komi
FICGS - Search results for komi
There are 63 results for komi in the forum.
Lionel Vidal (2006-05-31 19:33:20)
Go komi / Rules
Hello to all,
As a brand user FICGS user, I first read the rules (of course!), and I am wondering about the komi value of half a point. AFAIK it is not very common, unlike, say, 5.5. Is there a specific reason for such a komi value?
Best wishes,
Lionel
Lionel Vidal (2006-05-31 19:35:58)
Go komi
Oops! sorry. I meant 'brand new user'
Best wishes,
Lionel
Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-31 20:01:30)
Weiqi komi
Hello and welcome Lionel :)
That's a very... good question !
Actually I thought it was the more 'organic' (like this game) way. But it seems to be a large debate, without a clear response.
I suggest all go players to read this article : http://senseis.xmp.net/?Komi
Feel free to give me your opinion about that. Thanks in advance.
Lionel Vidal (2006-05-31 21:15:10)
Weiqi komi
Hello,
Thanks for that link: it is indeed a good reading. I would suggest also to read the chapter on the rules of Go in 'The go player's almanac' (Bozulich 2001), that gives much more details.
By reading these, you can see that half a point komi is indeed quite uncommon :-)
But an important point is that it should probably depend on the chosen rule, or more precisely on the counting mode, area or territory.
BTW, what is the counting rules here in FICGS ?
Note that this rule question may be quite critical on some life-and-death situation and may change the result of a game! And some of the simplest cases (like bent four in the corner) can arise not too uncommonly.
Lionel
Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-01 04:10:56)
Komi, pass, area scoring, ko, seki....
Ok... I'll bring answers and modifications to the rules for all points that remain blurred, today and tomorrow !
The counting method will be Area Scoring (chinese scoring) : When alternate play has ended, each player's score is the number of his stones on the board plus the number of empty intersections surrounded only by his stones.
Now I have a question from a beginner (me) : Is it possible, even with a non entire number komi (ie. 0.5 or 5.5), to have a draw situation ? In other words, what happens if a game can't finish because in example ko rule can't apply ?!
Thanks a lot for your help.
Lionel Vidal (2006-06-01 12:46:14)
Go rules
Hello,
Even if a well chosen komi rules out scoring draws, you still have the problem of infinite repetition.
Traditionally, a game in which a triple ko or other infinitely repeating position arises is annulled, or treated as draw or replayed.
Some rules (New Zealnd, USA, SST) deal with these positions by stating that a player cannot make exactly the same position on the whole board twice. (Note that it is then not always easy without computer assistance to determine the legality of a move).
The chinese rule (at least the 1988 official one) also forbids reappearance of the same board position, but in some situation this is not enough to prevent a draw: in some cases neither player want to start a sequence and keep passing to avoid solving a situation at their disadvantage. (and to forbid passes triggers others worse problems...).
As you see, the situation is quite complex, and while rules of Go seem simple, their precise definition is not easy. In practice, you eventually have to rely on the sportmanship of the players or on a referee decision.
Personally I have played till now only under the japanese rule, and in case of problems (very rare as this rule is quite detailled, but then rather complex in its exceptions handling), a senior player says the truth, and, at least in Japan, this truth is undisputed and becomes the laws :-)... quite simple!
Lionel
Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-01 13:22:24)
Infinite repetition
Couldn't the problem of infinite repetition be solved by giving the full point to White (the 2nd player, not like chess) ? It could be a compensation added to komi, as it can force black to give such stones that provoke repetition !?
But can White force easily such a situation with many stones....... ?
Lionel Vidal (2006-06-01 15:02:56)
Infinite repetition
Well, it might work, but that seems unfair to black IMO, because it creates discrepancies in the rules depending on you being sente or gote.
Admitedly, the komi can be seen as such discrepancy, but all it does is forcing sente to be bit more aggresive, the stategy and tactics, the feeling of the game being globally the same. What you propose would induce a kind of strategic play on the rules... not really Go anymore!
I realise I may not be clear: as an extreme example of rules discrepanies, just consider Renju. Here the rules are different for sente and gote and the strategy is indeed really different for both! While this is fine in Renju, because actually it became the heart of the game, I do not think Go needs it.
Besides, it would spoil somehow IMO the aesthetic feeling of the game flow.
Just my opinions of course :-)
Lionel Vidal (2006-06-01 22:17:30)
Go rules
I don't quite understand what kind of problems with draws remains with FICGS (sic!) rules: as passing is not allowed, if you add the non repetition of the same whole board position and a non integer komi, I do not see how a draw is still possible.
BUT... this solution does actually not solve anything as I don't think you can forbid passing (as a matter of fact, I checked the official japanese, chinese, new-zealand, AGA (USA) and SST rules: pass is allowed and needed)
The main reason is, IMO, that you need a legal way to end the game (double pass). And yes there are situations where the best move for BOTH players is NOT to move at all in the area: the simplest case I can think of is thousand-year kos, which in the case of japanese rule usually end in seki.
