It is currently Fri Dec 03, 2021 12:06 pm

 All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]

 Page 2 of 5 [ 100 posts ] Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 Print view Previous topic | Next topic
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #21 Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2021 11:18 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 255
Liked others: 17
Was liked: 30
Rank: panda 4 dan
IGS: kvasir
`[go]\$\$W\$\$ -------------------\$\$ | . O X 3 X X O . .\$\$ | O O O X 4 X O . .\$\$ | X O O O X O O . .\$\$ | 1 X O 5 X X O . .\$\$ | X 2 X X . X O . .\$\$ | X X O X X X O . .\$\$ | O O O O O O O . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]`

There is no regular ko ban in this position, only the pass-ko bans. If white can only have a single pass-ko ban at a time then black could take back in one of the kos without first passing. That is the difference.

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #22 Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2021 11:36 am
 Lives in sente

Posts: 826
Liked others: 16
Was liked: 37
Rank: 1er dan
kvasir wrote:
`[go]\$\$W\$\$ -------------------\$\$ | . O X 3 X X O . .\$\$ | O O O X 4 X O . .\$\$ | X O O O X O O . .\$\$ | 1 X O 5 X X O . .\$\$ | X 2 X X . X O . .\$\$ | X X O X X X O . .\$\$ | O O O O O O O . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]`

There is no regular ko ban in this position, only the pass-ko bans. If white can only have a single pass-ko ban at a time then black could take back in one of the kos without first passing. That is the difference.

Oh I see where is the misunderstanding. The position I proposed is not that one above but the following:

`[go]\$\$W\$\$ -------------------\$\$ | . O X . X X O . .\$\$ | O O O X . X O . .\$\$ | X O O O X O O . .\$\$ | . X O O X X O . .\$\$ | X X X X . X O . .\$\$ | X X O X X X O . .\$\$ | O O O O O O O . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]`

`[go]\$\$W\$\$ -------------------\$\$ | . O X 1 X X O . .\$\$ | O O O X 2 X O . .\$\$ | X O O O X O O . .\$\$ | 3 X O O X X O . .\$\$ | X X X X . X O . .\$\$ | X X O X X X O . .\$\$ | O O O O O O O . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]`

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #23 Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2021 10:58 pm
 Lives with ko

Posts: 255
Liked others: 17
Was liked: 30
Rank: panda 4 dan
IGS: kvasir
Gérard TAILLE wrote:
`[go]\$\$W\$\$ -------------------\$\$ | . O X 1 X X O . .\$\$ | O O O X 2 X O . .\$\$ | X O O O X O O . .\$\$ | 3 X O O X X O . .\$\$ | X X X X . X O . .\$\$ | X X O X X X O . .\$\$ | O O O O O O O . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]`

That is a different position and white would be able to use the pass-ko and the regular ko ban to demonstrate the black group is dead. The result would then be a seki. This is exactly same as with regular pass-ko rule because you still have two ko bans.

You could create a position like this to get different results.

`[go]\$\$W\$\$ -------------------\$\$ | . O X . X X O . .\$\$ | O O O X . X O . .\$\$ | O O O X X O O . \$\$ | O O X . X X O . .\$\$ | O O O X . X O . .\$\$ | X O O O X O O . .\$\$ | . X O O X X O . .\$\$ | X X X X . X O . .\$\$ | X X O X X X O . .\$\$ | O O O O O O O . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]`

`[go]\$\$W\$\$ -------------------\$\$ | . O X 1 X X O . .\$\$ | O O O X 2 X O . .\$\$ | O O O X X O O . \$\$ | O O X 3 X X O . .\$\$ | O O O X 4 X O . .\$\$ | X O O O X O O . .\$\$ | 5 X O O X X O . .\$\$ | X X X X . X O . .\$\$ | X X O X X X O . .\$\$ | O O O O O O O . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]`

Is it desirable or undesirable to let white claim there are three ko bans now? I'd say it is undesirable, and I find it hard to imagine a position when we want one side to defend SIMULTANIOUSLY in more than two kos. Such things may exist but the examples in j89 don't require it.

