And so we enter the "second phase" ... On 5, Jan 2007, at 8:50 AM, Mark Boon wrote:
I think you are mistaken for the real reason of the 'second phase', where he who passes has to pay a point. This 'second phase' only comes into effect after both sides have passed. It's to solve disputes in a fair manner. Since capturing dead stones would cost points, how do you resolve a dispute where your opponent claims his stones are not dead? (Think bent-four corner.)The actual proof consists of playing out the sequence that captures the stones. Every time your opponent passes and you continue playing moves to capture the stones you'd lose a point. That's why passing has to be compensated by paying a point. It's not about Go playing skills that should be rewarded but about being able to resolve disputes fairly.
I can see the purpose of a second phase to resolve disputes over the status of specific groups. Having the second phase played out with the "give a pass stone" does preserve the state as of the two passes that were intended to end the game, so I do not find this to be a problem. My argument against the pass stone costing a point applies to before the two consecutive passes that end the game.
I would then expect that the moves made in this second phase be restricted to the life and death of specific groups in question.
If our bots do this properly then there is no argument or objection from me.
Cheers, David _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
