Hello,
I recently added a feature to MoGo that allows it to accept a pass (I mean
pass after the opponent pass) even far from the end of the game. It is to be
gentler against human (not fill every intersection :)). So now there is a non
trivial dead string analysis.
Looking at the games
I assume in Go the difference is also a very large handicap.
in any case, i think that the difference is probably much larger than
just one or two stones. :)
It is said if has 4 stones handicap, every Pro will accept games play with
God even if bet his life.
When in limited local
On 27-nov-06, at 08:35, igo wrote:
It is said if has 4 stones handicap, every Pro will accept games
play with God even if bet his life.
I don't know if that's a generally accpted estimate. But I know that
Otake Hideo once said he'd bet his life with 4 stones against God. He
also added
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED],
steve uurtamo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
It is said if has 4 stones handicap, every Pro will
accept games play with God even if bet his life.
wow. i thought that there were at least two
stones worth of slack in the opening, and another
two in ko fighting. :)
And, the right to win all ko fights without
having to fight them
is only worth half a stone.
uh, that depends upon what the kos are for.
and actually, what i meant was that its threats
might be so complicated that they would be
ignored.
s.
A good point to consider - is God actively trying to confuse his
opponent and complicate things, or is he simply playing objectively best
moves?
- Don
On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 07:39 -0800, steve uurtamo wrote:
wow. i thought that there were at least two
stones worth of slack in the opening,
The December 2006 KGS computer Go tournament will be next Sunday,
December 3rd, in the European morning and Asian evening,
starting at 09:00 UTC and ending at about 14:00 UTC.
Both divisions will be five-round Swiss, and use 19x19 boards with 28
minutes sudden death, Chinese rules, and 7.5
A good point to consider - is God actively trying
to confuse his
opponent and complicate things, or is he simply
playing objectively best
moves?
good question. if his goal is to win with zero
handicap, all he has to do is pick a branch that
ends with a win for, say, W. if he is starting
I've often wondered how I would program a computer to play a game, chess
or go,
if I had perfect information about the game.How do you make it more
difficult
to win against a fallible opponent?
I assume that in many positions there are more than 1 maximizing move.
I would of
course restrict
On Mon, Nov 27, 2006 at 12:59:30PM -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
A good point to consider - is God actively trying to confuse his
opponent and complicate things, or is he simply playing objectively best
moves?
I have heard this terminology somewhere, but can't remember where:
A god plays
I guess you would simply steer towards positions
where the computer had
lot's of good moves and the opponent had very few
good moves.
this is essentially the same thing -- if you play
in a branch where the highest percentage of moves
lead to a win for you, then this means that your
But a god will win over the
devil, as he will not
fall in any of the traps, but can use the suboptimal
play spent in
setting those up.
actually, whomever is slated to win with perfect play
(1st or 2nd player) will win, because setting up
traps isn't necessarily inefficient -- it just
means
A good devil tries to win by MORE than he deserves and will
try to win in a losing position.
I have heard this terminology before and my understanding was
that a devil still plays a perfect game, he just tries to be
deceptive about it.
I don't see any point in not playing perfect if you can
Don (and others),
Depending upon your definition of God, I think most of the God
conversation is kind of silly.
Given He is omnipotent, he has the ability to alter one of His created entities
such that it is not possible to beat Him PRIOR to casting His reply as
white. The alteration
Le lundi 27 novembre 2006 16:36, Steven Clark a écrit :
Computer stupidity? How about how GNUGo has no problem invading under my 4,4
stone, but refuses to invade under my 5,5 stones? I assume this is because
there is a joseki entry for 4,4, but none for 5,5 openings. Attached is a
rather silly
In the second game Fritz against Kramnik Fritz played strategically very
poor (or Kramnik very strong), Kramnik avoided a 3-times repetition offer
of Fritz, but at the end Kramnik missed an easy to see mate in 1!! and lost
very badly. Thats the end of the match. He will not be able to recover
16 matches
Mail list logo
