djhbrown wrote:
i remember reading that Japanese pros had done some tests to figure out the value of handicap stones, by playing games against each other at various handicaps, and concluded that, on average, each handicap stone was worth about 10 points.
Japanese pros (and top players before there were pros in the modern sense) used to give handicaps to other pros. The estimate of 10 pts. per handicap stone comes from those times. It was a rough and ready estimate. That is why Japanese komi started out at 4.5 pts. in the mid-20th century.
Quote:
this does not quite gel with the other common pro wisdom that during the fuseki, sente is worth about 30 points.
You seem to be the only person who knows that pro wisdom.

Even at the start of play, the value of sente is only around 7 pts. Or if you mean the value of one player having sente vs. the other player having sente, it is around 14 pts. Nobody thinks that it is even close to 30 pts.
Quote:
one would expect that lesser players would play less efficiently, making their average value of sente less than that.
Good point. A good komi for DDKs might be 3.5.
Quote:
the common practice about the value of komi has moved up from 5.5 to 7.5 points over the last 40 years.
I don't know exactly when Ing adopted a komi of 7.5 for his rules, which use area scoring, but it was by the early 1980s. 40 years ago some Japanese tournaments used a komi of 4.5, some used a komi of 5.5 (nominally 5 pts. with White winning jigo). It took them a long time to adopt a komi of 6.5.
Quote:
but i bet no-one has ever done a proper statistical survey of actual game results to determine what komi really should be. part of the difficulty of such a survey is that in actual play, the one behind will generally tend to make riskier plays, making the score difference an unreliable estimator.
Ing was no dummy. I expect that he adopted the 7.5 komi on the basis of statistics.
Good point about the value of the komi affecting the play.

40 years ago someone (sorry, I don't recall his name) submitted an article to the American Go Journal based upon his statistical analysis of 2800 Japanese professional games. He concluded that the proper komi is 7.

Terry Benson asked me to review the article before publication, and I made the same point you did about komi affecting the play. Terry included it in a footnote to the article. Terry also sent me the guy's data, which the Nihon Kiin had collected. There were 1400 games with a komi of 4.5 and 1400 games with a komi of 5.5. I analyzed the two sets of games separately. The median board result of the games with komi of 5.5 lay between 6 and 7, as expected from the article. To my surprise the same was true of the games with a 4.5 komi. Obviously, the komi difference had not affected the results very much.
Quote:
so the most convincing evidence comes from the pro-pro handicap games, ie that a stone is worth about 10 points.
The 10 point value did not come from analyzing pro-pro handicap games, and when I looked at them, I got a value of 13.75 pts. The American Go Journal article buttressed my prediction that the Japanese would adopt a 6.5 komi by the year 2000. (It took them a little longer.

)
Quote:
i don't think i'm confusing it with the oft-quoted proverb about the value of ponnuki, which i think is a more recent amateur colloquialism rather than expert opinion, since it depends hugely on what's around it.
Sorry, the saying that ponnuki is worth 30 pts. comes from the same era as the estimate of 10 pts. per handicap stone. The 30 pt. value was adopted by pros, and everyone understood that it referred to the value on a relatively open region of the board. It seems to me that it holds up surprisingly well, as a rough estimate. Unlike the proverb about the tortoise shell shape being worth 60 pts. (It is the result of capturing 2 stones instead of 1 for the ponnuki.) That shape is worth only about 40 pts., roughly. (FWIW, the estimates of 30 pts. and 40 pts. are equal to 10 pts. times the difference between the number of stones played locally, 4 - 1 for the ponnuki, 6 - 2 for the tortoise shell.

)
Quote:
i also remember reading that during late yose, when precise counting is possible, one heuristic way of estimating the relative value of a sente move vs a gote one is to double the sente gain; same for reverse sente. so does that make double sente worth double again?
Good guess, but no. Ogawa and Davies pointed out back in the 1970s that the theoretical value of double sente involves division by 0. (I suppose that people multiply the value of sente by 2 rather than divide the value of gote by 2 because multiplication is easier than division. The division of gote by 2 is theoretically correct to get the average value per move, which means that for double sente you divide by 0.)