Visualize go this way, make it 30 times easier to count

[justtysen]

I agree that using a 20x20 board and playing in the squares can make counting more visually intuitive for many players but I actually find the uniqueness of the current norm as part of the charm and larger lesson of the game. I have spent a little time actively practicing counting using the lines and also using mentally modified versions of the squares and I think this helps to change the intuitions one comes to the table with and thereby broadens one's horizons, making more creative thought possible. So I wouldn't discourage someone from playing as proposed but I would hesitate doing it to the exclusion of the alternatives. I am reminded of an old study of observing an image of fish. Westerners were more likely to remember details of the large and central fish, while easterners would remember more details of the smaller and peripheral fish. This is of course a generalization and things are always changing, but the intersection thought pattern is one I think is underdeveloped in many westerners.

Regarding visualization techniques: You might also try playing with the board rotated 45°. I feel like this potentially places more visual gravity at the corners and uniquely reflects certain aspects the dynamics at play.

[Maharani]

Number of lines visible when the board is full: zero with intersections, all with squares.

I didn't think of that. I agree it's a downside.

Solution: square stones (with slightly rounded edges) instead of lines? On a physical board you could indicate the lines by carving them out a tiny bit instead of drawing them with ink...

[bogiesan]

[quote="Maharani"

Solution: square stones (with slightly rounded edges) instead of lines? On a physical board you could indicate the lines by carving them out a tiny bit instead of drawing them with ink...[/quote]

Folks have been playing around with the format of the board and playing pieces for hundreds of years. We seem to have arrived, by consensus, at the existing paradigm. Your proposals have probably been tried and discarded more than once. Easy to pest your theories in modeling applications and you could easily build a set with CNC and 3d printing or adapting playing pieces from other toys.

[Maharani]

Number of lines visible when the board is full: zero with intersections, all with squares.

I didn't think of that. I agree it's a downside.

Solution: square stones (with slightly rounded edges) instead of lines? On a physical board you could indicate the lines by carving them out a tiny bit instead of drawing them with ink...

A few hours before I posted this, someone on the OGS forums actually showed an example that I didn't see until later:

[Maharani]

Number of lines visible when the board is full: zero with intersections, all with squares.

I didn't think of that. I agree it's a downside.

Solution: square stones (with slightly rounded edges) instead of lines? On a physical board you could indicate the lines by carving them out a tiny bit instead of drawing them with ink...

A few hours before I posted this, someone on the OGS forums actually showed an example that I didn't see until later:

[WriterJon]

If it actually is easier to count squares, can that be adapted to regular play? Is it easier to treat each point as belonging to the square on its South-West side and counting accordingly?

Does someone who can already do regular counting with any kind of efficiency want to test this?

[justtysen]

I was modifying my homemade go board when something happened that made me think of this thread. I was sanding the board to remove the engraved lines because I started using thinner stones and their edges would catch on the engraving when using the te-tsuki technique of snapping a stone against an established palm-ward stone. During the process I tended to sand off parts of the lines between intersections more than the intersections themselves. In this state I could still see the overall grid pattern but each point stood out more as a discrete location. It is my impression that this method produces a similar boon to counting as using square stones while introducing less visual clutter. Taking this idea further the board could be reduced to dots but I think using crosses is probably the most balanced approach and the length of the gaps can be gradually adjusted to train the eyes to see this pattern on a regular board. I didn't leave the board in that state, instead adding flush, drawn on lines as usual but I think it might be a worthwhile idea for those interested.

[Maharani]

Very cool!