i was studying the Ikeda Area III rules http://gobase.org/studying/rules/ikeda/?sec=e_rules and am a bit puzzeled by rule 6:
Rule 6 End of the game: After the first pass, the game ends when both players pass in succession.



this seems to mean that the game ends with 2 or 3 passes.

Makes me wonder what is there against ending a game of go by 3 consecutive passes?

_________________
Promotor and Librarian of Sensei's Library

One of the earliest attempts to codify go rules, Yasunaga's Constitution, had a 3 pass rule. Ing has a 4 pass rule. My first rules ( http://senseis.xmp.net/?SpightRules ) had what was, in most cases, a 3 pass rule.

All of these rules allow a pass to lift a ko or superko ban. That does no good if you pass to lift the ban, and then your opponent can end the game by passing. Therefore, two consecutive passes cannot end the game.

Under Ikeda Area III rules the first pass is what we now call taking a button (See http://senseis.xmp.net/?ButtonGo ). That is why it is treated differently.

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

aga rules are quite interesting in this regard as well.
black only gets 1 pass to end the game, but white sometimes gets two. (she has to pass a second time whenever she passes first.)
combined with pass stones this can be disadvantagous. you may lose a piont just for not playing the last move.

Yes, but that's only if you then count the score using territory rules. Under area scoring it makes no difference. AGA rules are designed to make area scoring and territory scoring agree - and return the area score in both cases. And, in area scoring, black does better by one point than he would under territory scoring if black gets to make the final move.

AGA rules are fundamentally area scoring rules, even though you may not realise this when counting!

[Disclaimer: I've never actually played under AGA rules. But I'm 100% sure the above is correct, as I thought quite a bit, when I took up go last year, about the difference between area and territory scoring.]

As the father of the AGA pass stones, let me say that the reason that White make make a forced pass is because of pass stones. The two go together. (It's not a bug, it's a feature.)

The reason is simple. AGA uses area scoring, where each stone on the board counts as one point. White's final pass stone does not affect the score, because it is scored as one point for White. If it were not on the board, the empty point where it would be would also be scored as one point for White.

Requiring White to make the last pass and hand over a pass stone means that, when the score is counted, each player will have the same number of stones on the board. And that means that the net result will be the same if the players simply count territory instead of counting both territory and stones. AGA pass stones do not affect the score. They are merely a convenience for the players.

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

As Far As I know under the Ikeda Area III rules a pass does not lift a ko or superko ban.
I don't know what with http://senseis.xmp.net/?SpightRules happened but your rules aren't there anymore (only some discussion)

My intention of all this is (again) to make the best go rule set

My ideas at the moment are:

- they are for go bots so no encorne
- Area scoring
- simple

So i was thinking to do:

1 start with Ikeda Area III rules

2 add "all stones are alive" as end condition (no discussion on wwhich groups are alive)

3 Simplify rule 7:

3a replace rule 7 with a half point to the first player who passes
3b add 1/2 point to the komi

And then was my question became can rule 6 be simplified to just end any game by 3 passes?


(I haven't made a decision yet on what kind of superko rule yet, my preference is at the moment to go for situational superko)

_________________
Promotor and Librarian of Sensei's Library

Some thoughts:

I believe that a pass should be treated just as that: a move that does not place a stone on the board. I do not think that it is proper to infer a binding meaning "I want to end the game now" to that.

In order to end the game, the players should agree that it is finished. Just after a pass is a convenient time for the player whose move it is to initiate such an agreement.

A pass should not alter any ko status. When a move does not modify the board, it cannot lift a ko ban (I think that is obvious, but that may just be me).

_________________
A good system naturally covers all corner cases without further effort.

I agree with the underlying point, Harleqin, but let's imagine all ko threats have been played, and there are no dame. If it's B to play and the only point of interest left on the board is an approach ko that's favorable to B, what should happen? My instinct is that B passes, W plays the approach move, B takes the ko, W has no move, B fills in the ko. But is there any elegant way to force that outcome other than to let passes lift a ko ban? Otherwise W could just keep passing, and B would never be able to take the ko without playing in his own territory first.

