positional judgement and endgame values under chinese rules

[asura]

Hello,
I have learned go with japanese rules and I always count the japanese way no matter what rules are used. To me this seems easier but I wonder if it really is or if it is only more usual for me.
So my question is how people that learned go with chinese rules count and think about endgame values, for example do they think about first line hane and connect as 4 points in gote instead of 2 points in gote? (deri values)

I could also imagine that the "best" counting technique might be differently so that for territory counting in pairs might be better and for area calculating rectangles might be better.

P.S. I am aware that both leads to almost the same result, but the question is which one is more efficient?
What do you think, any ideas or experience?

[amnal]

I could also imagine that the "best" counting technique might be differently so that for territory counting in pairs might be better and for area calculating rectangles might be better.

I don't think this could really be the case. Area and territory counting are different ways of ascertaining a score, but the game of Go is unlikely to be affected by more than a point either way, and the optimal counting method isn't going to be affected.

Actually, I don't think any of your questions really depend on how the game is ultimately counted - this is decoupled from the judgement of move value during the game itself. If there is a notable difference, I'd expect professional competitiveness to lead to them all converging on the same one anyway.

Nevertheless, for what it's worth I've heard that most professionals (not just Japanese) tend to count mentally using territory style scoring, since it's generally easier to count territory than all the individual points of the board controlled. I can't provide a source though, so it could just be wrong

[snorri]

Hello,
I have learned go with japanese rules and I always count the japanese way no matter what rules are used. To me this seems easier but I wonder if it really is or if it is only more usual for me.
So my question is how people that learned go with chinese rules count and think about endgame values, for example do they think about first line hane and connect as 4 points in gote instead of 2 points in gote? (deri values)

I could also imagine that the "best" counting technique might be differently so that for territory counting in pairs might be better and for area calculating rectangles might be better.

P.S. I am aware that both leads to almost the same result, but the question is which one is more efficient?
What do you think, any ideas or experience?

In area rules, there are some situations when you play a dame first instead of connecting or capturing a ko. (See Robert Jasiek's Ko and Dame Endgames under Area Scoring.) That stuff is very late endgame, though.

Chinese pros and amateurs I've met seem to count by territory when estimating the score, whether it's pairs or something larger. They can remember the captures.

[RobertJasiek]

During opening, middle game and early endgame, it is usually sufficient to do territorial positional judgement by determining the territory count, because it is (almost) the same as the area count, but calculated faster.

During the intermediate or late endgame, it can happen that endgame counts are more correct if done as area counts instead of territory counts. Therefore, in case of doubt, determine the area counts of your preferred endgame values, such as miai value or deire value.

Asymmetric sekis, one-sided dame, the number of handicap stones and a few arcane things can differ. Don't forget to fill dame alternately:

http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/diffasts.html

As has already been mentioned, basic endgame kos differ:

http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/kodame.pdf

[Bill Spight]

Hello,
I have learned go with japanese rules and I always count the japanese way no matter what rules are used. To me this seems easier but I wonder if it really is or if it is only more usual for me.
So my question is how people that learned go with chinese rules count and think about endgame values, for example do they think about first line hane and connect as 4 points in gote instead of 2 points in gote? (deri values)

I could also imagine that the "best" counting technique might be differently so that for territory counting in pairs might be better and for area calculating rectangles might be better.

P.S. I am aware that both leads to almost the same result, but the question is which one is more efficient?
What do you think, any ideas or experience?

For myself, sometimes I find Chinese counting more convenient, sometimes Japanese. I remember that for the first Environmental Go game between Jujo and Naiwei we set up for Chinese scoring, but they used Japanese scoring, anyway.

[asura]

Thanks for your answers.
It's interesting that both Chinese players used Japanese counting in environment go as default without explicit agreement.

Does anyone know what move-values are used in Chinese endgame books?

[ez4u]

Look at all the different threads that mention this kind of stuff. Aren't we talking about +/- 1 point or so? When we make it to KGS 9d we can worry about this. Until we can reliably beat kghin (as of 2013-08-24) with White, no komi, is it an issue?

[John Fairbairn]

Does anyone know what move-values are used in Chinese endgame books?

They do it the same way as the Japanese. Pros have told me that they especially also tend to quote komi in the Japanese way (7.5 points), at least in the context of counting during the game. Books, however, now nearly always give komi as zi (i.e 3.75) when citing game records, and the result is likewise given in zi (1 zi = 2 moku).

This may be a generational thing: most of the Chinese pros I know have been influenced by stays in Japan or Korea, or came up when these countries had more clout in the go world.

[asura]

Thank you for the informations. It clears up things for me now.

BTW, in environment go it makes a difference of 1 point for every card vs. board play, so it could add up to 40 points in total.

[Bill Spight]

Thank you for the informations. It clears up things for me now.

BTW, in environment go it makes a difference of 1 point for every card vs. board play, so it could add up to 40 points in total.

The way we found out that Jujo and Naiwei were using Japanese scoring was that after the game we announced the winner and both of them disagreed. Then to show us they started replaying the game. We told them that that was unnecessary. In the brief discussion afterwards we discovered that they were counting territory. No harm, no foul.

[TheBigH]

To me it seems fair that white's group should count as one point of territory, but I am having trouble articulating why. I guess it's because white can add another stone to the seki group without trouble and black can't.

[oren]

To me it seems fair that white's group should count as one point of territory, but I am having trouble articulating why. I guess it's because white can add another stone to the seki group without trouble and black can't.

And in Chinese/AGA rules, white would gain one more point. White would get 2 and black 1.

[snorri]

Look at all the different threads that mention this kind of stuff. Aren't we talking about +/- 1 point or so? When we make it to KGS 9d we can worry about this. Until we can reliably beat kghin (as of 2013-08-24) with White, no komi, is it an issue?

Let's start some threads that help everyone get to that level, then. I have no clue, so you first