Note that a single pass (that is the game goes on after it) can change the difference in scores in area mode: the AGA rule introduces the concept of pass stone to compensate and insists on white making the last move (if necessary with an additional pass and pass stone) to ensure that the total number of stones played by the two players are equal!
(BTW this is one of the reasons, admitedly far behind familiarity, why I prefer the japanese rule in face to face go)
To sum things up (!!), while I agree that FICGS could develop its own set of rules, I feel that the subject is too complex and error-prone, and has been long, and still is, disputed by highly competent authorities : why not use the result of their work?
I would add that the point of all this is rather moot if you consider that situation like triple ko and alii are indeed rather rare: why not stricly stick to, say, the official chinese rule, and replay the game by referee decision in the rare cases where neither playing side will yield?
oh, but I could also check what they do in the kiseido server ?!?
oh, and do take what I say with great caution: I don't feel and I am certainly not competent enough on the subject! Any other advice over there? :-)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-01 21:25:04)
Discrepancies
It is very clear Lionel.
In another hand, each tournament rules and generally each situation influence the strategy at chess (so other games). And FICGS chess wch rules are special ones in the knockout tournament that should avoid draws. Actually, only a "one game match" can have no influence on 'the game'. (not perfectly true, as the player's strength is another factor)
Rules are flexible, particularly for the game of Go, so I think we can use even uncommom ones, if it is balanced enough (= there's still a challenge). Do you have an idea about this rule avoiding repetition, how many stones or komi it could be worth ?
Another question : Are there situations that look like zugzwang in Go (where the best move could be 'passing') ?
Lionel Vidal (2006-06-02 16:28:11)
Go rules
It's me again :-)
What is the point of the special cases you chose? Why not simply follow the chinese rule? I reread it yesterday and
compared to what you say:
- reappearance of the same board position is forbidden (note that should be easy to check by computer with hash keys associated to positions)
- Seki is not really a special case in chinese rule (it is only in territory scoring): you count stones and enclosed vacant points; others vacant points are share equally.
- Winner is determined by comparing one's score to 180 1/2 (half number of points of the board).
- Komi: 2 3/4 points are deducted from black's score and added to white's.
- After both sides have agreed to end the game (that is after a double pass), if any unsettled positions remain on the board, both sides' stones are treated as alive (that is neat and solve most drawing problems)
- Basically a player that makes an illegal move loses his turn (i.e. in effect passes): that includes repeating the same position (why should white win in such a case?).
That sounds much cleaner IMO.
The only possible draw may be some very complex round robin kos, where the position keeps changing, but I guess we can forget it (and it should eventually been resoved by double pass anyway, even if one side is unhappy: see the preceding neat point).
BTW you can probably find the full text on the Web (I have only a paper version from the 1988 official rules of Chinese Weiqi Association).
Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-02 20:39:25)
FICGS : Chinese rules !
You convinced me :)
(sorry, I didn't understand well some concepts before)
Good news : I have implemented the non-repetition rules with hash keys...
Now the rules are exactly CHINESE RULES with a 6.5 komi, which is the value which tends to be used in tournaments.
Thank you Lionel :-)
Lionel Vidal (2006-06-03 09:50:52)
Chinese rules
After reading the new rules (nice :-)), I have two suggestions:
- maybe you should cleary state that repetition of position leads to a loss (or does it? it is the way I understand the wording, but either way is possible), which is not the case in chinese rules (AFAIK at least in some versions, you just loose your turn).
- maybe you should announce somewhere (not in the rules of course) whether the already running games have to follow the new rules. Knowing the applied komi is important, even in fuseki.
Now let's try them :-)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-06 17:39:44)
7.5 komi + Superko
Hello to all.
In accordance with Chinese rules, the last update of the FICGS rules of Go states a 7.5 komi (3.75 by chinese counting)
http://www.britgo.org/rules/compare.html#threeKK
The last ambiguity may concern the superko rule, as now FICGS graphical interface forbids any board repetition (not only previous move). See this page on BRITGO site, at the very bottom : Positional superko (PSK) means a play may not recreate a previous board position from the game, referring to the position just after the play and consequent removals.
However, forbidding any board repetition is the only way to prevent draw games.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-06-19 16:19:58)
Go is not a drawn game...
Not for tomorrow, hopefully !
But programs are killing chess little by little for sure... Maybe then we'll play Go, which has the advantage not to be a drawn game (we even don't know the result for sure with a 7.5 komi)... or maybe we'll play big chess :)
Don Groves (2006-09-16 05:05:55)
Go rules
Thibault, I have searched for "go rules" but cannot find anywhere on FICGS where all the rules are spelled out, komi, passing, etc. What is the standard komi for our games?