That makes the rule equivalent to Button Go where a player gains 1/2 point by taking the button. Taking the button is a simple gote, just like moves on the board. IMO it just confuses things to regard it as a pass.

For instance, in coupon go where a player may take a coupon that is worth so many points instead of making a board play, everybody agrees that taking a coupon lifts a ko ban, even though it does not alter the board proper. A button is equivalent to a 1/2 point coupon. That is why Ikeda treated the first pass in his Area III rules differently from every other pass. Those rules do not really have a three pass rule.

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

I guess you mean that White took the ko initially, and that White passes instead of playing the approach move. I do not see the problem, though---as long as White does not play the approach move, he cannot win the ko. I do however know that there are situations in this vein that might look like a problem.

In my view, the problem arises not from the ko ban, but from a defect in the assumed rules: a pass must always be worth one point less than playing a "dame". (Just for completeness: taking the button must be worth the same as playing a "dame" for White, and the same as passing for Black; it thus gains half a point for whoever does take it.)

_________________
A good system naturally covers all corner cases without further effort.

Thank you allfor your responces

i made a sensei's page on the Ikeda Area III Rules

my followup on this:

- I do think that x consecutive passes does end the game. but maybe it is good to set x at 4 (so it ends with 2 consecutive white and black passes). enough for every player to change their mind.

I think this does(almost) address Harlequins wishes that one pass in itself not game ending. (the second consecutive pass, does it but only if the opponent passes as well and so)

- I do like to have only two different kind of kinds of moves.('move' as defined by Ikeda placing a stone or a pass)
adding differend kinds of moves (this is a button/ coupon taking move, this is an game ending move ect ) i don't think makes the rules better.

- I see problems in ko-ban-breaking passes. If not anything else they will increase the lenght of the rules.

- for the problems jts mentiones. In principle i do adhere to the "all stones are alive" and "area is all points occupied by a colour or surrounded by one colour " principle. then there are no dead stones on the boardat the end of the game, they need to be captured.

- also having many passes to end the game almost forces to Natural Situational Superko

_________________
Promotor and Librarian of Sensei's Library

Well, it does not. My view is that the players can alternate passes as long as they wish. To end the game, they must say so. This defends against any notion of "pass fight", and also against any uncertainty about hidden meanings of passes (as a bad example, see Ing rules).



I see your point. However, you should not let yourself be confused by the distinction between distinction and confusion.

_________________
A good system naturally covers all corner cases without further effort.

What is the use of allowing players to alternate passes as long as they wish?
I think at some point the game needs to end (whitout any player wishing for it)




I am confused now.

I could add the following passes in an explanation:

A button taking pass -> the first pass of the game.
A game end offer pass -> a 3rd consecutive pass in a game
A game ending pass -> a 4th consecutive pass in a game: The game ends now.
A normal pass -> any other pass

and just stick to one type of pass in the rules

_________________
Promotor and Librarian of Sensei's Library

it doesnt matter

i just own you and win by res. why don't you spend more time playing games then you wouldn't be so weak

The aga rules are quite a different cattle of fish i am not even sure your comment is true.

The aga rules uses pass stones while the ikeda rules don't

And I think that the extra white pass was only to make the number of moves (passes or plays) the same for both players. White is allowed to play again after the two passes.
(he just needs to give Black an extra pass stone)

Under the ikeda area III rules the player who makes the first pass is allowed to play on even if his opponent also passes. (but only after the first pass does this apply)

_________________
Promotor and Librarian of Sensei's Library

Are you like 12 or something? There's no need to insult people.

Or is this a humor/troll fail? See Helel's posts for how to do that sort of thing right.

_________________
That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.
--
My (sadly neglected, but not forgotten) project: http://dailyjoseki.com