LG Cup 29 final fiasco

[Harleqin]

If you followed the game, then you can tell where stones are buried. I am not confident that I can avoid off-by-one errors with that, though.

But at the end of the game, you can do button scoring: remember whether White passed first, then do area scoring, and if White passed first, add 1 to White's score.
This is in most cases equivalent to territory scoring (exceptions are clearly identifiable, e. g. one-sided dame in seki).

I used this in at least one tournament game where we found a stone that we were unsure was a captured one.

Anyway, I find the commotion about stones off the board a bad look. If you have a game record, you can score it. Game punishments for such trivialities is not the way to make Go seem more professional.

[Toukopouko]

If you followed the game, then you can tell where stones are buried. I am not confident that I can avoid off-by-one errors with that, though.
But at the end of the game, you can do button scoring: remember whether White passed first, then do area scoring, and if White passed first, add 1 to White's score.
This is in most cases equivalent to territory scoring (exceptions are clearly identifiable, e. g. one-sided dame in seki).

I used this in at least one tournament game where we found a stone that we were unsure was a captured one.

Anyway, I find the commotion about stones off the board a bad look. If you have a game record, you can score it. Game punishments for such trivialities is not the way to make Go seem more professional.

But this completely misses the point. The issue is not whether we can determine the winner after the game is over, but whether seeing an incorrect count of captured stones during the game can mislead you into thinking you are ahead by X points, making you give up more points than you otherwise would during the rest of the game and thus possibly losing the game.

I guess the habit argument applies here as well: When you’ve played thousands of games trusting that the captured stones in your opponent’s lid reflect the correct count, it’s hard to suddenly realize that you shouldn’t trust something you’ve always relied on. It’s difficult to question something that has been so consistent for so long, let alone all the sudden switch to mentally tracking every single capture while you’re playing

[John Fairbairn]

In shogi, captured pieces have to be placed on a highly visible komadai beside the board, so the principle of expecting to be able to see "prisoners", even in go, is well entrenched in Japan - and Korean pro go has always been most influenced by Japan.

But there are problems in relying on this. What if there are too many prisoners in a lid to count visually? Six or seven is the usual limit to take in at a quick glance, so even a lid that is not overflowing can be problematic. If it is overflowing, are you allowed to take the lid and count the stones - risking a charge of filching a stone or two by sleight of hand? The rules don't say. And very few games outside of title matches are directly supervised by a referee.

The Japanese and Korean approach has always been to put the responsibilities on the players themselves, where the rules do not suffice. This is not ideal and tends to rely on non-go behaviour such as deferring to a senior.

This can fail, too, of course. In 2011, Han Zenki thought he had won by 0.5 in a game that was counted up to show a win for Kobayashi Koichi by 1.5. But out of politeness to a major player, Han did not ask for a recount. Still, he replayed the game when he got home and confirmed his win, so he lodged an appeal. The Nihon Ki-in refused it on the grounds that a result can't be changed once the players have agreed it and left the board. Even when Han pointed out the game had been broadcast on the internet and had many witnesses, he was refused.

[RobertJasiek]

In Europe, if there is a rule, it says something like "prisoners must be visible". Prisoners in the lid are as accepted as prisoners ordered well (e.g., as multiples of 10, AFAP) beneath the lid or board. (A few players like to form and constantly rearrange pyramids, but this is another topic.)

Such a combination of clarity and tolerance accomodates for both area and territory scoring occurences in European tournaments and players from all over the world.

[kvasir]

I watched the relevant parts of the live feed again. This time there was automatic translation available, this helped me understand more about what happened in the third game.


When Ke Jie puts the first stone on the table it ends up close to the clock. He just puts it down right after pressing the clock.

The commentators were showing a variation as this happened and, after quickly finishing what they were saying, they go on to talk about the misplaced stone.

It is not long before the next stone is misplaced. This time it is simply pushed off the edge of the board.

The commentators continued to talk about the misplaced stones and all the related circumstances, then they said something about what was taking place in the room at this time.

What the commentators say (among other things) that may provide more insight:

1. There is referee training and certification in Korea that need to be renewed every single year. It appears to be suggested that the referee might risk losing his certification or be penalized in some way if he ignores the mistake.
2. The referee is already in conference with the players’ representatives.
3. That the referee has already communicated his decision to the representatives.
4. Yu Bin who is Ke Jie’s representative or CWA representative has protested.

When the game is finally suspended to communicate the penalty to the players it looks like it is left to Yu Bin to communicate with Ke Jie. Possibly there is a language barrier, but this kind of indirect communication is also something that is considered respectful and polite in China. Then there is what some have called an “outburst” by Ke Jie, which to me seems like a poor choice of words or an exaggeration.


