On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 10:49 +0100, Jacques Basaldúa wrote: > Don Dailey wrote (about big/small wins) > > > It actually surprises me that go players care about this ... > > One difference with chess is that you don't play chess after > the game is over. The comparison could be: the king is > captured, the loser keeps playing and then the winner > gives the queen for nothing. Bad moves hurt! And we get to > the really important part of a any program: The user.
Many people DO play chess after the game is over. They continue to play a game long after they could have resigned. The only difference is that GO is easier. You can easily lose a dead won game in chess but in GO there is point where it is played out and it's very hard to lose unless you are doing it on purpose. > Many users feel stolen by UCT programs. I have read that > in the KGS chatrooms. Normal users do not count with > +/- 0.5 point precision. They have the impression the > program blundered and they caught up. This is human nature and ego. I have seen it many times in computer chess - every loss to a computer it seems was some kind of "irregularity" in the minds of the loser. > But when the > program counts, surprise!, it wins by 0.5 points Chinese. > The users were thinking Japanese even if they accepted > Chinese rules. In fact, they did not have the choice. > They get the impression the game was stolen by > "technicalities" after they saw the engine blunder many > times. How does Japanese make any difference? I would think that a Japanese rule player would appreciate UCT style of play more than Chinese players? My impression of go players has changed a little as a result of this discussion. There has always been this idea (usually when Japanese/Chinese rules comes up) that it's more about the hidden truths, not playing out the game to get the score. But it seems it's not that at all, even for strong players if they think it's odd to protect the win more than try to win big. I think this may be an ego thing too. It's probably humiliating to win by 1 point against a much weaker player, even if you have the win in the bag very early on. > Of course, I know there is a good reason for how UCT > works. And improving style is much less important than > improving strength. But many players don't want to adapt > to "computer settings". They want computers to win the > game as they have always played it. They may want this, but it's a bit selfish. After all, does anyone force THEM to change their playing style to suit someone else? I know how human nature works. I don't know GO culture, but I know chess culture and there are many people in chess who are immersed in the cultural trappings of chess, not so much the game although they like to pretend. They get real annoyed if you don't play their kind of game. It's more a cooperative dance than a battle for them. Ever play tennis recreationally? Same thing but worse. Many players will not play a game of tennis with you if you don't play in a way that is "comfortable" for them. They want to play someone that will always hit to their strong side with comfortable knee level strokes. To make a long story short they want to play someone who makes their own game look pretty. They want you to cooperate with them (even if they lose they want it to be their kind of game.) If I'm playing them and I happen to be the better player, I usually just cooperate with them to make them feel like they are playing the game the way it's "supposed" to be played. - Don > Jacques. > > _______________________________________________ > 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/
