Life In 19x19

ez4u wrote:I am not sure who you think the 'we' is that haven't proved something. I have played thousands of games with existing komi and do not feel that it favors Black or White. So 'I' have 'proven' that 6.5 is fine for amateur play. I do not claim that I can play accurately enough that small differences in komi make a difference anyway.

And yes the burden of proof is on you. Why? Because Go players are just like everyone else. On average we are complacent, lazy you-know-whats who don't like to change our ways. Nothing new there, right?

The burden of proof of what value of komi is valid is NOT on me, because I am making no claims on what komi should validly be. If I claimed komi should be X, then yes, I should prove it.

You, on the other hand, are claiming that komi should be a particular number - 6.5. Your proof is that you "do not feel that it favors Black or White".

The only claim I am making is that the pie rule is more flexible, so that is all I am "burdened" to prove, and I've already shown that in my existing posts on the topic.

oren wrote:

Kirby wrote:At least as good as the current system, is it not?

I want to sit down and play go. If I wanted an extra bidding phase, I'd play bridge.

In friendly go over the board, I don't even discuss komi. Online, I would expect 6.5 nowadays. I don't really want an extra phase to game starting.

I've used a lot of 'proper handicap' on DGS which has a lot of ranges for komi which can be interesting, but I don't mind since it's not an extra phase to handle.

"All I want to do is sit down and play go. If I wanted to nigiri, I'd play pick up sticks"

Nigiri sucks, doesn't it?

Kirby wrote:

ez4u wrote:I am not sure who you think the 'we' is that haven't proved something. I have played thousands of games with existing komi and do not feel that it favors Black or White. So 'I' have 'proven' that 6.5 is fine for amateur play. I do not claim that I can play accurately enough that small differences in komi make a difference anyway.

And yes the burden of proof is on you. Why? Because Go players are just like everyone else. On average we are complacent, lazy you-know-whats who don't like to change our ways. Nothing new there, right?

The burden of proof of what value of komi is valid is NOT on me, because I am making no claims on what komi should validly be. If I claimed komi should be X, then yes, I should prove it.

You, on the other hand, are claiming that komi should be a particular number - 6.5. Your proof is that you "do not feel that it favors Black or White".

The only claim I am making is that the pie rule is more flexible, so that is all I am "burdened" to prove, and I've already shown that in my existing posts on the topic.

No problem, let's divide the burdens just as you say. Now let's see who gets more games - you with pie and me with 6.5 komi. Enjoy!

Personally, I do not think pie komi is a good idea.
The pros know what komi they want to play with. For the amas the komi is a fluid concept.
So here is what I propose:

1. The komi is whatever (fixed, 6.5, 7.5, blah blah)
2. For dan players, the result is as we always counted it - the win is to the one who has more points
3. For kyu players, the win is ONLY awarded of the result in points is more than the kyu level of the weaker player,

For example: for a game between two 5k players, the game has to be decided by more than 5 points (including komi?) to be decisive. Otherwise it is a draw.

Yeah - I know - I hate to introduce a DRAW to the game, but to me it just makes sense.

The play of kyu players is just too random to really talk about 'the one who won by 1 point played better' - he just got more lucky. Its about the granularity about what a player can see... If a 1k player, for example, cannot possibly tell between a 1 point move and a 2 point move, he should not be penalized (or rewarded) for making a wild guess.

The actual numbers and formulas can be worked out differently, but this is the idea I had for a long time now. To speak of 1 point win between 20k players is just ridiculous. It should have been a draw! And this is the basis of what I am talking about.

Now go ahead - rip me a new one!

ez4u wrote:...
I am not sure who you think the 'we' is that haven't proved something. I have played thousands of games with existing komi and do not feel that it favors Black or White. So 'I' have 'proven' that 6.5 is fine for amateur play. I do not claim that I can play accurately enough that small differences in komi make a difference anyway.

And yes the burden of proof is on you. Why? Because Go players are just like everyone else. On average we are complacent, lazy you-know-whats who don't like to change our ways. Nothing new there, right?

What really matters, I suppose, is not proof, but acceptance. If something like a mathematical proof were sufficient to convince the AGA to change the rules, this would be a different world. But of course it is not. The only way players will use komi pie is if they decide to do so. I'm glad to hear there is at least one group, albeit small and informal, which has tried it.

