Hello all, thank you all for all your precise comments. It becomes pretty complicated and technical for me, I'll try to find out everything :).
Bye, Sylvain 2007/6/15, Łukasz Lew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
This is my analysis. It may be flawed but I hope it has some value. It would be very interesting to see what mogo "thinks" on those variations. Best Regards, Lukasz On 6/14/07, Sylvain Gelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello Sanghyeon, thank you for your comments. > > > > After white (mogo) H2, MoGo was estimating 74%, and expecting: > > > H2 G1 H3 B1 A1 B3 H1 F8 B5 H4 > > This is far too optimistic. Why would black play H2? :-) > Sorry, white played H2. The sequence I gave starts with white move :). > Black was expecting to play G1 :). > > > > Black played H3, and estimation increased to 81%, white B3 and expecting: > > > B3 B1 A1 B4 C5 C4 A3 C6 B6 B5 > > After B3 B1 A1, black G1 and then B1 F1 D1 B4 and white is dead. > Ok thanks. So good white actually played G1 instead of A1 after black B1 then. > > > > > Actually during pondering MoGo realized that it was lost then, because > > > black played the expected move (B1), but the estimation was then < > > > 50%. > > MoGo realized too. Actually G1 is an interesting move. After white 48, > > all groups on the board is alive and white actually wins by my counting. > > So I think that white 50 is a losing move. > > Oh, so contrary to what I believed, you say (if I understand you > correctly) that the mistake was done in the upper left group and not > in the bottom center group? > > > Thank you, > Sylvain > _______________________________________________ > 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/
