In [ext]The Theory & Practice of Go, Korschelt describes an
experimental 21x21 goban that he constructed and turned over to his
Master, Murase Shuho, for testing.
Anyone who wants to try this can play email-style games on
dragongoserver.net -- up to 25X25.
Forrest Curo
_
On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 23:15 -0700, terry mcintyre wrote:
> Humans don't have much experience with 9x9 go. In such tight confines,
> there is a premium for precise reading; there is little margin for
> error. It is much harder to escape, and harder to trade territory for
> influence. There is also,
On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 22:24 -0700, David Fotland wrote:
> > I cannot believe 9x9 is harder than 19x19 and
> > I don't care how strong the player is who says that - I don't
> > believe it.
> >
> > - Don
>
> I don't believe it either :) Sorry for the misunderstanding. I was making
> a statement
>> No, humans are much weaker on 9x9 than on 19x19.
> With all due respect, that's absurd. If that were true, then all
> we would have to do is move to smaller boards if 19x19 were not
> challenging enough.
You've almost gotten it right. In fact, 9x9 go is used to teach people
the rules of the
There are multiple possible definitions of what it means for a player
to be the same strength on two different sized boards. It is impossible
to pit a 9x9 player against a 19x19 player. If two people
use different definitions of 'same strength', they are bound to disagree
about which size people
Humans don't have much experience with 9x9 go. In such tight confines, there is
a premium for precise reading; there is little margin for error. It is much
harder to escape, and harder to trade territory for influence. There is also,
as Dave Fotland observed, little established literature on the
> I cannot believe 9x9 is harder than 19x19 and
> I don't care how strong the player is who says that - I don't
> believe it.
>
> - Don
I don't believe it either :) Sorry for the misunderstanding. I was making
a statement about how strong people are at a pair of games, not a statement
about wh
2007/4/12, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
9x9 is a good board size for computers. I'm not really sure if there
is anything special about 19x19 (why not 17x17 or 21x21?) perhaps
they thought 17x17 was too hard (if it's true that smaller boards
are harder for humans.)
To the question "why not
On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 17:29 -0700, David Fotland wrote:
> No, humans are much weaker on 9x9 than on 19x19.
David,
I saw this on Sensei's Library that indicates larger boards
are harder:
[ snip ]
In [ext]The Theory & Practice of Go, Korschelt describes an
experimental 21x21 goban that
that smaller boards
are harder for humans.)
- Don
> David
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 11:02 AM
> > To: computer-go
> > Sub
-Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey
> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 11:02 AM
> To: computer-go
> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Sylvain's results
>
>
> On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 17:49 +0100, Jacques Basal
lts.
Dave
- Oorspronkelijk bericht -
Van: Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Datum: woensdag, april 11, 2007 8:01 pm
Onderwerp: Re: [computer-go] Sylvain's results
> On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 17:49 +0100, Jacques Basaldúa wrote:
> > BTW. There is another stone in the way of 19
Sorry, you are right. I mixed up the legal moves and legalpositions.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: computer-go@computer-go.org
Sent: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 1:25 PM
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Sylvain's results
Are you sure the number of legal moves is proportional t
Are you sure the number of legal moves is proportional to the board area? It
seems going up much faster than that.
Daniel Liu
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: computer-go@computer-go.org
Sent: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 11:49 AM
Subject: [computer-go] Sylvain's results
> What I
On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 17:49 +0100, Jacques Basaldúa wrote:
> BTW. There is another stone in the way of 19x19 computer go.
> Knowledge.
> Humans play much stronger and do much stronger judgment than in 9x9.
I think you said this backwards from what you intended. Obviously,
humans are closer to pe
Hello Jacques,
2007/4/11, Jacques Basaldúa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
In terms of board size (i.o. board area) that is: boardsize^5
Yes. ^5 seems impressive, but as between 9 and 19 there is only a
factor 2, that seems reasonable :-).
As Sylvain verifies it is: bsize^5 > bsize^4 just as I predicte
16 matches
Mail list logo