Someone mentioned the games of Shusaku san, and that it may be unfortunate he played so many games as black without any komi. Maybe some time in the future, players will lament the fact that so many games from this period were played with a komi of only 6.5 or 7.5. Does it really matter to anyone playing now? Perhaps not. And I certainly don't want to give the impression that I know what's best for anyone else to do. I just have this notion that such a magnificent and profound game as Go should not have any potential blemish. The rules should be future proof.

Thanks to everyone for your input.

Kirby wrote:Nigiri sucks, doesn't it?

Yes, I haven't done nigiri much either.

Stronger player takes white. If it's even or close whoever has the closest bowls at the time.

Thinking back I can't think I've ever done nigiri.

Bantari wrote:Personally, I do not think pie komi is a good idea.
The pros know what komi they want to play with. For the amas the komi is a fluid concept.
So here is what I propose:

1. The komi is whatever (fixed, 6.5, 7.5, blah blah)
2. For dan players, the result is as we always counted it - the win is to the one who has more points
3. For kyu players, the win is ONLY awarded of the result in points is more than the kyu level of the weaker player,

For example: for a game between two 5k players, the game has to be decided by more than 5 points (including komi?) to be decisive. Otherwise it is a draw.

Yeah - I know - I hate to introduce a DRAW to the game, but to me it just makes sense.

The play of kyu players is just too random to really talk about 'the one who won by 1 point played better' - he just got more lucky. Its about the granularity about what a player can see... If a 1k player, for example, cannot possibly tell between a 1 point move and a 2 point move, he should not be penalized (or rewarded) for making a wild guess.

The actual numbers and formulas can be worked out differently, but this is the idea I had for a long time now. To speak of 1 point win between 20k players is just ridiculous. It should have been a draw! And this is the basis of what I am talking about.

Now go ahead - rip me a new one!

My initial reaction was that I liked this idea, but after some more playing I've changed my mind. I absolutely love playing out a really close game in which I can't even tell who's winning, but we're both desperately trying to gain just the slightest advantage. With your suggestion, that excitement would be replaced with relaxation.

Splatted wrote:

Bantari wrote:Personally, I do not think pie komi is a good idea.
The pros know what komi they want to play with. For the amas the komi is a fluid concept.
So here is what I propose:

1. The komi is whatever (fixed, 6.5, 7.5, blah blah)
2. For dan players, the result is as we always counted it - the win is to the one who has more points
3. For kyu players, the win is ONLY awarded of the result in points is more than the kyu level of the weaker player,

For example: for a game between two 5k players, the game has to be decided by more than 5 points (including komi?) to be decisive. Otherwise it is a draw.

Yeah - I know - I hate to introduce a DRAW to the game, but to me it just makes sense.

The play of kyu players is just too random to really talk about 'the one who won by 1 point played better' - he just got more lucky. Its about the granularity about what a player can see... If a 1k player, for example, cannot possibly tell between a 1 point move and a 2 point move, he should not be penalized (or rewarded) for making a wild guess.

The actual numbers and formulas can be worked out differently, but this is the idea I had for a long time now. To speak of 1 point win between 20k players is just ridiculous. It should have been a draw! And this is the basis of what I am talking about.

Now go ahead - rip me a new one!

My initial reaction was that I liked this idea, but after some more playing I've changed my mind. I absolutely love playing out a really close game in which I can't even tell who's winning, but we're both desperately trying to gain just the slightest advantage. With your suggestion, that excitement would be replaced with relaxation.

I have to agree with Splatted here. This proposal seems to devalue the endgame for kyu players, and trains them that games should be blowouts, because they have to be in order to register a win. This is exactly the opposite of the mindset that's needed to play at higher levels, however.

Kirby, you're already free to sit down across from your opponent and say "I'm convinced that the current komi system is sub-optimal--we just don't know what proper komi is for amateurs, so do you think we could bid on it?" And then your opponent is free to say "sounds great!", "let's play the normal way", or to slowly back away from the table, and find an Ayn Rand fan to have a lighthearted non-ideological discussion with.

What you're proposing is that we all be forced to have this discussion and bidding. Flexible, yes, but that's not always a good thing.

skydyr wrote:

Splatted wrote:My initial reaction was that I liked this idea, but after some more playing I've changed my mind. I absolutely love playing out a really close game in which I can't even tell who's winning, but we're both desperately trying to gain just the slightest advantage. With your suggestion, that excitement would be replaced with relaxation.