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #24 Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2021 2:55 am
 Lives in sente

Posts: 826
Liked others: 16
Was liked: 37
Rank: 1er dan
kvasir wrote:
`[go]\$\$B\$\$ -------------------\$\$ | O O X . X X O . .\$\$ | O O O X . X O . .\$\$ | X O O O X O O . .\$\$ | . X O . X X O . .\$\$ | X . X X . X O . .\$\$ | X X O X X X O . .\$\$ | O O O O O O O . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]`

This position demonstrates how dangerous it is to try to pick a winning side in ko fights for the purpose of status confirmation.

One question I have that pertains to this position is how many pass-ko bans do we really need for each player? In this position black is dead because white can create two pass-ko bans in time to fill blacks last two liberties. Is it really needed to allow multiple pass-ko bans on the same player to achieve the desired effect? For example if white had to pick which ko had a pass-ko ban (that is one or the other ko stone would not be subject to a pass-ko), that would solve this position. That is if a player is allowed only one pass-ko ban at a time, could that work? If not, how many pass-ko bans do we really need?

I think now your are right Jann. I am not able to find an example in which one player need more than one pass-ko ban. Good point indeed.

Coming back to my proposal with the "no ban in double ko" rule the point is that in some double ko situations even a single pass-ko ban is an issue:

`[go]\$\$B\$\$ -------------------------------\$\$ | O . O . X X . . O . . O X . . \$\$ | O O O X O X X O O O O O X . . \$\$ | X X X O . O O O X X X X X . . \$\$ | . . X O O O X X X . . . . . . \$\$ | . . X X X X X . . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]`

`[go]\$\$B\$\$ -------------------------------\$\$ | O . O . X X 2 3 O . . O X . . \$\$ | O O O X O X X O O O O O X . . \$\$ | X X X O 1 O O O X X X X X . . \$\$ | . . X O O O X X X . . . . . . \$\$ | . . X X X X X . . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\$\$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]`

and white can neither retake the ko at (pass-ko ban) nor the ko at (regular ko).

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #25 Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2021 3:22 am
 Lives in gote

Posts: 400
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 35
Gérard TAILLE wrote:
kvasir wrote:
That is if a player is allowed only one pass-ko ban at a time, could that work? If not, how many pass-ko bans do we really need?

I think now your are right Jann. I am not able to find an example in which one player need more than one pass-ko ban.

That was not my quote, I still think the left-or-right examples from the other topic show why one pass-ko ban is not enough - IF Japanese-style results (no ko interaction) are desired.

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #26 Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2021 5:35 am
 Lives in sente

Posts: 826
Liked others: 16
Was liked: 37
Rank: 1er dan
jann wrote:
Gérard TAILLE wrote:
kvasir wrote:
That is if a player is allowed only one pass-ko ban at a time, could that work? If not, how many pass-ko bans do we really need?

I think now your are right Jann. I am not able to find an example in which one player need more than one pass-ko ban.

That was not my quote, I still think the left-or-right examples from the other topic show why one pass-ko ban is not enough - IF Japanese-style results (no ko interaction) are desired.

Yes I agree Jann. In this thread I only consider positions with double ko and in this context and in Japanese-style rule your comment was to me quite interesting.

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #27 Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2021 6:49 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 255
Liked others: 17
Was liked: 30
Rank: panda 4 dan
IGS: kvasir
jann wrote:
Gérard TAILLE wrote:
kvasir wrote:
That is if a player is allowed only one pass-ko ban at a time, could that work? If not, how many pass-ko bans do we really need?

I think now your are right Jann. I am not able to find an example in which one player need more than one pass-ko ban.

That was not my quote, I still think the left-or-right examples from the other topic show why one pass-ko ban is not enough - IF Japanese-style results (no ko interaction) are desired.

I don't get what interactions in you mean in that specific position, Jann. I think I treated the position incorrectly before, it is a bit tricky to have a pass-ko and a regular ko ban, now I don't think there is any difference from regular pass-ko in this case because of how black takes the kos first. Because black takes the kos first he will have a regular ko ban in one and a pass-ko ban in the other, allowing black to capture everything.

