[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: computer-go: perfect play



>
> I was at the Go Congress two years ago when Martin Mueller beat
> ManyFaces at a high handicap (27 stones? 29 stones? I forget..) and I
> proposed something like this at that time, to illustrate how
> remarkable it is to lose at such a high handicap.
>
>      A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
>   19 . . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . 19
>   18 . . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . 18
>   17 . . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . 17
>   16 . . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . 16
>   15 . . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . 15
>   14 . . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . 14
>   13 . . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . 13
>   12 . . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . 12
>   11 . . . . . . . . # . # . . . . . . . . 11
>   10 . . . . . . . . # # # . . . . . . . . 10
>    9 . . . . . . . . # . # . . . . . . . . 9
>    8 . . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . 8
>    7 . . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . 7
>    6 . . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . 6
>    5 . . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . 5
>    4 . . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . 4
>    3 . . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . 3
>    2 . . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . 2
>    1 . . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . . . . 1
>      A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
>
> (This has 23 stones, and I think what I proposed at the time had 25, with
> extra stones at J8 and L12.)
>
> Now if Black plays mirror go, with every move on one side reflected
> across the line of stones (so e.g. H2 is answered with M2) then Black
> should win by at least two points.
>
This is very clever, but I'm not completely convinced.  White can place a
group against the black wall, and then induce black to capture it.  White
can then confound black's strategy by playing inside the area that the
captured group was removed from.

Tom.