Re: Non standard 9 or 10 stones handicap placement
Posted: Wed May 21, 2014 11:09 am
by skydyr
oca wrote:I feelt like in the first game, very not easy for me to use the handicap stones... The first move that I missed was black 27... I think the joseki is more to atari the other stone by playing R2 instead of P4...
The closer the stones are to the center, the more you need to know about using influence to wield them effectively. On the other hand, when you have stones on the third line, you don't have influence, really, and may as well just have reverse komi. I think that the star points are one of the easiest points to learn to use influence from, because you concede the least amount of space underneath them for white to work with while still being high enough to be influential. If they were 5th line stones, for example, white is more able to afford to scoop out territory underneath and trust that the remainder won't be enough for black.
Edit: Also, the big square feels slightly overconcentrated to me. Is tengen really necessary with it, for example?
Re: Non standard 9 or 10 stones handicap placement
White sets up ladders that bounce around the sides and intersect so as to avoid the center and capture first when they collide. Don't ask me to do this in a game. It also gets really ugly if/when black deviates, so white had better be strong enough to control the game after that deviation with much of the board relatively settled.
Re: Non standard 9 or 10 stones handicap placement
Posted: Wed May 21, 2014 11:57 am
by shapenaji
skydyr wrote:
White sets up ladders that bounce around the sides and intersect so as to avoid the center and capture first when they collide. Don't ask me to do this in a game. It also gets really ugly if/when black deviates, so white had better be strong enough to control the game after that deviation with much of the board relatively settled.
In theory, I sort've see it, if white sets up a capture, he will be the first to capture, but I can't visualize a situation where that capture would also break the capture of an opposing group if there isn't any center asymmetry to exploit. I know I probably wouldn't be able to beat this in a real game.
Re: Non standard 9 or 10 stones handicap placement
You have a mathematical proof that black wins? If so, how many initial stones in the center will do?
Re: Non standard 9 or 10 stones handicap placement
Posted: Wed May 21, 2014 6:01 pm
by lightvector
If there is a superko rule in effect (positional and situational are both fine), it's possible to break symmetry by setting up two independent kos which Black will mirror to make four kos in total. Then if White begins capturing in the kos, Black will be the first player forced to deviate (I think).
Without a superko rule, two ladders that circle the board is another way. Here's a proof of concept:
$$Wc Initial position $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . O O X X X . . . . . . | $$ | . . X , . . . . . X O O . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . | $$ | . . O O . . . . . . . . . O . X . . . | $$ | . . X O X . . . X X X . . . . X O . . | $$ | . O O X X . . . X , X . . . O O X X . | $$ | . . X O . . . . X X X . . . O X O . . | $$ | . . . O . X . . . . . . . . . X X . . | $$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . X X O . . . . . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . O O O X X . . O . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+
[go]$$Wc The ladders begin $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . O O X X X . . . . . . | $$ | . . X , . . . . . X O O . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . | $$ | . . O O . . . . . . . . . O . X . . . | $$ | . . X O X . . . X X X . . . . X O . . | $$ | . O O X X . . . X , X . . . O O X X . | $$ | . . X O . . . . X X X . . . O X O . . | $$ | . . . O . X . . . . . . . . . X X . . | $$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . X X O 3 . . . . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . O O O X X . . O . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]
$$Wc By this point, black is doomed. $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . O O X X X . . . . . . | $$ | . . X , . . . O X X O O . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . O X X O . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O X X O . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . O X X O . . . . . . X . . . . | $$ | . . O O . 4 1 . . . . . . O . X . . . | $$ | . . X O X 5 . . X X X . . . . X O . . | $$ | . O O X X . . . X , X . . . O O X X . | $$ | . . X O . . . . X X X . . . O X O . . | $$ | . . . O . X . . . . . . 2 3 . X X . . | $$ | . . . . O . . . . . . X O O X . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . X O O X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . X O O X . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . X X O O X . . . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . O O O X X . . O . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+
[go]$$Wc By this point, black is doomed. $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . O O X X X . . . . . . | $$ | . . X , . . . O X X O O . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . O X X O . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O X X O . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . O X X O . . . . . . X . . . . | $$ | . . O O . 4 1 . . . . . . O . X . . . | $$ | . . X O X 5 . . X X X . . . . X O . . | $$ | . O O X X . . . X , X . . . O O X X . | $$ | . . X O . . . . X X X . . . O X O . . | $$ | . . . O . X . . . . . . 2 3 . X X . . | $$ | . . . . O . . . . . . X O O X . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . X O O X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . X O O X . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . X X O O X . . . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . O O O X X . . O . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]
$$Wc The end position $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . O O X X X . . . . . . | $$ | . . X , . . . O X X O O . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . O X X O . O X . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O X X O . X O O X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . O X X O . . . X O O X . . . . | $$ | . . O O X X O . . . . . X O O X . . . | $$ | . . X O X O . . X X X . . X O X O . . | $$ | . O O X X O . . X , X . . X O O X X . | $$ | . . X O X O . . X X X . . X O X O . . | $$ | . . . O X X O . . . . . X O O X X . . | $$ | . . . . O X X O . . . X O O X . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O X X O . X O O X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . O X . X O O X . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . 1 X X O O X . . . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . O O O X X . . O . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+
[go]$$Wc The end position $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . O O X X X . . . . . . | $$ | . . X , . . . O X X O O . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . O X X O . O X . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O X X O . X O O X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . O X X O . . . X O O X . . . . | $$ | . . O O X X O . . . . . X O O X . . . | $$ | . . X O X O . . X X X . . X O X O . . | $$ | . O O X X O . . X , X . . X O O X X . | $$ | . . X O X O . . X X X . . X O X O . . | $$ | . . . O X X O . . . . . X O O X X . . | $$ | . . . . O X X O . . . X O O X . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O X X O . X O O X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . O X . X O O X . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . 1 X X O O X . . . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . O O O X X . . O . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]
I tried to carefully set up the configurations at the ends of the ladders so that once the ladders get started, even if Black deviates such as by playing out the ladder faster on one side than the other, White can ensure both that his or her own stones escape and that Black's stones are captured (I think).