I have to agree with Splatted here. This proposal seems to devalue the endgame for kyu players, and trains them that games should be blowouts, because they have to be in order to register a win. This is exactly the opposite of the mindset that's needed to play at higher levels, however.

Yeah, I hear you guys. And pretty much agree with what you say.
Its just that this idea creeps into my mind each time people start discussing minute komi changes for kyu players.

Personally, I think the game is fine just the way it is. No need to tinker.

Bantari wrote:

skydyr wrote:I have to agree with Splatted here. This proposal seems to devalue the endgame for kyu players, and trains them that games should be blowouts, because they have to be in order to register a win. This is exactly the opposite of the mindset that's needed to play at higher levels, however.

Yeah, I hear you guys. And pretty much agree with what you say.
Its just that this idea creeps into my mind each time people start discussing minute komi changes for kyu players.

Personally, I think the game is fine just the way it is. No need to tinker.

This is why I've gone in the direction of no komi and handicap that changes when one is a few wins ahead. Unless you're only playing someone once or a small number of times, there's no need to even out the playing field with komi to get good games. It worked for hundreds of years, and it was only with the need for one-off unhandicapped tournament games for pros that komi was introduced, as I understand.

ez4u wrote:...
No problem, let's divide the burdens just as you say. Now let's see who gets more games - you with pie and me with 6.5 komi. Enjoy!

Anyone that likes 6.5 komi can play me - if they are the bidder, they bid 6.5 for komi. I'll probably accept, and it'll be the same game as normal. But if I don't accept, they'll be at an advantage in their mind, since I didn't accept what they thought was the best komi. If I bid, I bid what I want. If it's 6.5, they're probably good with it. Otherwise, I'll still be at a disadvantage in their mind.

So there is no advantage at all for them to play you instead of me in terms of game result. The only difference would, perhaps, be the pleasure in the game experience - maybe they think my bid is ridiculous and don't want to play. But this is no different than if I play poorly chosen moves.

I see no benefit at all to not doing the komi pie. I see possible benefit to doing it if 6.5 isn't the best komi.

oren wrote:
Yes, I haven't done nigiri much either.

Well, despite my sarcasm, the point is (in response to "I want to sit down and play go. If I wanted an extra bidding phase, I'd play bridge."), you are still able to "sit down and play go" without any extra thinking about bidding, as you appear to be suggesting.

Just always bid 6.5 if you're the bidder, if someone bids a number higher than 6.5 pick white, and if they pick lower than 6.5 pick black. This is just as simple as pulling over the bowl that is closest to you when you play, and requires no effort on your part if you are not interested in the komi pie.

hyperpape wrote:Kirby, you're already free to sit down across from your opponent and say "I'm convinced that the current komi system is sub-optimal--we just don't know what proper komi is for amateurs, so do you think we could bid on it?" And then your opponent is free to say "sounds great!", "let's play the normal way", ...

What you're proposing is that we all be forced to have this discussion and bidding. Flexible, yes, but that's not always a good thing.

Well, it'd be just as simple to say that "players must bid if one player suggests it", and if no players suggest it, the bidding is implicitly 6.5/7.5 without any discussion.

The reason I think it would be nice to have this option is because:
1.) If a player doesn't think that 6.5/7.5 is the correct komi, they have a guaranteed fair way to establish komi before the game.
2.) If the second player already thinks that 6.5/7.5 is the ideal komi, there is no disadvantage for them to play the bidding phase.

In terms of having players think that the game result is "fair", I think that this is the best way (perhaps even with the "blind" bidding, as earlier suggested).

...
or to slowly back away from the table, and find an Ayn Rand fan to have a lighthearted non-ideological discussion with.

What do you mean by this?

Kirby wrote:The reason I think it would be nice to have this option is because:
1.) If a player doesn't think that 6.5/7.5 is the correct komi, they have a guaranteed fair way to establish komi before the game.
2.) If the second player already thinks that 6.5/7.5 is the ideal komi, there is no disadvantage for them to play the bidding phase.

What if I don't care what the correct komi is, and just want to put stones on the board? You seem to be telling us to just bid 6.5 and then it's over, but I think you're misunderstanding. It's really not the number or colour that matters - even talking about komi, or the choice between black and white, introduces a meaningless psychological and competitive edge to the game. Some people like these competitive edges - like haggling, or betting for trivial amounts of money - and some people find them a little unpleasant.