[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [computer-go] Super Ko on KGS ignores player to move
I have tried to construct a sequence of moves involving a same board
configuration but different players initiative, and I don't know that
one would ever
exist with two players trying to win, as it involves a ko where two stones are
captured in the sequence in the corner.
white to move 1,1
black to move
+bbwwwwwww <----captured white
white to move
w++wwwwwww <-----captured two black stones
black to move <-------same board configuration different initiative
On 8/15/05, John Tromp <John.Tromp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Mark wrote:
> > The question is: repetition of what. Obviously repetition of something
> > you consider the 'state' of the game. PSK considers the state of the
> > game to be the position of the stones. Don argues you might as well
> > include the color to move as it's a rather vital piece of information.
> Vital for the outcome of continued play, yes.
> But as to avoiding repetitive play, it's pretty much redundant,
> as the negligable difference of PSK vs SSK in practice shows.
> The reason TT rules got to be as concise as they are, is by eschewing
> redundancy (as much as possible while preserving the feel of the game,
> which e.g. stone scoring would not) and reducing the rules to their
> essence. PSK is the natural choice in this light.
> computer-go mailing list
computer-go mailing list