to give a prisoner is he may defend with a ko, so he can save 1pt by not throwing in at

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W :b4: ko threat $$ ---------------- $$ | 3 X X X X X X X X X X X . X . X X O O O X . $$ | X O 1 O O O O O O O O O X X X X O 2 . O X . $$ | O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O X X . $$ | X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]

j89 example 2 explains why these positions are seki by stating that new stones can be played. It seem more intuitive to think of it as unfinished or unsettled positions and therefore seki when you count the game, maybe this is the intent of the definition of life and death in article 7.1 and territory in 8. ? If that is the case, people may disagree if it is a good idea to avoid the intuitive explanation altogether when presenting the rules. The benefit of referring to the idea of unsettled stones is that it gives guidance as to how to read the rules and it could also explains quite nicely why there is no territory in seki. On the other had it is quite a lofty idea that is hard to define and one could say unnecessary.

jann · Post by **jann** » Fri Sep 17, 2021 8:00 pm

kvasir wrote:j89 example 2 explains why these positions are seki by stating that new stones can be played. It seem more intuitive to think of it as unfinished or unsettled positions and therefore seki when you count the game, maybe this is the intent of the definition of life and death in article 7.1 and territory in 8. ?

I dont think so. The exchange can be neutral, favorable or unfavorable (then the position is settled):

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

But L/D is static, it cannot evaluate exchanges. It must assume any exchange is unfavorable (thus unacceptable). You don't need to give up ("enable") any kind of compensation to be able to capture dead stones from your territory - if you need to then those are not really dead stones.

kvasir · Post by **kvasir** » Fri Sep 17, 2021 8:57 pm

jann wrote:
kvasir wrote:j89 example 2 explains why these positions are seki by stating that new stones can be played. It seem more intuitive to think of it as unfinished or unsettled positions and therefore seki when you count the game, maybe this is the intent of the definition of life and death in article 7.1 and territory in 8. ?
I dont think so. The exchange can be neutral, favorable or unfavorable (then the position is settled):

$$B
$$ ---------------------------------------------------
$$ | . O X . X O . | O . O X . X O . | . O X . X O O .
$$ | O . X . X O . | O O . X . X O . | O . X . X X O .
$$ | X X X X O O . | X X X X X O O . | X X X X O O O .
$$ | O O O O O . . | O O O O O O . . | O O O O O . . .
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B $$ --------------------------------------------------- $$ | . O X . X O . | O . O X . X O . | . O X . X O O . $$ | O . X . X O . | O O . X . X O . | O . X . X X O . $$ | X X X X O O . | X X X X X O O . | X X X X O O O . $$ | O O O O O . . | O O O O O O . . | O O O O O . . .[/go]
But L/D is static, it cannot evaluate exchanges. It must assume any exchange is unfavorable (thus unacceptable). You don't need to give up ("enable") any kind of compensation to be able to capture dead stones from your territory - if you need to then those are not really dead stones.

I don't mean unsettled as in "undecided", I think I pointed out also that one might get into trouble if one tries to define "unsettled" precisely, but I am referring to the way that it is necessary to argue that these stones are alive because capturing them would alter the life and death of other stones.

I completely agree with you that the life and death needs to be a static property when the game ends.

I don't want to get into semantics but "settled" has a meaning of "place so as to stay" in my dictionary, so unsettled can mean something was done the opposite: placed though it could not stay. I think that describes what I meant very well.

Gérard TAILLE · Post by **Gérard TAILLE** » Sat Sep 18, 2021 2:49 am

For sure the rule has not to define what is an unfinished or unsettled position. This wording belongs to the go player but not to the rule.
The rule must give the result for any position but for unfinished position a large range of values might be acceptable because it will not change the game itself and the final result.

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

In this unfinished position the final expected result is : white plays first and the local result is -2 (four black prisonners against two white prisonners).
As a consequence if the rule gives for this unfinished position a result greater or equal to -2 then everything is OK and the expected result will be reached.
=> it does not matter is you decide the result is 0 (seki?) or +1 (white marked stone is dead will black stones are alive)

kvasir · Post by **kvasir** » Sat Sep 18, 2021 3:48 am

Gérard TAILLE wrote:For sure the rule has not to define what is an unfinished or unsettled position. This wording belongs to the go player but not to the rule.
The rule must give the result for any position but for unfinished position a large range of values might be acceptable because it will not change the game itself and the final result.

$$B
$$ ---------------
$$ | . X X O . . .
$$ | W X X O . . .
$$ | X O O O . . .
$$ | X X X . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . .
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B $$ --------------- $$ | . X X O . . . $$ | W X X O . . . $$ | X O O O . . . $$ | X X X . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]
In this unfinished position the final expected result is : white plays first and the local result is -2 (four black prisonners against two white prisonners).
As a consequence if the rule gives for this unfinished position a result greater or equal to -2 then everything is OK and the expected result will be reached.
=> it does not matter is you decide the result is 0 (seki?) or +1 (white marked stone is dead will black stones are alive)

But wait a minute, this is a non-sequitur, because white loses points by not resolving this before the end of the game and the value of resolving the position is either 1 or 2 pts. depending on ko threats. I think "zero" is a very special number here, it is the only value you can assign without getting into the details of which side benefits by playing first. So I would say it does matter what value you try to assign.

