Re: computer-go: Most simple Go rules

[Don Dailey <drd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

   On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 06:44:36PM +0100, Nick Wedd wrote:
   > Though this raises another question.  What if the rules forbid suicide,
   > but one player makes a suicide move, and the other accepts it?  My view
   > is, let them play on.

   I once learned that in human quick chess, you did not loose when your time
   expired, you lost when your opponent pointed it out to you!

That is correct in tournament chess too, not just quick chess.   

   In general, does something illegal forfeit the game on its own, when the
   opposing program notices it, when the programmer notices it, or when the
   tournament director is made aware of it?

   If your program makes an illegal suicide, and I accept it, it can be said to
   be fair enough to let them continue. If it plays on an occupied point, it is
   a bit harder to argue. If it runs out of time, I don't know. If I see the
   operator typing in good advice, I can call foul, but I would not expect my
   program to be able to see the difference.

What if your  program makes another  kind of illegal move, like moving
on top of  an existing stone?   Do you allow  it?  An  illegal move is
wrong  and  probably  shouldn't  be allowed,   or  you  are  playing a
different game than the one you intended.


   In big important tournaments this sort of things will have to be specified
   in advance (and more borderline cases added almost every year...)  For small
   "unimportant" tournaments, common sense can get you far (although it is not
   nearly as common as its name implies...)

   If one person is sponsoring the whole tournament, he can probably specify
   what ever rules he wants. But in the long run it would be an advantage to
   have a commonly accepted rule set, so that we don't have to modify our
   programs specially for each tournament.


   Just my $0.02 worth,


That's totally logical!   We should do just this!!!!!    Nah!!!

Don