Life In 19x19

Research of ancient weiqi rules in 2 Chinese classic books

author:Zhang hu
copyright reserved
"Scoring Rules by Captives/Prisoners(计俘子规则), found by Zhang hu(章浒)",
"If you quote my arguments, please attach the above texts and relevant contents."

Introduction & Part 1: a hidden rule in ancient weiqi rules(Song Dynasty and more early) at https://www.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=17865
Part 2: ancient rules in texts & annotations of 13 Chapters Classic at https://www.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=17866
Part 3: ancient rules in texts of Dunhuang Classic of Weiqi at here


(Part3-1 3-2 as below)

part 3-1 of ancient rules in texts of Dunhuang Classic of Weiqi

picture1 of Chapter Ⅵ from IDP: The preparation knowledge is in part2 https://www.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=17866,
otherwise it is not easy to understand the following content. So, please read part2 carefully first.

It's easier to understand if we start in the middle of Chapter VI.And, to save time, I'll just cover the key points.

Texts of Dunhuang Classic of Weiqi: 碁有停道及两溢者，子多为胜。
There are situations of "equal in Dao(停道)" or "both parties overflow(两溢)" in Qi(碁), the one who has more stones(子) who win.

Comments: 1. Qi(碁qí) means Weiqi. 2. "stones(子)" means captured stones/prisoners. 3."both parties/both sides overflow(两溢)"

comment:the translation of 筹 as "counting rods" is not a good translation, Now I changed it to "chips". 2020/11/19 10:23 beijing time
comment:the translation of 子 as "pieces/piece" maybe is not a good translation, Now I changed it to "stones/stone". 2020/11/22 01:30 beijing time

Comments:
1. "equal in Dao(停道)" is different with and similar as "equal in Lu".
What does "equal in Lu(停路)" mean? please see here: https://www.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.p ... 56#p261556

"equal in Lu(停路)" is from the Thirteen Chpaters Classic of the times of Song Dynasty.
It's not very diffcult to understand after reading commentary of Liu zhong fu.
And the research of Zhao-zhi-yun and Cheng-zu-yuan has resolved the problem.

2. What does Dao(道) of "equal in Dao(停道)" means?
Picking up all stone(s) which not alive forever from the board, let them become stone prisoners of the other side,
and NOT filling any prisoners into each other's territory, the empty intersections of one party on the board is Dao(except basic liberties which make groups alive forever).

3. What does "equal in Dao(停道)" means? What's the difference between "equal in Dao(停道)" and "equal in Lu（停路)"?
If you have known the means of "equal in Lu（停路)"，you will guess the means of "equal in Dao(停道)".

4.How to transfer the situation of a game to the situation of "equal in Dao(停道)", and then we start to score?
a short answer is: Use gaining chips(打筹), see comments of SGF below.

First, I will explain "both parties overflow(两溢)".
It's the most primitive method.

Please read comments in SGF below and click ">" button to the last move:


Above, after "both parties overflow(两溢)", we will count sum of prisoners.
Black side keeps: 3 + 5 = 8 prisoners
White side keeps: 1 prisoners
Net Score of prisoners: 8 - 1 = 7 captured stones/prisoners

So, the final result is: Black side wins 7 stones(子)/prisoners.

Second, I will explain "equal in Dao(停道)".
It's a simple method of the times of Dunhuang Classic.

Please read comments in SGF below and click ">" button to the last move:


above, after "equal in Dao(停道)", we will count sum of prisoners.
Black side keeps: 7 prisoners
White side keeps: 0 prisoner
Net Score of prisoners: 7 - 0 = 7 captured stones/prisoners

So, the final result is: Black side wins 7 stones(子)/prisoners.

I will call it: "Scoring Rules by Prisoners(计俘子规则) found by Zhang hu(章浒)"
And we find that the rules of Dunhuang are actually the same as those of the Song Dynasty，except for some operational differences。
Now, the explanation of the other contents of Chapter VI is easily solved.

Third, why are these stones prisoners and not living stones on the board?

Chen zu yuan believes that: these stones are living stones on the board.
Maybe, it is possible to use “living stones" to explain Dunhuang Classic. But, there is a difficult.

As we know, the word "chips" spread from the times of Dunhuang Classic to Song Dynasty. Chips represent prisoners.
How Chen explain these words in Chapter VI of Dunhuang Classic: "the game on chips(论筹)" "getting chips(获筹)" and so on?
How Chen explain the operation of "stone overflow(溢)" or "both parties overflow(两溢)"?
If "living stones" is true, "full" is enough, no need to "overflow". That's what he can't justify.

However, it is easy to justify it by "Scoring Rules by Prisoners".

