Button Go but for territory scoring with area style rules

[iopq]

What always annoyed me about area scoring is the lack of precision. But most button go rulesets like AGA take territory counting and make it imprecise like area scoring.

It might not seem like a big deal, but it actually is at the very highest levels of play. This is because komi is set to 7.5, which is worse for Black winrates.

At the same time, area scoring rules are much simpler. It would be preferable if a button go rule did the opposite, take area scoring rules as a base, but if Black takes the last dame, let White catch back up, while if Black takes the button it does nothing (except deny White the opportunity to catch up, of course, so it does serve a purpose)

Has anyone designed a ruleset like this? I just posted my proposal for it in the group tax thread, but it's actually a separate issue

viewtopic.php?p=283525#p283525

[RobertJasiek]

There is no "lack of precision" but I guess you might refer to the 2-point score differences as long as the parity of the non-scoring intersections remains constant because the seki parity does.

[iopq]

https://senseis.xmp.net/?TerritoryAndAreaScoring

If you ignore seki stuff, even in normal games a territory difference of 6, 7, 8 would be area difference 7, 7, 9

it's as if you took floor((territory difference)/2)*2 + 1

[RobertJasiek]

There is an implicit suggestion that territory scoring would have more demanding late endgame but IMX the opposite is true: area scoring also has dame ko fights, 1-sided dames etc.

[iopq]

There is an implicit suggestion that territory scoring would have more demanding late endgame but IMX the opposite is true: area scoring also has dame ko fights, 1-sided dames etc.

You can literally lose a point in the endgame, but get the last dame because of parity and still win.

$$B Black plays largest play
$$ ------------
$$ . O 2 1 X .
$$ . O O O X .
$$ . O 4 3 X .
$$ . O X X X .
$$ . . . . . .

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Black plays largest play
$$ ------------
$$ . O 2 1 X .
$$ . O O O X .
$$ . O 4 3 X .
$$ . O X X X .
$$ . . . . . .[/go]

$$B Black makes territory mistake
$$ ------------
$$ . O . 2 X .
$$ . O O O X .
$$ . O 3 1 X .
$$ . O X X X .
$$ . . . . . .

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go] $$B Black makes territory mistake
$$ ------------
$$ . O . 2 X .
$$ . O O O X .
$$ . O 3 1 X .
$$ . O X X X .
$$ . . . . . . [/go]

these two diagrams have the same area score

[RobertJasiek]

The endgame consists of more than potential territory regions. It is also about getting the last play on the board with the area gote move value 1. A local loss of 1 point is compensated by a local gain of 1 point elsewhere. Therefore, your description of "losing 1 point" does not fully represent what is happening - it is not a global description.

[iopq]

That's all true, but the last dame has a rounding effect on scoring, which is basically "lack of precision"

And komi being 6.5 being more fair is also a fact, and you can't do 6.5 in area scoring

[RobertJasiek]

For "precision" discussion, choice in the game trees should be considered for either scoring to compare strategic complexities.

What are the komi "facts"?

Since you want to consider different aspects, do not neglect (dis)ambiguity of either scoring rules!