It is basically the same as your pass-once except that possibility of reusing the pass-ko ban is not discarded AND it solves the issue of allowing use of pass-ko to force multiple moves in a row in at least some positions. Like with any change or interpretation of anything in J89 there will be different results in some positions (that is the intention) but it does appear to work with all of the examples.

Anyway, I don't expect it to work 100%. For one thing J89 still has unclear "enable", a double-ko cycles, and a lofty idea of a "Japanese" understanding of what is the correct result. It is too subjective to really match everyone's idea of what 100% is. I am more interested in understanding the benefits and limitations.

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #28 Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2021 11:03 am
 Lives in gote

Posts: 400
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 35
kvasir wrote:
I don't get what interactions in you mean in that specific position, Jann. I think I treated the position incorrectly before, it is a bit tricky to have a pass-ko and a regular ko ban, now I don't think there is any difference from regular pass-ko in this case because of how black takes the kos first. Because black takes the kos first he will have a regular ko ban in one and a pass-ko ban in the other, allowing black to capture everything.

`[go]\$\$B\$\$ +---------------\$\$ | X X . P P X . O O Z Z . |\$\$ | X P P P X X O O O Z O O |\$\$ | . P X X . X O . O Z Z O |\$\$ | P P X X X X O O O Z . . |\$\$ --------------------\$\$[/go]`

I thought that: B starts the bent4 ko and takes it first, W throws in at right, B captures there as well. At this point (if there is only one pass-ko ban) W passes for whichever of the two kos B chooses to have protected. Next B resolves one of the kos and W captures in the other, thus saving central stones and even bent4 will be alive (directly or on enabling). Right?

Quote:
For one thing J89 still has unclear "enable", a double-ko cycles, and a lofty idea of a "Japanese" understanding of what is the correct result.

Hmm, I think J89 is actually not bad (if you accept its approach to ko), better than I thought in the past.

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #29 Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2021 11:34 pm
 Lives with ko

Posts: 255
Liked others: 17
Was liked: 30
Rank: panda 4 dan
IGS: kvasir
This is my current thought of how the position goes when black tries to capture in confirmation.

`[go]\$\$B\$\$ +---------------\$\$ | . X . O O X . O O X X . |\$\$ | 1 O O O X X O O O X O O |\$\$ | O O X X . X O . O X X O |\$\$ | O O X X X X O O O X 2 3 |\$\$ --------------------\$\$[/go]`

Black protects with pass-ko, the other ko will be protected by the regular ko rule.

White passes for because he can take in neither ko shape, one protected by pass-ko and the other by regular ko rule.

finishes the ko that was protected by the regular ko rule. (There may be an ambiguity about if you are allowed to switch the pass-ko ban around but we don't need it here).

White still can't take in the bent-4 because of the pass-ko ban, black takes there also with .

`[go]\$\$B\$\$ +---------------\$\$ | . X 7 O O X . O O X X 5 |\$\$ | X O O O X X O O O X O O |\$\$ | O O X X . X O . O X X O |\$\$ | O O X X X X O O O X . X |\$\$ --------------------\$\$[/go]`

So it appears that black only needs one pass-ko ban to capture everything in this position.

jann wrote:

Quote:
For one thing J89 still has unclear "enable", a double-ko cycles, and a lofty idea of a "Japanese" understanding of what is the correct result.

Hmm, I think J89 is actually not bad (if you accept its approach to ko), better than I thought in the past.

I agree that J89 is not so bad. It is just that I think that we can't talk about perfection or treat its concepts formally all the time. The semantics of J89 are not always clear enough, but I do like how it presents a simple and elegant approach. I still doubt it really works except in practice (when we are really just happy to finish the game).

I'd also add that the faults in some other rule texts are lot more comical than J89, for one thing we tend to just ignore anything not doing with the position on the board. That is really a faulty approach but understandable because it is the position in the game that interests us.