Now, we know the mean of "砲碁"(see below), and find that before the times of Dunhuang Classic,
"even number moves then game over" & people had already angry with playing moves of dame before counting territory.
Therefore, it also proved that there was no "counting living stones" in that era.

For comparison, here is how play might go under No Pass Go with Prisoner Return. Note that the normal way to continue is to stop and score the game.



Edit: Note that komi could and probably should be implemented by giving White some prisoners before play begins, but I don't know how to do that with GoWrite.

Bill Spight wrote:For comparison, here is how play might go under No Pass Go with Prisoner Return. Note that the normal way to continue is to stop and score the game.

Edit: Note that komi could and probably should be implemented by giving White some prisoners before play begins, but I don't know how to do that with GoWrite.

I basically understand.
It is very similar as ancient weiqi rules.
If compared with the Japanese go rules, I would rather adopt it.

part 3-2 of ancient rules in texts of Dunhuang Classic of Weiqi

picture2 of Chapter VI from IDP 敦煌《棋经》
碁制篇第六
Chapter Ⅵ Rules of Weiqi

－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
凡论筹者，初捻一子为三筹，后取三子为一筹。积而数之，故名为“筹”。
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
In the game on chips（论筹）, (one party with net score of stones/prisoners will get chips.)
First, one stone is exchanged for three chips, and then every three stones are exchanged for one chip.
It is called "chips(筹)", because it is accumulated(积) and counted(数).

Modern Chinese: 凡是论筹（论子彩）的对局，(在达到停道或两溢的局面时，先比较双方俘获的棋子，并将之相互抵消后，尚持有净胜俘子的一方）先捻取净胜的第一颗俘子可获三个筹码， 之后每取三颗俘子获得一个筹码。
累积起来计数，所以叫做“筹”。

Comments:
1. stone(s) = captured stone(s)/prisoner(s)
2. net score: net score of stones/prisoners. after comparing the stones captured by both sides and offsetting each other, the net winning stones.
see explanation of "equal in Dao" and "both parties overflow".
3. getting chips for money.
4. These are about getting chips by net score of stones/prisoners.

details as below: －－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
下子之法，不许再移。占之不举，君子所上。
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
Rule for putting down a stone, it is not allowed move again on the board. You can't take it up after you've put down it, this is what gentlemen advocate.

Modern Chinese: 下子的规则，不允许再移动棋子。落子后不能再拿起来，这是君子所崇尚（上）的。

Comment: about Prohibition of moving stone or retracting a false move in the game.

－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
凡获筹，有持者必须先破求。取局者，勿论。收子了讫，更欲破取筹不合。
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
About getting chips in the game on chips, the party with net score must make a request first.
if the game aim at winning or losing only（取局), no need to do that.
It is unreasonable to ask for chips after all stones have been put into the pot.

Modern Chinese: 凡是（在筹局中）获取筹码，持有净胜俘子的一方必须先提出这个要求。如果只是取棋局的输赢（取局），那自然不必提这个要求。
要是在棋局结束，且全部棋子已经放回罐中之后，才提出要求说，想获得筹码，那就不合情理了。

Comments:
1. advice of getting chips(获筹),
2. advice of game on QuJu(取局).

－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
碁有停道及两溢者，子多为胜。
取局子停，受饶先下者输。纵有多子，理不合计。
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
There are situations of "equal in Dao(停道)" OR "both parties overflow(两溢)" in Qi(碁) , the one who has more stones(子) who win.

In the game on QuJu(取局), if the number of stones on both sides is equal, the one who played first at the start of the game loses.
Even if one side has more stones than the other, there is no reason to get more chips.

Comment:
1. stone(s) = captured stone(s) / prisoner(s)
2. Quju(取局): the game aim at(取) winning or losing only, getting more chips is not allowed.
3. net score: net score of stone prisoners, see explanation of "equal in Dao" and "both parties overflow" at part3-1.
4. These are key contents.

Modern Chinese: 在双方有落子权的空点数量相等的局面下（不包括棋块赖以生存的气或称基本眼位）以及在双方棋子都溢出形成满局的情况下，最终俘获对方棋子多的一方胜。
只取棋局输赢的对局，如果双方各自俘获对方的棋子一样多，受饶先下者输。取局的时候，只算赢一盘；纵使胜方持有更多的俘子，也不能合计这些俘子，去取得更多的筹码。

－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
凡砲碁者，不计外行，有险之处，理须随应所无，不问多少，任下皆得。古人云：“炮碁忿，君子是以不满其三。”此则缘取人情谓之言也。
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
About "CannonQi", regardless of outside dames, must put down stones when dangerous,at this time do not ask how much, one next move can get the value of one prisoner's benefits.
The ancients said: "CannonQi, make others angry. Therefore, a modest gentleman only put down two moves, but not three. " It's just human talk.