Based on this and other information my conclusions are as follows:
1. The root of the problem is that Ke Jie makes the same mistake repeatedly despite heavy penalties.
2. There is nothing wrong with the rule that the players must put the stones in the lid. The penalties for not doing this aren’t different from the penalties for other errors that could be made.
3. It is still unclear why the referee consulted other people in the room instead of immediately stopping the game to give the penalty.
4. When the game was eventually stopped it is after the error was corrected and it is unclear why the penalty is still given.
5. It is possible that the referee had already communicated to the officials that he intended to give the penalty when the error was corrected.
6. It may have been possible for the referee not to give a penalty and instead rule that it isn’t his role to stop the game to give penalties after an error has been corrected if this error didn’t cause any problem and the player is making effort to follow the rules.
7. Arguments about the game having been stopped at a critical junction can go both ways. It could give Byun Sangil more time to think about his move but it is also the case that the prisoners went missing at a point when Byun Sangil needed to be precise about his chances in an endgame.

I think my ultimate conclusion is that this was more unfortunate than it was unfair.

My conclusions are undoubtedly contentious. I’m relying on machine translated rules but more importantly I don’t have the Korean perspective on why the rules are the way they are.

I’ll add a general observation. In international sports it is usually mandatory to have referees that are not from the countries that are competing. This (usually simple) step is often enough to avoid accusation that the referees favored one or the other side. Maybe this is something that should also be seen as being necessary in Go.

[deungsan]

I don’t have the Korean perspective on why the rules are the way they are.

I am Korean, a Tygem 6-dan player, and currently an after-school Go instructor for elementary school students. I have seen the problematic scene from the third game between Ke Jie and Byun Sang-il, and I would like to share my opinion on why such a rule is necessary.

I teach Go to elementary school children aged 7 to 10, most of whom are encountering Go for the first time in their lives. In the very first lesson, before they play their first game, I teach them various Go etiquette rules and how to manage Go stones properly.

The stones must always be in one of the following three places:
1. Inside the Go bowl,
2. Precisely on the intersections of the Go board,
3. Captured stones must be placed inside the lid.

If they fail to follow any of these three rules, they are not observing proper Go etiquette. I tell them that if they do not follow these etiquette rules, their friends may not want to play Go with them in the future, and I will inform their parents about it. This is how I teach them proper Go manners.

Students who cannot or do not manage captured stones properly are not allowed to advance to the next level.

Most Korean Go enthusiasts manage stones in this way, so captured stone issues rarely arise in Korean Go games. However, I have heard that when playing face-to-face with Chinese players, captured stones are often neglected. In particular, Ke Jie’s act of placing the captured stone on the table instead of in the lid, as seen in the problematic scene, can be considered a breach of Go etiquette.

Over the past 30 years, the Korea Baduk Association has likely received countless reports of such incidents. In some cases, players may have even hidden captured stones during the game to interfere with their opponent’s counting, as mentioned earlier. Given this history, it is understandable that they wanted to establish a captured stone management rule, at least for tournaments held in Korea.

The Chinese Weiqi Association argues that the timing of the referee's intervention was advantageous for Byun Sang-il. However, considering that the game situation was already 98% in favor of White, Ke Jie’s claim appears unreasonable. If the game had been 98% in favor of Black, Ke Jie would have continued playing.

After this incident, the Chinese Weiqi Association seems to be turning Go into a political or money-driven game. In such cases, the side with more money and stronger political influence usually prevails.

[Ferran]

I've barely followed the event itself, but I find the online reaction quirky. A mix of intriguing, entertaining and, sometimes, disgusting.

There's something I have to acknowledge. I've never been a fan, at all, of Ke Jie. I consider Go a 道, with the same limitations as Judo, sado (cha no yu), calligraphy... with more of an emphasis in the mental side of martial arts, but still a 道. I found Ke Jie's tantrums in the past, his lack of humility, and the way he was being coddled, extremely grating. He seems to have grown out of that stage. If he manages to keep this process, I'll begin to feel an interest. I'll certainly admit to being positively surprised.

This doesn't apply to the CWA. At all. They are the association that expelled Rui Naiwei (I could, also, point to a certain Go Seigen, of moderate fame). They have updated their methods, and they play to the gallery and the increasingly nationalistic side of modern Chinese sports and performative outrage social media. They have not updated their morals. In other martial arts or sports I know something like this could expel a whole national association off the sport for a few years. It would, at the very least, forbid the team managers from international events for quite a while. Maybe I'm spoiled. But I find it telling that a Chinese official did post something about it... and got silenced.