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #30 Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2021 12:58 am
 Lives in gote

Posts: 400
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 35
kvasir wrote:
Black protects with pass-ko, the other ko will be protected by the regular ko rule.

White passes for because he can take in neither ko shape, one protected by pass-ko and the other by regular ko rule.

I don't understand this. As I wrote I think W passes for the protected ko (B 1). What does it mean to pass for a ko that is not protected anyway?

Hm, maybe you mean passing for the ko itself is forbidden by the protection? But then how can such protection be eliminated? You need a way for that to prevent anomalies (or a different kind of double ko abuse).

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #31 Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2021 1:15 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 255
Liked others: 17
Was liked: 30
Rank: panda 4 dan
IGS: kvasir
jann wrote:
kvasir wrote:
Black protects with pass-ko, the other ko will be protected by the regular ko rule.

White passes for because he can take in neither ko shape, one protected by pass-ko and the other by regular ko rule.

I don't understand this. As I wrote I think W passes for the protected ko (B 1). What does it mean to pass for a ko that is not protected by pass-ko ban anyway?

It should just be "white passes" because white has no move, it is not a pass for a ko in any sense. My point was that black takes unprotected ko first.

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #32 Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2021 1:24 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 255
Liked others: 17
Was liked: 30
Rank: panda 4 dan
IGS: kvasir
The idea is that neither player can automatically defend multiple kos by referring to just the pass-ko rule. If white can fight the second ko then the game is either not over or black is asking too much. In this case the game wouldn't be over because if white had a few ko threats he would start the ko (or?), so that is different from pass-ko in J89. The only extra that black gets in status confirmation is the single pass-ko ban in the bent-4, allowing positions that are regarded as end-of-game positions to be handled correctly (hopefully). Or you could say I need two pass-ko bans, or something else.

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #33 Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2021 1:53 am
 Lives in gote

Posts: 400
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 35
If the rule really forbids passing itself for the ko, the question is how can such protection be lifted? Which seems essential...

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #34 Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2021 1:56 am
 Lives in sente

Posts: 826
Liked others: 16
Was liked: 37
Rank: 1er dan
I am a little confused.

`[go]\$\$B\$\$ +---------------\$\$ | . X . O O X . O O X X . |\$\$ | 1 O O O X X O O O X O O |\$\$ | O O X X . X O . O X X O |\$\$ | O O X X X X O O O X 2 3 |\$\$ --------------------\$\$[/go]`

Black protects with pass-ko, the other ko will be protected by the regular ko rule.
The only interesting move white can make with is pass for protected ko (ko )
and then white will be able to save a great part of her stones.

That means that we need to handled two pass-for-ko in order to reach the expected japanese result (all white stones are dead).

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #35 Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2021 2:20 am
 Lives in sente

Posts: 826
Liked others: 16
Was liked: 37
Rank: 1er dan
BTW has somebody found a position in which the "no ban in double ko" rule associated to the "traditional" pass-for-ko (for each ko) contradicts the expected japanese result?

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #36 Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2021 2:21 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 255
Liked others: 17
Was liked: 30
Rank: panda 4 dan
IGS: kvasir
Gérard TAILLE wrote:
I am a little confused.

`[go]\$\$B\$\$ +---------------\$\$ | . X . O O X . O O X X . |\$\$ | 1 O O O X X O O O X O O |\$\$ | O O X X . X O . O X X O |\$\$ | O O X X X X O O O X 2 3 |\$\$ --------------------\$\$[/go]`

Black protects with pass-ko, the other ko will be protected by the regular ko rule.
The only interesting move white can make with is pass for protected ko (ko )
and then white will be able to save a great part of her stones.

That means that we need to handled two pass-for-ko in order to reach the expected japanese result (all white stones are dead).

In that case black would take in the bent-4 shape and protect the other ko using pass-ko so white would have to pass for that one.