Modern Chinese: 凡是砲棋，不计外行（外面的单官之意），下到危险之处，必须要有应手，此时开始收外气，不问多少，下一步可以得到价值一颗俘子的利益。
古人说：“砲棋收气吃，像走单官一样，会让别人忿怒。所以谦谦君子，收气不满三步，就收一两步好了。” 这只是在人情话而已。
今注：因为三颗俘子就可以换一枚筹码。

砲棋的图解见下，这是迄今为止最好的也是唯一的解释。
下图的SGF棋盘中，三角标记的黑棋棋块，就是打入白阵的“石包”砲，就是砲碁。虽然它是死棋，但有收气吃的好处。

This is the best and only explanation of "CannonQi" so far.
"Cannon(砲)" means: Cannon that fires/throws out stone balls. "Qi(碁)" means Weiqi.
About cannon(砲) picture, please see: https://www.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.p ... 21#p261821

"CannonQi(砲碁)", the benefits of fake dames(labled X) when CannonQi(砲碁) happened.
At the SGF picture below, the Black stones labled ▲ are "stone balls".
Black move 1,3 are "outside dames". When black goes to move 5, it is "when dangerous". All of Black's next moves(fake dames) will get benefits.



Now, We find that before the times of Dunhuang Classic,
"even number moves then game over" & people had already angry with playing moves of dame before counting territory.

根据“古人云：砲碁忿。。。”的字句，可以推测到：
远在敦煌《碁经》成书时代之前，围棋人是偶数终局且不收单官，以避免偶数终局时，先手方下最后单官的利益问题。（此处强调 保留发现的版权）

I has written an article(中国古代围棋规则探源 - 两溢后计俘子的围棋规则) concerning "Scoring Rules by Prisoners" and "CannonQi(砲棋)" at Hangzhou meeting 2015.In fact, I had reached a preliminary conclusion by then.The paper was published with the help of Chen zu yuan.
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
凡碁斗劫者，应所不问。先有契约者，勿论。
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
In general, about ko fight in a game, the implementation of the "应所不问" provisions. It is also allowed that the two sides make other regulations before the match.

Modern Chinese: 凡是斗劫的棋，一般情况下，实行“应所不问”的规定。双方在对局前已订好另外的规定，那自然不必再论。

今注1：最后一句是打劫的规定，"应所不问"的意思待解。但提到了一点，打劫规则是可以事先商定的。这也为现代人处理“三劫循环”、“四劫循环”的胜负问题时，提供了一个思路。
今注2："应所不问"的意思可能是：应劫的地方不问哪里都行，即使是导致两劫或三劫循环、甚至四劫循环，都是可以的。那么“应所有问”，大概就是不允许循环劫的意思了。这是今人的猜想，仅供参考。

Comment: about rules of ko. What is the means of "应所不问"? Maybe, it means that "There is no limit to where it should be." So, cycle ko is allowed.

pgwq wrote:In the game on QuJu(取局), if the number of stones on both sides is equal, the one who takes the first move loses.

The one who takes the first move loses is the definition of a 0 game in combinatorial game theory, upon which No Pass Go with Prisoner Return is based. And it fits with the idea of a no pass game. If the player with the move can pass, why does she lose? OC, a game in which each player has the same score has a net score of 0. That's not enough to make it a 0 game, but it is necessary.

In line with where I think pgwq is headed, suppose that there are no more moves left on the board, and each player has an equal number of prisoners. This is a 0 game in No Pass Go with Prisoner Return, because the first player who starts returning prisoners will run out of them first, and then, when neither play has a prisoner left, will have no move, and will therefore lose.

I certainly cannot claim that 取局 is a game with Prisoner Return, but the one who takes the first move loses certainly fits the basic win/lose idea of combinatorial game theory, and if the number of prisoners determines who wins or loses, and if the first player when each player has the same number of prisoners loses, it sure sounds like a game where the object is to take prisoners. Besides which, 取 has a meaning of taking, right?

Edit: I just realized that there could be a different interpretation. The player who takes the first move could refer to the player who played first at the start of the game. In modern go that is Black, so this statement could be the equivalent of White wins jigo in modern go.

Bill Spight wrote: Edit: I just realized that there could be a different interpretation. The player who takes the first move could refer to the player who played first at the start of the game. In modern go that is Black, so this statement could be the equivalent of White wins jigo in modern go.

Yes.the player who played first at the start of the game loses. I've amended it.Thanks.

"取局" maybe means： the game aim at(取) winning or losing only.

CannonQi 褚胤有名的围棋技术就是“褚胤悬砲” —— 见敦煌《碁经》
Chu-yin（Northern and Southern Dynasties）'s famous Weiqi skill is "Chu-yin hang Cannon" - see Dunhuang Classic