[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: computer-go: Engineering (was: Most simple Go rules)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Nick Wedd
> Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2001 2:17 PM
> To: computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: computer-go: Engineering (was: Most simple Go rules)
>
>
> In message <000001c1015a$f7369b40$093ba8c0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Mark Boon
> <tesuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
>
> >As far as I'm concerned, Go is a game where the first player who
> can't place
> >a stone on the board anymore loses. Added of course the usual rules about
> >capture and repetition. Most of the existing rule-sets are
> trying to end the
> >game more quickly by introducing the concept of territory and counting it
> >instead of playing it out. Somewhere in history this concept of territory
> >has become so dominant that it was 'forgotten' that each group actually
> >needs two eyes and that two points should be subtracted for each group on
> >the board. Everyone accepted this "bending" of the original
> rules pure and
> >simply because they prefered to have a quicker way of ending the game.
>
> The game where the first player who can't place a stone loses, and the
> game with the two-stone group tax, are different.
>
> . . O X . Five-by-five board
> . . O X . No prisoners
> O O O X X X to play
> . O X X .
> O O X . X
>
> With a two-stone group tax, O wins. With first-who-can't-play loses, X
> wins.
>
I always thought that the game where you try to put as many stones on the
board as possible to be equivalent to being able to move as long as
possible. This turns out to be not so. It took me a minute to figure out
that X can indeed win by playing 5-1 (or 5-2) and after that play in white's
territory. Extending this principle further the games are quite different
indeed.
Is the game where you try to put as many stones as possible equivalent to
the "two-stone group tax" game, or is there a counter example for that as
well?