I am failing to explain this What I am trying to say is that you can have one pass-ko ban at a time, but you don't have to declare it ahead of time or maintain it for the next move. Basically, you can ban the recapture in one ko using the pass-ko in any position, it does not have to be declared when the ko shape is declared, the ko shape does not become ineligible for a pass-ko ban by not introducing or removing the ban. This might be more flexible then needed, but for simplicity just pick any available j89 pass-ko bans in every position as the single pass-ko ban.

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #37 Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2021 2:25 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 255
Liked others: 17
Was liked: 30
Rank: panda 4 dan
IGS: kvasir
jann wrote:
If the rule really forbids passing itself for the ko, the question is how can such protection be lifted? Which seems essential...

Sorry, I don't understand. The ban can be lifted by passing but then you adjust the play (to end the ko that was passed for) and use your single pass-ko ban in the other/second ko. If the second ko is then passed for you finish that ko before giving any chances there.

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #38 Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2021 2:40 am
 Lives in gote

Posts: 400
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 35
kvasir wrote:
I am failing to explain this What I am trying to say is that you can have one pass-ko ban at a time, but you don't have to declare it ahead of time or maintain it for the next move. Basically, you can ban the recapture in one ko using the pass-ko in any position

I think I understand the idea now. But this essentially allows preventing ko recapture for TWO turns (which is what you did in the left-right example: one turn with normal ko ban, next turn by insta-shifting the protection there, and only then can the opponent pass for it - otherwise W could save himself in that example).

I don't see how such wild idea could survive even a simple approach ko (J89 #10).

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #39 Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2021 2:55 am
 Lives with ko

Posts: 255
Liked others: 17
Was liked: 30
Rank: panda 4 dan
IGS: kvasir
jann wrote:
kvasir wrote:
I am failing to explain this What I am trying to say is that you can have one pass-ko ban at a time, but you don't have to declare it ahead of time or maintain it for the next move. Basically, you can ban the recapture in one ko using the pass-ko in any position

I think I understand the idea now. But this essentially allows preventing ko recapture for TWO turns (which is what you did in the left-right example: one turn with normal ko ban, next turn by insta-shifting the protection there, and only then can the opponent pass for it).

I don't see how such wild idea could survive even a simple approach ko (J89 #10).

You mean to say there is problem that one may not be pass for a ko when it is protected by the regular ko rule? That seems valid but not really what I meant. What I meant or intended was that you could pass to lift any potential ko-ban, it is not conditioned on it being used to protect that ko at that time. That is you don't get to postpone the pass for a ko like you suggest by not protecting the ko using pass-ko.

I open to the suggestion that passing for an unprotected ko may create some weirdness, but maybe a pass for a ko only really happens when the ko is protected by either rule?

Top

 Post subject: Re: The "no ban in double ko" rule to solve pass-for-ko issu #40 Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2021 3:02 am
 Lives in gote

Posts: 400
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 35
Now I'm not sure again if I understand the idea well, how would this prevent the closed double ko loop for example?

Top

 Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
 Page 2 of 5 [ 100 posts ] Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

 All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]

#### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

 You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
 Jump to:  Select a forum ------------------ Life In 19x19.com General Topics    Introductions and Guidelines    Off Topic    Announcements    General Go Chat    Beginners    Amateurs    Professionals       Lee Sedol vs Gu Li    Go Rules    Forum/Site Suggestions and Bugs    Creative writing    Tournaments       Ride share to tournaments Improve Your Game    Game Analysis    Study Group    Teachers/Club Leaders       Teacher advertisements    Study Journals L19²GO (Malkovich)    1-on-1 Malkovich games    Big Brother Malkovich games    Rengo Games    Other versions of turn-based games Go Gear    Go Books    Go Book Reviews    Computer Go    Gobans and other equipment    Trading Post    New Products/Upgrades/Sales Go Club Forums    Go Club Discussions       Honinbo Go League    American Go Association Forum       Go Congress 2011 volunteers       AGA volunteers ( non-congress)    Australian Go Association    European Go Federation Forum    Singapore Weiqi Association    KGS    ASR League    IGS    OGS    Tygem    WBaduk    Turn Based Servers    Insei League Events    Kaya.gs       King of the Hill