Pair Go Points Rules
Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2026 12:41 pm
Since hardly anyone reads this forum anymore, I thought it would be a good idea to pose this question here. Don't the European Pair Go Points Rules need to be changed?
The objectives today are as follows ( https://www.eurogofed.org/egf/pairsystem.htm )
1) allows EGF members to nominate their pair individually,
2) gives large EGF members WP places more often,
3) gives EGF members with strong pairs WP places more often,
4) does not too much disadvantage to countries that cannot afford to send pairs to the EP regularly due to financial or geographical reasons,
5) still works if no European Pair Go Championship takes place, (EPGC)
6) remains stable if Europe gets more or less than the usual 9-10 places,
7) is easy to maintain and does not require financial support,
8) the character of the European Pair Go Championship does not need to be changed,
9) support the aims and spirit of the World Amateur Pair Go championship as far as we understand them from its sponsors, the Japan Pair Go Association,
10) helps the spread of Pair Go.
Regarding #9 , you can see here why the Japan Pair Go Association (JPGA) want to spread the game https://www.pairgo.or.jp/setumei/igi.htm
I believe the EGF's objectives are a bit back to front , for example objective #10 should be one of the first objective
Objective #7 is perhaps a little self contradictory, give the rather complex formula in play
It's okay to award points based on the performance of the country's top pair in the EPGC. That makes complete sense to me.
The idea of awarding points based on the size of the registered members seems wrong though.
Given the JPGA (mainlyà want to increase the number of women playing, you might want to at least change the points award to base it on the number of women playing. But yes, that would be difficult to keep track of in practice.
An easier option might be to give points based on
a) number of participants at the country's Women's championship
b) number of participants at the country's Pair Go championship
particularly for (b) , if the country isn't even having a Pair Go championship, then perhaps they're not doing a good job of promoting Pair Go.
The objectives today are as follows ( https://www.eurogofed.org/egf/pairsystem.htm )
1) allows EGF members to nominate their pair individually,
2) gives large EGF members WP places more often,
3) gives EGF members with strong pairs WP places more often,
4) does not too much disadvantage to countries that cannot afford to send pairs to the EP regularly due to financial or geographical reasons,
5) still works if no European Pair Go Championship takes place, (EPGC)
6) remains stable if Europe gets more or less than the usual 9-10 places,
7) is easy to maintain and does not require financial support,
8) the character of the European Pair Go Championship does not need to be changed,
9) support the aims and spirit of the World Amateur Pair Go championship as far as we understand them from its sponsors, the Japan Pair Go Association,
10) helps the spread of Pair Go.
Regarding #9 , you can see here why the Japan Pair Go Association (JPGA) want to spread the game https://www.pairgo.or.jp/setumei/igi.htm
I believe the EGF's objectives are a bit back to front , for example objective #10 should be one of the first objective
Objective #7 is perhaps a little self contradictory, give the rather complex formula in play
It's okay to award points based on the performance of the country's top pair in the EPGC. That makes complete sense to me.
The idea of awarding points based on the size of the registered members seems wrong though.
Given the JPGA (mainlyà want to increase the number of women playing, you might want to at least change the points award to base it on the number of women playing. But yes, that would be difficult to keep track of in practice.
An easier option might be to give points based on
a) number of participants at the country's Women's championship
b) number of participants at the country's Pair Go championship
particularly for (b) , if the country isn't even having a Pair Go championship, then perhaps they're not doing a good job of promoting Pair Go.