Re: [computer-go] citation

[Harry Wang <foreversoldier@xxxxxxxxx>]

> But  that wasn't your  point at  all, you  said
> John's  definition was
> INCORRECT.  
-----

yes, let me answer this briefly for now. yes, John's
definition is INCORRECT. ( with no disrespect to John
) I also mentioned it's a casual definition because
most casual definitions are created due to lack of
experience and thus incorrect. 


> For reference again, here is what  John said that
> seems pretty easy to
> understand by any reasonble interpretation, if not
> completely formal:
> 
>   Given a position on an arbitrarily-sized Go board,
>   and a white group with 2 liberties, can Black keep
>   putting white
>   in atari---that is, reduce white to 1
>   liberty---until capture?
>  

I agree that this definition is easy to understand.
However, this definition for ladder is simply WRONG
because it cover just some aspect of ladder formation
and many many other Go formations.

hope this helps. 

by the way, I enjoy the construction conversations
here. 

Once thing I have noticed too often is most people
overtrust difinitions given from Go instructional
books or published papers. But I have seen too many
error and misconceptions from such sources. 


-harry



		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/