[go]$$Bcm61 No Prisoners $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O . X . . O X . . X O . . . | $$ | . . . X . . O X . O . X . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . 3 X . . . . . . . 2 1 . . | $$ | . . . . . . O . . O . X . . X . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . O . . . . . . . O O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . O . X . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . O O O . . . . . . . . . . X . O O . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . X X O . | $$ | . . X X O O . . . , . . . O . X O O . | $$ | . X O O X . . . . X . . . . . X O X . | $$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X . X O . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
First, I'd like to make a few comments about the exchange. Fuego has already made a few similar exchanges this game. First were the forcing moves in the lower right corner; I liked Daniel's response "respect for opponent is... dropping". Then there was the exchange of F3 for F2 in the lower left.
I can only speculate, but here's what I think: if a move has a semi-obvious sente followup, that usually means ignoring it is quite bad, which means that a pseudo-random playout would value the move quite highly. This is just a guess, but I think the randomness of monte-carlo playouts might lead Fuego to over-value sente exchanges. And in this particular example, multiple players stronger than me have pointed out the dangerous aji of that corner, so I don't think it's a huge loss for Fuego to play this way. On to the next move:
Value: 48.5 %
Sequence:
$$Bcm63 No Prisoners $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O . X . . O X . . X O . . . | $$ | . . . X . . O X . O . X . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . 8 4 2 1 X . . . . . . . O X . . | $$ | . . . . . 3 O . . O . X . . X . . . . | $$ | . . . 7 . 5 . O . . . . . . . O O . . | $$ | . . . . . 6 . . . O . X . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . O O O . . . . . . . . . . X . O O . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . X X O . | $$ | . . X X O O . . . , . . . O . X O O . | $$ | . X O O X . . . . X . . . . . X O X . | $$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X . X O . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ ---------------------------------------
[go]$$Bcm63 No Prisoners $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O . X . . O X . . X O . . . | $$ | . . . X . . O X . O . X . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . 8 4 2 1 X . . . . . . . O X . . | $$ | . . . . . 3 O . . O . X . . X . . . . | $$ | . . . 7 . 5 . O . . . . . . . O O . . | $$ | . . . . . 6 . . . O . X . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . O O O . . . . . . . . . . X . O O . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . X X O . | $$ | . . X X O O . . . , . . . O . X O O . | $$ | . X O O X . . . . X . . . . . X O X . | $$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X . X O . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
I strongly expect Daniel to block at F15, but I don't see any harm in not triggering it
Re: 135. daniel_the_smith (2d) vs Fuego (bot)
Posted: Sun Oct 02, 2011 8:27 pm
by emeraldemon
As a side note: would there be any interest in creating a Mac application for Fuego? If people think they would use it, I could try to make a binary for Mac users.
Re: 135. daniel_the_smith (2d) vs Fuego (bot)
Posted: Sun Oct 02, 2011 11:55 pm
by Laman
emeraldemon: if you trigger a sequence, i suppose you run Fuego again from the new board position (after 1-2), correct? because while Fuego is pretty good in choosing one move, its predictions further to future are often nonsensical, so i think just triggering 1-2-3 from its prediction could give a suboptimal result. or doesn't it matter?
Re: 135. daniel_the_smith (2d) vs Fuego (bot)
Posted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 7:04 am
by emeraldemon
Laman wrote:emeraldemon: if you trigger a sequence, i suppose you run Fuego again from the new board position (after 1-2), correct? because while Fuego is pretty good in choosing one move, its predictions further to future are often nonsensical, so i think just triggering 1-2-3 from its prediction could give a suboptimal result. or doesn't it matter?
Yes, if I make a trigger, I run Fuego for the full time again after playing the move. This particular case wasn't actually a trigger, I just numbered the 61-62 exchange for clarity since Daniel didn't make a diagram.