Specifically, until White's stones manage to link up to L16 (so that capturing Black's stones also gains liberties for White's own stones), White's strategy is to run from the right ladder if in atari, otherwise capture Black's stones if Black failed to run on the left, otherwise play the next atari if Black did run on the left.
In practice, if Black is willing to deviate at a good moment, setting either of these things up is not easy and probably takes careful planning to make sure Black's deviation isn't too damaging. Especially if White hasn't prepared what to do ahead of time.
Re: Non standard 9 or 10 stones handicap placement
Posted: Thu May 22, 2014 8:17 am
by shapenaji
lightvector wrote:I tried to carefully set up the configurations at the ends of the ladders so that once the ladders get started, even if Black deviates such as by playing out the ladder faster on one side than the other, White can ensure both that his or her own stones escape and that Black's stones are captured (I think).
Specifically, until White's stones manage to link up to L16 (so that capturing Black's stones also gains liberties for White's own stones), White's strategy is to run from the right ladder if in atari, otherwise capture Black's stones if Black failed to run on the left, otherwise play the next atari if Black did run on the left.[/hide]
In practice, if Black is willing to deviate at a good moment, setting either of these things up is not easy and probably takes careful planning to make sure Black's deviation isn't too damaging. Especially if White hasn't prepared what to do ahead of time.
That's a beautiful demo, not just because it illustrates the concept well, but also because all of the initial positions look perfectly reasonable.
Thanks for this! I hadn't thought about using superko either.
Re: Non standard 9 or 10 stones handicap placement
Posted: Thu May 22, 2014 1:39 pm
by illluck
@Lightvector: I have shamelessly used your diagram on Baidu Tieba, on which a similar position came up
I seem to remember a pro saying that this is quite a lot harder to play against than the traditional placement stones, but that it was missing the point: High handicap games are typically learning/teaching games, not winning games, and that this placement defeats the purpose of a handicap game.
Re: Non standard 9 or 10 stones handicap placement
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 6:17 am
by Mike Novack
topazg wrote:
I seem to remember a pro saying that this is quite a lot harder to play against than the traditional placement stones, but that it was missing the point: High handicap games are typically learning/teaching games, not winning games, and that this placement defeats the purpose of a handicap game.
We could be even more precise in the sense of that. The traditional placement doesn't give a handicap in terms of defined territory in addition to influence. It is influence only and there is a reason for that (in terms of learning). Instead of this alternative arrangement if more than the effect of a standard nine stone handicap, adding some reverse komi would be a better way of giving some territory (in effect).
Re: Non standard 9 or 10 stones handicap placement
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 6:21 am
by drmwc
I somtimes play Go against CrazyStone on my tablet when I commute in. On a 19x19 board, I give it 4 stones since this generally results in me winning about 80% of the time. (I prefer winning against bots, but like to give them a fighting chance).
I've taken to playing a Great Wall strategy as white. It's surprisingly effective - over a sample of around 10 games, my winning record has jumped up to 100%.
I reckon white's already caught up half a stone here.
Re: Non standard 9 or 10 stones handicap placement
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 7:07 am
by skydyr
drmwc wrote:I somtimes play Go against CrazyStone on my tablet when I commute in. On a 19x19 board, I give it 4 stones since this generally results in me winning about 80% of the time. (I prefer winning against bots, but like to give them a fighting chance).
I've taken to playing a Great Wall strategy as white. It's surprisingly effective - over a sample of around 10 games, my winning record has jumped up to 100%.
(and black seems to pass several times)...