Rule disagreements have been a staple of competition Go for decades, if not centuries. Up to a certain point it's even healthy. This is a bull in a china shop (pun unintended, but welcome).

deungsan (kwan ja nim?) points that outside referees would be a better option. I agree, in principle, but Go does not have the equivalent of soccer's FIFA. It would take some work.

Take care.

[deungsan]

The following is the sgf of the game (downloaded from http://www.go4go.net). This game has not been finished and some post above said it reached a critical juncture in which life and death of White sequence in the top right of the board had not been checked despite that AI favored White with 98% and 10 points ahead. In a sense, this sgf is a quiz of life and death of the top right White sequence.

[RobertJasiek]

deungsan, as you know Korean go stone etiquette so well, please tell us:

What happens when too many prisoners overflow a lid?

May a player inspect and count prisoners in his own lid and the opponent's lid?

[deungsan]

What happens when too many prisoners overflow a lid?

Just ask refree an extra bowl and lid.

I have never had a situation of lid overflow in my entire go history. There were many cases where many dead stones resulted in capturing race, then the game ends with either side resign before taking out them from the board (the timing of resign is another etiquette)

In my class, the lid of bowl can hold about up to 50 stone. Next week (it is luna new years holidays now) I will show a bowl and lid used in my class.

May a player inspect and count prisoners in his own lid and the opponent's lid?

During playing, I used to have a rough sense of how many dead stones were there on the lids, looking at the positions where stones removed and stones on the two lids, but, in case of sante, soon confused and lost sense of counting...

I believe players whose rank is higher than mine (tygem 6d) may have a better sense of how many dead stones are generated. I do not know how they manage to count dead stones.

[RobertJasiek]

In Europe, I have had, or witnessed, many close games with large captures or ko fights and overflowing lids, each of which can keep about 50 stones. Never was it necessary to call a referee to do the obvious of just placing prisoners besides the lids.

Much more often has it been necessary to fetch, or let kibitzes bring, additional bowls from nearby boards for extra stone supplies, although the typical bowl has ca. 180 stones.

In Europe, players can count stones in lids or arrange them on the table. Only very few would mentally keep track of numbers of prisoners, or their difference, removed from the board. It is unnecessary because counting is tolerated.

It is depreciated, if not illegal, to hide stones.

[macelee]

@deungsan

I respect your right to participate in this discussion. However, some of your arguments are so flawed that they hardly merit further debate. You claim that certain way of doing things are considered Go etiquette and that Ke Jie's deviation from it is in breach of that etiquette. It seems you are treating a local rule as if it were a universal standard.

Another thing that bothers me greatly is that this so-called rule is not applied universally or equally in all situations. In this recently taken photograph, four stones are clearly visible on the table. Why wasn't the white player penalized for this?

[jlt]

The video: https://www.youtube.com/live/AlrwjeHzDBs?t=6359s

White put black stones in the lid, a few stones slid out, he put them back immediately into the lid.

[deungsan]

@deungsan

I respect your right to participate in this discussion. However, some of your arguments are so flawed that they hardly merit further debate. You claim that certain way of doing things are considered Go etiquette and that Ke Jie's deviation from it is in breach of that etiquette. It seems you are treating a local rule as if it were a universal standard.

Another thing that bothers me greatly is that this so-called rule is not applied universally or equally in all situations. In this recently taken photograph, four stones are clearly visible on the table. Why wasn't the white player penalized for this?

It seemed like someone above was interested in hearing a Korean perspective, so I joined this discussion.

As a Go instructor for elementary school after-school programs in Korea, I teach children who are learning Go for the first time about the etiquette they must follow. Part of this includes how to properly handle stones during a game. In the place where I live, children who do not observe these manners while learning Go will not be promoted in rank and will have difficulty participating in local Go tournaments. This is because children who disregard etiquette during games are often avoided by others, leading them to lose their Go friends and eventually end up playing alone. Since this essentially results in the child isolating themselves from the Go community, I call their parents and recommend that they stop learning Go—because they won’t be able to achieve the purpose of learning in the first place.
Behaving like Ke Jie did above (such as placing captured stones anywhere) is considered impolite here in Korea. A child who acts that way would not even be given the opportunity to participate in local tournaments.

These are points that Korean Go enthusiasts would generally agree on, but I never claimed that this perspective was universal. Please reread my post carefully.

2. If the captured-stone lid rule was not observed, ask the people who were responsible for overseeing it.

[deungsan]

In my class, the lid of bowl can hold about up to 50 stone. Next week (it is luna new years holidays now) I will show a bowl and lid used in my class.

The follwoing image shows a bowl and lid. I put 50 stones in the black lid and 100 stones in the white lid on purpose. These lids and bowls are quite similar to those used in local tornaments.