ah, sorry to respond to my own post, but of course if the game is close, the threat doesn't even need to be of value > X, if it is large enough to threaten to win the game, which can happen in near-endgame situations.
the idea is that you start a ko for something that your opponent is absolutely unwilling to give up (because it would lose the game), and for which you have no expectation of being able to win that fight, you can still either get small compensation (by making an unanswered tiny threat) or big compensation (by making a threat that if unanswered would lose the game). so simply having these threats lying around in the bank can be quite profitable if they're used correctly. games are sometimes resigned as soon as one player realizes that he doesn't have enough ko threats to win a ko fight, if it's for enough points. but as you mentioned earlier, sometimes MC players abandon the fight because something else looks more interesting. this is fairly rare behavior in human games, which is why i noticed it of these (MC) players. s. On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 12:37 PM, steve uurtamo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > the general idea is that if the ko represents something of value X, > then making threats of value > X will force your opponent to answer, > and if he does not have as many threats of value > X as you do, then > you can eventually win the ko fight (by filling the ko) and gain X-(value of > sente) points, or have a threat unanswered and gain (> X - X) points, > along with > possibly taking sente (which could be worth something near to X, but is > probably smaller). > > this is really relevant when X is large, or when there are multiple kos on > the board of varying values. > > important kos are often at a critical connection point for one or both > players, or at a critical eyespace (such as in the corner or along the edge) > > strong players can crush weaker players simply by starting kos in > important places because they know that they can win the ko or gain > points in compensation for starting a ko, since ko fights are generally > very hard for weaker players, who usually misjudge the value of ko > threats, remove ko threats early in the game for no good reason, or > have difficulty finding (or creating a sequence of!) reasonably-valued > ko threats. > > s. > > > > On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 8:49 AM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > steve uurtamo wrote: > > >> So I don't think > > >> sophisticated ko fights are resolved but I not strong enough to really > > >> quantify this. > > >> > > > > > > It's very often the case that games between, say, two 7d players on KGS > > > will come down, in large part, to one or two or three ko fights and > their > > > resolution. or even the threat of a ko fight if one player is weak > enough. i'm > > > not sure that even the strongest amateurs count all of their ko threats > > > correctly ahead of playing them (the game is quite dynamic, after all) > but > > > this is way, way deeper water than i tread in, so i don't have any real > idea. > > > > > > i just wonder if anyone has tried to beat these programs by initiating a > > > complicated but critical ko fight. i'd think it'd be a can't-lose if > you chose > > > it correctly. i wonder if it's a repeatable way to beat these guys, or > if the > > > depth is handled just fine. > > > > > > the thing that got me thinking about this is that i've never seen an MC > > > player really play out a ko fight. (or perhaps they are in their own > cryptic > > > MC way that i can't see). > > > > > Perhaps I don't know what I'm talking about here, but is it possible > > that most ko fights can be avoided? Perhaps ko fights introduce too > > much uncertainty and they look for a more simple way to proceed? > > I've seen lot's of positions where there is a ko back and forth 2 or 3 > > times and the computer used every other turn to do something > > constructive in some particular area - then when it stopped fighting it > > stayed interested in that other area. I don't really know if what I > > saw meant anything - it involved only 1 ko point. Is that still > > considered a ko fight? It "seemed" to me to know what it was doing, > > picking (what seemed to me) just the right moment to abandon the ko. > > > > - Don > > > > > > > > > s. > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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/
