On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Dave Dyer <dd...@real-me.net> wrote:
> > If you are in a lost position, "good play" is play that maximizes > the probability of a turnaround, which is quite different depending > on how far behind you are, and for what reason. What maximizes the probability of a turnaround depends on your opponent more than anything else. I'm sure the best move by this definition will change according to who you are playing. > > If the status of all the major groups is solid, then concentrating > on tactics which can gain a few points reliably might be the right > thing. I think the best PRACTICAL definition (which can be formalized) is to play the move (or one of the moves) that maximizes the total points on the board. I think this is the natural human style, more or less. My real point is that whether a move is good or bad cannot be precisely defined if you are looking for a "practical" definition. If you use my theoretical definion, it can be precisely defined, but it may not be the best practical definition for winning real games against fallible opponents. - Don > > On the other hand, if the status of some groups is less than > immutable, then focusing on changing their status favorably might > be correct. It's hard to see how shifting Komi will influence > the style of play in this direction. > > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ >
_______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
