Right, a traditional "one stone handicap" is only half a stone advantage, and a "two stone handicap" is only 1.5 stones. So if a 4.0 dan plays against a 2.0 dan (in say KGS, you can see fractional rating on the graph) in a 2 stone game the 4 dan has a better chance of winning, it's not actually a fair game (maybe 55% or so?). I believe the KGS rating algorithm takes this into account: if this 4.0d and 2.0d played many games and the wins were 50:50 the 2d's rating would go up and the 4d's down.

As has been indicated, stronger players are better able to make use of handicap stones than weaker players. Uberdude vs. Uberdude should probably get around 120 points komi for giving 9 stones. For 10 kyu vs. 10 kyu, who knows? My guess is to start with 70 points and then adjust the komi up or down by 4 points per game, depending on who won or lost, until you get a better idea of the right komi.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

I was absolutely out of context here, I apologize.

Not sure I understand your what you're getting at.. I wasn't complaining about the OP, if that's what you think! My last reply was w.r.t. EdLee's hidden, maybe that was confusing

If I am asked a question, it is up to me to decide how best to answer it. If in my opinion, the question has a false premise, I see nothing wrong with disregarding the intent of the question until the premise has been cleared up. In this case, the question was based on the premise that in a 9 handicap game, it is possible to determine a generally valid number for the value of komi. My impression is that you consider the premise unproblematic, whereas EdLee considers it to be an essential misconception. Just because other people agree with you (and not everyone does - Bill Spight for example also pointed out that the value can differ depending on the strength of the players) does not mean that other interpretations of the question are not valid. It seems that you consider EdLee's suggestion to have been impractical and thus not helpful, and yet Dr. Straw mentioned the use of a kadoban in earlier times to determine the strength difference between individuals. As much as you may prefer a straight answer to a roundabout one, the intent of the OP is not the only deciding factor as to which is best.

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

Ok, so there is a question whether the concept of komi in 9 handicap game is is valid. Yes, to me this is obvious (or at least: as obvious as the same question about komi in a normal game of Go) --- fair komi is a property of the game, not of the players.

The other thing: I think that EdLee has a general tendency to give "mysterious" answers to various questions --- not only in this thread, but generally. By "mysterious" I mean answers that amount to tautologies, or something like "this question cannot be answered, because Go is so complicated", or this expanding an original question into many many new subquestions (like in that hidden post). Not all the time of course, but not very seldom either, and I decided to "call him out" on this habit a little bit. In retrospect, this seems like a very bad idea, since it appears I came across as attacking him. I'm sorry for that and it was not my intention.

Sennahoj, you end our text with this:
But right in the beginning of that same paragraph you are doing it again, in my perception:
TBH, to me this looks like intentionally slapping somebody in the face and then saying “oh, it appears that I came across as hitting you, I’m sorry.”

Reminds me of that religious leader who once insulted the followership of another religion. Later he said “I am sorry that I was misinterpreted”, which most media—idiotically, but actually biased—interpreted as an apology while with that comment he had actually expressed how stupid he thought his audience was for “misinterpreting” him.

_________________
“The only difference between me and a madman is that I’m not mad.” — Salvador Dali ★ Play a slooooow correspondence game with me on OGS?

I personally don't see it that way. I think Sennahoj is just saying what it is about some of Ed's posts that raises his hackles.

I think you are wrong. I think Ed's tendency is to reject questions that request shortcuts, and instead point to the necessity of examining specifics, which he does time and time again in the countless game reviews and answers to specific questions that he offers (rather helpful, I might add).


Not just if it is valid, but rather if a single number is adequate. While on the one hand, regarding komi in an even game, we all seem to accept that what is good enough for the pros is good enough for us - but when have we seen a pro play a 9 handicap game? Would every pro choose the same value? Would it not depend on their estimation of their opponent? What about amateurs - can't stronger players use handicap stones better than weaker players, and shouldn't this affect komi? BTW, I ask these questions neither to avoid doing the work nor to appear wise, but rather to point out that I see your answer as inadequate. You may be right that this is not a discussion that the OP was looking for (appears not) but also does not appear to be one that everyone else finds uninteresting.

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

Yeah, that is how it looked. Ed is a long-time contributor to this board. Why would you feel the need to call him out at all? I don't think you can really expect the rest of the world to adjust to your behavioral desires.

_________________
- Brady
Want to see videos of low-dan mistakes and what to learn from them? Brady's Blunders

I think there is some confusion that comes from "overloading" the term komi a little bit, so let me try to clear this up.

By komi (K) I mean: the number of points given to white which gives a tie in a perfectly played game. This is a single integer number, and it is well defined because the game tree is finite (so perfect play exists). It is equally well defined for Go with or without any extra handicap stones.

Then there is another sense in which one could use "komi" --- what number K_AB should players A and B use in their game to give ~50% win rates, given that A and B have the same rank? The number K_AB can of course vary around K, because A and B can have the same rank (i.e. same average win rate against some other population of players), while at the same time A struggles when playing with B. Like Bill and Uberdude said, that variance will likely be larger for weaker players. Asking for the size of K_AB is like asking "what hadicap should A and B play with?" (because using any K_AB different from K is a de facto handicap), and of course here one must use trial and error.

Don't know exactly why, "it annoyed me" is I guess the most honest answer I can give. It was stupid though, and I will work harder to suppress similar impulses in future. However, just because I give an opinion about something certainly does not mean that I "expect the world to adjust"!

Thanks, makes it easier to understand.

Respect!

I’m not sure, though, whether suppressing the impulse really is healthy … for myself, I find that it feels better for me if I analyze the impulse and its genesis … and for this it helps me very often, especially (but not only) when talking to the other involved person, if I change the wording, e.g. the active/passive, so that instead of saying, “it annoyed me”, “you hurt me”, etc., I wish to change on my internal processing of this by changing it to “I felt annoyed by it (and why exactly, what were my expectations, and how did I perceive “it”)”, or “I felt hurt by what you did/said (and why exactly, etc.)”, etc. I have found that this makes communication about conflict a LOT easier if I talk about myself in this way, about my feelings and perceptions (and perhaps putting them in perspective with my expectations), instead of talking about the other person, which, no matter how I try to keep it “neutral” or “objective” (which of course is impossible) will always contain a slight flavour of blame.

<edit> Also, by talking about me, my feelings, etc. and by changing the active/passive, I become an actor again, I can escape from the “victim game”. </edit>
<edit 2> And when I am not “the victim” anymore, I liberate the other one from feeling forced into the role of the perpetrator. </edit 2>

Of course it is easier for me to speak “wise words” than always to act accordingly, as can perhaps be seen a few comments above this and elsewhere

_________________
“The only difference between me and a madman is that I’m not mad.” — Salvador Dali ★ Play a slooooow correspondence game with me on OGS?