Re: 135. daniel_the_smith (2d) vs Fuego (bot)
Posted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 7:17 am
by daniel_the_smith
$$Bcm61 No Prisoners $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O . X . . O X . . X O . . . | $$ | . . . X . . O X . O . X . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . 4 X X . . . . . . . O X . . | $$ | . . . . . . O . . O . X . . X . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . O . . . . . . . O O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . O . X . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . O O O . . . . . . . . . . X . O O . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . X X O . | $$ | . . X X O O . . . , . . . O . X O O . | $$ | . X O O X . . . . X . . . . . X O X . | $$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X . X O . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ ---------------------------------------
[go]$$Bcm65 No Prisoners $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . 9 O . X . . O X . . X O . . . | $$ | . . . X . . O X . O . X . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . 2 O X X . . . . . . . O X . . | $$ | . . . . . 1 O . . O . X . . X . . . . | $$ | . . . . 7 . . O 3 . . . . . . O O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . 8 4 O . X . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . O O O . . . . . . . . . . X . O O . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . X X O . | $$ | . . X X O O . . . , . . . O . X O O . | $$ | . X O O X . . . . X . . . . . X O X . | $$ | . . 6 5 O . . . . . . . . . X . X O . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
From this sequence it seems like Fuego may try to engage in a capturing race with the stones on the left. I'm very curious to see how this will turn out.
Re: 135. daniel_the_smith (2d) vs Fuego (bot)
Posted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 9:12 am
by daniel_the_smith
$$Bcm61 No Prisoners $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O . X . . O X . . X O . . . | $$ | . . . X . . O X . O . X . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . 6 O X X . . . . . . . O X . . | $$ | . . . . . X O . . O . X . . X . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . O . . . . . . . O O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . O . X . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . O O O . . . . . . . . . . X . O O . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . X X O . | $$ | . . X X O O . . . , . . . O . X O O . | $$ | . X O O X . . . . X . . . . . X O X . | $$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X . X O . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ ---------------------------------------
[go]$$Bcm67 No Prisoners $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O . X . . O X . . X O . . . | $$ | . . . X . . O X . O . X . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . O O X X . . . . . . . O X . . | $$ | . . . . . X O 3 2 O . X . . X . . . . | $$ | . . 0 . . 6 4 O 1 7 9 . . . . O O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . 5 O . X . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . 8 . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . O O O . . . . . . . . . . X . O O . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . X X O . | $$ | . . X X O O . . . , . . . O . X O O . | $$ | . X O O X . . . . X . . . . . X O X . | $$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X . X O . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
Re: 135. daniel_the_smith (2d) vs Fuego (bot)
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 4:59 pm
by kwhyte
emeraldemon wrote:As a side note: would there be any interest in creating a Mac application for Fuego? If people think they would use it, I could try to make a binary for Mac users.
I absolutely would, I just spent a few hours last week looking for one online.
Re: 135. daniel_the_smith (2d) vs Fuego (bot)
Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2011 11:28 am
by daniel_the_smith
$$Bcm61 No Prisoners $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O . X . . O X . . X O . . . | $$ | . . . X . . O X . O . X . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . O O X X . . . . . . . O X . . | $$ | . . . . . X O . 8 O . X . . X . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . O X . . . . . . O O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . O . X . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . O O O . . . . . . . . . . X . O O . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . X X O . | $$ | . . X X O O . . . , . . . O . X O O . | $$ | . X O O X . . . . X . . . . . X O X . | $$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X . X O . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ ---------------------------------------
[go]$$Bcm69 No Prisoners $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . 8 . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O . X . . O X . . X O . . . | $$ | . . . X . . O X . O . X . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . O O X X . . . . . . . O X . . | $$ | . . . . . X O 1 O O . X . . X . . . . | $$ | . . . . 4 . 2 O X 5 6 . . . . O O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . 3 O 7 X . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . O O O . . . . . . . . . . X . O O . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . X X O . | $$ | . . X X O O . . . , . . . O . X O O . | $$ | . X O O X 0 . . . X . . . . . X O X . | $$ | . . . 9 O . . . . . . . . . X . X O . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
I assume Daniel will connect, so I'll wait until next move to write some analysis.
Re: 135. daniel_the_smith (2d) vs Fuego (bot)
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 8:00 am
by flOvermind
If the sequence really turns out the way Fuego thinks it will, especially with white getting 72, then I think white essentially has a won game. White will get a huge attack on the left side black stones and the top left corner. If the top white stones die (and that's a big if), it could get close again, but I don't think that would be enough to catch up completely...
Of course, Fuego could change its mind about 71, so this is all pretty speculative right now
Re: 135. daniel_the_smith (2d) vs Fuego (bot)
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 6:50 pm
by emeraldemon
Is this game still on? I don't want to rush you, just wondering.
exchange. Fuego has already made a few similar exchanges this game. First were the forcing moves in the lower right corner; I liked Daniel's response "respect for opponent is... dropping". Then there was the exchange of F3 for F2 in the lower left. 