Let me be clear, I was not suggesting that the rules NEED to define what an unsettled position is but that the combinations of rules can INTUTIVELY be understood to be assigning zero territory in unsettled positions.

So yes, it is seki if left as is but before the end of the game it depends on ko threats but white will gain 1 or 2 points even if he can't win a ko as long as he resolves this before the end of the game.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$ --------------- $$ | 1 X X O . . . $$ | O X X O . . . $$ | X O O O . . . $$ | X X X . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$ B $$ --------------- $$ | O 2 3 O . . . $$ | O 1 . O . . . $$ | X O O O . . . $$ | X X X . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]

Now if black does not wish to fight a ko it is w+2 because it is 5 black prisoners and 3 white.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$ --------------- $$ | . 3 X O . . . $$ | 2 X 1 O . . . $$ | X O O O . . . $$ | X X X . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]

If black wishes he can create a ko shape and try to connect everything which is w+1.

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

Gérard TAILLE · Post by **Gérard TAILLE** » Sat Sep 18, 2021 5:42 am

kvasir wrote:
Gérard TAILLE wrote:For sure the rule has not to define what is an unfinished or unsettled position. This wording belongs to the go player but not to the rule.
The rule must give the result for any position but for unfinished position a large range of values might be acceptable because it will not change the game itself and the final result.

$$B
$$ ---------------
$$ | . X X O . . .
$$ | W X X O . . .
$$ | X O O O . . .
$$ | X X X . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . .
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B $$ --------------- $$ | . X X O . . . $$ | W X X O . . . $$ | X O O O . . . $$ | X X X . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]
In this unfinished position the final expected result is : white plays first and the local result is -2 (four black prisonners against two white prisonners).
As a consequence if the rule gives for this unfinished position a result greater or equal to -2 then everything is OK and the expected result will be reached.
=> it does not matter is you decide the result is 0 (seki?) or +1 (white marked stone is dead will black stones are alive)

But wait a minute, this is a non-sequitur, because white loses points by not resolving this before the end of the game and the value of resolving the position is either 1 or 2 pts. depending on ko threats. I think "zero" is a very special number here, it is the only value you can assign without getting into the details of which side benefits by playing first. So I would say it does matter what value you try to assign.

Let me be clear, I was not suggesting that the rules NEED to define what an unsettled position is but that the combinations of rules can INTUTIVELY be understood to be assigning zero territory in unsettled positions.

So yes, it is seki if left as is but before the end of the game it depends on ko threats but white will gain 1 or 2 points even if he can't win a ko as long as he resolves this before the end of the game.

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

$$ B
$$ ---------------
$$ | O 2 3 O . . .
$$ | O 1 . O . . .
$$ | X O O O . . .
$$ | X X X . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . .
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$ B $$ --------------- $$ | O 2 3 O . . . $$ | O 1 . O . . . $$ | X O O O . . . $$ | X X X . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]
Now if black does not wish to fight a ko it is w+2 because it is 5 black prisoners and 3 white.

$$W
$$ ---------------
$$ | . 3 X O . . .
$$ | 2 X 1 O . . .
$$ | X O O O . . .
$$ | X X X . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . .
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$W $$ --------------- $$ | . 3 X O . . . $$ | 2 X 1 O . . . $$ | X O O O . . . $$ | X X X . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]
If black wishes he can create a ko shape and try to connect everything which is w+1.

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

Assigning zero territory in unsettled positions seems logical to me and it is the case with "GT territory rule".

But in J89 as it stands it is not the case.

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

In J89 I am not sure the result is seki (see my post viewtopic.php?p=267413#p267413 and Jann answer in viewtopic.php?p=267416#p267416)

Take this another example:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W white to play $$ --------------- $$ | . . . X O . . . $$ | . a . X O . . . $$ | X X X X O . . . $$ | O O O O O . . . $$ | . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . .[/go]

We are still in normal play with white to play.
Assume that if white plays at "a" to kill black stones then black wins the game by 0.5 point.
The only way for white to win the game is to pass, hoping black is not skillful enough to see she must add a move.
If black passes then the confirmation phase will decide black stones are dead => all corner is white territory => white wins the game
I would have prefered to say it is a seki because I do not like to see here a white territory when black can live if she plays first but it is J89 rule.

Life In 19x19

Japonese counting

Re: Japonese counting

Re: Japonese counting

Re: Japonese counting

Re: Japonese counting

Re: Japonese counting

Re: Japonese counting

Re: Japonese counting

Re: Japonese counting

Re: Japonese counting

Re: Japonese counting

Re: Japonese counting

Re: Japonese counting

Re: Japonese counting

Re: Japonese counting

Re: Japonese counting