On 7/12/07, Nick Wedd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jason House <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >On 7/12/07, chrilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why is it not possible to establish uniform rules in Go? > >I'm curious... How does the rule sets affect how people play the game >of go? Kyu players, using full boards, aren't really affected. Kyu players can't count a full board with perfect accuracy, so they just play out the yose and then count to find what the result was. Kyu players on 9x9 boards can be affected. I recently lost a 9x9 game by half a point, playing a line that would have guaranteed a half-point victory except that I was mistaken about the ruleset.
I've seen analysis of "perfect" 7x7 play that shows how some moves are ideal under one ruleset rather than another. I'm a kyu player (3k) and I know that I never even consider the ruleset and how counting would be different. My yose plays don't take scoring differences into account. What rank are you? Do you have a link to the game? Strong players are certainly affected. At a London Open Go Tournament a
few years ago, a Chinese 5-dan was disappointed to lose by half a point a game which she would have won using Chinese rules.
The key question is really if the game would have been played differently knowing the ruleset.
I personally find territory scoring more interesting. 90% of >my reason for that is because the game ends sooner... I don't have to >go filling dame (open spaces between chains of opposing colors). The Japanese rules in fact require the players to fill the dame. Though very few people take any notice ... Nick >Another nice bonus to territory scoring is that avoiding point loss in >end game forces me to have confidence in the stability of a position as >the outer dame are filled. A little bit like gambling 30 points to >save one. > >Besides that stuff, I really play the game the same way for either rule >set. It's only once I reach the bitter end of the endgame that I might >play differently. Mostly, I'd fill dame instead of passing. I'd also >be more ok with putting an extra stone to protect an internal group >weakness that I think probably won't be a problem. -- Nick Wedd [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ 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/
