I'm glad you bring it up. >From the same site, it appears there is no standard way of handling this. I will look to see what Tromp/Taylor says if anything.
It would be nice if we could simple equate handicap with ELO points, I think it would be more accurate. We may find that 1 stone per kyu doesn't hold up forever. Then we just use ELO (converting in a straightforward way to kyu if we want this) and have a formula (or table) for compensating ELO. For instance we may determine that 400 ELO can be compensated by 4 stones and this effectively changes the ELO calculation. This seems more mathematically logical to me. Perhaps the server itself can converge on the right formula. - Don On Fri, 2006-12-22 at 21:46 +0100, Christian Nilsson wrote: > Yes, in chinese rules you need to compensate white for the extra area > you gain from the actual stones. The handicap is only meant to be the > extra strength/stability. > > One can of course ignore this for the server. I just wanted to make > sure all programs use the same rules. I don't know what the > tromp-taylor rules says about it. > > On 12/22/06, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm trying to figure this out. If you get a 9 stone handicap, you have > > to give back those 9 stones? So a 9 stone handicap is not quite as > > much > > as it seems although it's still pretty good. > > > > - Don > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 2006-12-22 at 21:24 +0100, Christian Nilsson wrote: > > > There's also the small issue of the compensation given to white > > > because of the extra black stones on the board. Setting a modified > > > komi would break (MC-)programs with an internal rule for it. Not > > > setting it would break those who does not use that rule. > > > > > > How is this compensation handled by the various programs on cgos, if at > > > all? > > > > > > Check http://www.britgo.org/rules/compare.html#comp if you don't know > > > what I'm talking about.. > > > > > > //Christian > > > > > > > > > On 12/22/06, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Ok, > > > > > > > > Well I'm inclined to go with the majority which seems to have turned > > > > around > > > > from the last time I polled. > > > > > > > > Now the question: How to set it up? > > > > > > > > Here are the options: > > > > > > > > 1. Use GTP handicap commands to set up game. > > > > > > > > 2. Send the appropriate pass commands to get the initial setup > > > > to accommodate programs that have not implemented handicap. > > > > > > > > 3. Do both - send handicap to programs that can handle it, otherwise > > > > guide them through it by sending play commands with passes. > > > > > > > > In any case, I would make the game records (SGF) look correct, doing > > > > whatever > > > > that takes. > > > > > > > > - Don > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 2006-12-22 at 20:48 +0100, Magnus Persson wrote: > > > > > Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > > > > > > > > > > on 9x9 boards. To make a long story short, I didn't see any evidence > > > > > > that this algorithm is fundamentally disadvantaged in handicap > > > > > > games. > > > > > > In fact, I agree with Remi's view that it is particularly *well* > > > > > > suited to handicap games compared to territory based algorithms. > > > > > > When > > > > > > it finds itself behind, it goes for the swindle. Against an equal > > > > > > opponent, that's obnoxious and futile. Against a weaker foe, it's > > > > > > wise. > > > > > > > > > > I have to add to this. My opinion about Valkyrias play as white with > > > > > handicap on > > > > > 9x9 is that it plays excellent handicap go (given its strength at > > > > > even). In my > > > > > view I do not have to change anything. But this is of course just my > > > > > impression. > > > > > > > > > > It is true that MC-programs plays randomly in the end of the game but > > > > > in the > > > > > opening the handicap stones are just a burden and does not really > > > > > make it play > > > > > random. > > > > > > > > > > -Magnus > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > computer-go mailing list > > > > > computer-go@computer-go.org > > > > > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > computer-go mailing list > > > > computer-go@computer-go.org > > > > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > computer-go mailing list > > > computer-go@computer-go.org > > > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > computer-go mailing list > > computer-go@computer-go.org > > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ > > > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
