Let's not confuse japanese counting with Japanese rules. It is quite
feasible with Chinese rules and the use of pass stones to end up doing
territory counting over the board which is equivalent to area scoring,
On 1/1/07, steve uurtamo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
one early habit that is good for new go players to learn is
to always fill dame. sometimes groups get ataried this way
that the newer player wouldn't have noticed. it can result
in massive point loss if you're not careful about it, and it's
a good teaching tool (from the japanese rules point of view)
about being careful at the end of the game. under chinese
rules, you also do this because it's worth points to you.
bent-four, triple ko, seki 'points', etc., are all things that have
to be dealt with by any scoring ruleset, but are things that you
would be foolish to try to explain to someone during their first
game. it would only complicate what is otherwise a very simple
set of rules unnecessarily, and when such situations arise, the
exceptional cases can be pointed out and explained (or the
curious player will read about them elsewhere).
i think that the fun of go is in the playing, and not the scoring,
and that anyone who has played more than two games can
tell (however late in the process) that they're getting destroyed
(and thus that scoring is unnecessary) or that it's close (and
thus that scoring is necessary).
one thing to keep in mind about japanese scoring is that after
you've done it ten or so times, there are a number of counting
shortcuts that you can force onto the board after the game is finished
that can make it incredibly efficient to determine the difference in
score.
my guess is that many chinese players who haven't seen this would
be horrified to see these happen on their board, because they are
based upon assumptions implicit in the japanese system of counting.
after you've counted a few 19x19 boards the naive way, this is much
easier to appreciate.
the only place i've seen japanese rules cause confusion with players
is in LD situations where one player thinks that a group is dead
and the other doesn't. the practical reality is that if one of the two
is a much stronger player, then they can patiently explain on the board
what the situation is, with playout or otherwise. if, on the other hand,
the
two are of equivalent and of low strength, playing it out to prove the
case one way or the other is more important as a learning tool than the
actual and exact score of the game. in point of fact, weak players often
beat each other by huge margins where counting may be amusing for
the winner, but entirely unnecessary.
(here i am assuming that strong players don't generally disagree about
status, or if they do, can agree upon an effective measure for determining
status and don't mind the need to. [since one player generally thinks
that the other is a fool for not seeing what is 'obviously dead', they are
often more than happy to attempt to prove it.]).
all that being said, simply for end-of-game counting over the board,
japanese rules get my vote.
s.
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
___
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/