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-16 12:13:33)
Go rules (playing rules)
Hello Don.
I just updated the 'Help' page, to find easily the good links.
Playing rules for Go (2006 september 16) : "Rules for Go are chinese rules, as defined by the Chinese Weiqi Association. (...) Scoring method is area scoring with chinese counting. Positional superko rule apply. Komi is 7.5 points."
Chinese rules - http://senseis.xmp.net/?Chineserules
Feel free if you have any question.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-30 01:35:07)
FICGS Go / Weiqi rules
Hello Roger.
Two ways to reach FICGS Go rules :
1. 'Help', then 'FICGS general rules' or 'Chess & Go playing rules' links.
2. 'Membership' link after you logout. Or this direct link :
http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#playing
Reminder : FICGS Go rules (2006 september 30)
"Go games are played on a 19 x 19 goban. Go moves are given by coordinates a1 to t19 (e.g. : s13), as showed on the go viewer. Please note that i letter doesn't exist on the viewer, so any move with letter i (e.g. : i5) won't be understood by the viewer, consequently the move is false. Please let the graphical interface generate the move. Komi is 7.5 points. Please note that you can pass, just entering 'pass'.
Rules for Go are chinese rules, as defined by the Chinese Weiqi Association. Both players must play until one resign, both players pass (then call referee) or game is adjudicated. It's up to the players to discuss the score at the end of the game, so calling referee should be exceptional. Scoring method is area scoring with chinese counting. Positional superko rule apply, it's impossible to repeat a previous board position."
Thibault de Vassal (2006-11-15 14:23:14)
Go scorer (improvement)
Hello to all Go players.
A small improvement in the Go scorer : Komi (7.5 points) is now added to White score and the program says who 'probably' wins !
Also a small bug corrected in the count algorithm, about a few unknown points...
In example, you can score this exciting game Vorobev -Steveson :
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=score&game=3102
Just remove these groups : n8 m9 g18 r18 g17
Score is 183 to 178 (+ 7.5) -> White wins by 2.5 points. (verified with a viewer)
See the game here :
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=3102
Don Groves (2006-11-20 07:33:54)
Go : Komi
I feel 7.5 points komi is too much for some Go games. Since we do not use handicaps (which is good, IMHO) should not komi be reduced if White is a higher rated player than Black? For players of equal ability, 7.5 komi is fine, but when I must give Sebastian Ilie 7.5 points, it seems a joke. He beats me by 200 anyway ;-) I suggest komi be reduced by one point for every 100 (or perhaps 200) rating points difference (to a minimum of 0.5) when White is the superior player. What do others think about this?
Thibault de Vassal (2006-11-20 15:59:46)
Go : Komi
Komi 7.5 points is the 'estimated' fair value while playing perfect (at least pro)...
Since we use elo rating system for Go, I think any handicap (stones or komi) is nonsense, but maybe we could create an unrated category of tournaments, simultaneous games or matches with a handicap... Could be fun & more interesting in some cases.
Lionel Vidal (2006-11-20 16:40:27)
7.5 or 6.5 ?
In most recent pro games (eg. last meijin match) the komi was 6.5 if I remember well.
Oh, but that was japanese rule ?!? Is that where the difference comes from? hum, I am sure I *knew* that... :-(
Lionel Vidal (2006-11-20 21:29:31)
You seems in advance :-)
Well, considering the results of last year pro games (almost a perfect 50-50 result, according to my rather large but admittedly incomplete database) I am not sure a komi change from 6.5 will occur soon, at least in the japanese pro scene... And the number of recent games in gobase that ends in 1 or 1/2 points difference is astonishing :-) (not really significant, I know, as pros have the capacity to keep a tiny edge till the end, reducing it to simplify the game... but still :-))
Anyway, for us, simple and humble go mortals, that does not change much :-)
(but even at my low level I tend to be more aggressive in my fuseki while playing with an opponent of my level or stronger when the komi is 7.5 instead of say 5.5... so considering the increase/decrease (black/white) of aggressive attitude, maybe it is important for most of us because the feeling of a game might eventually change)
Lionel Vidal (2006-11-20 21:57:03)
Go handicap and rating
Is handicap Go really nonsensical in rated tournaments?
While it seems so in a world championship, where the aim is to determine the stronger player in an absolute sense, why should it be so in a tournament, where the aim is to determine the best player in a relative sense... hum, not a very clean or clear sentence, but I hope you got the idea :-)
In face to face Go, in most amateur tournaments, it is not a problem, and you can win or loose a tournament, win or loose points, playing with an handicap (some tournaments set a limit lower than 9 in the number of handicap stones). I do not know the formulae used to compute the knew ratings, but in practice it works well. (and the same thing works also in Shogi tournaments)
Before WWII, even pros played with handicap (one or two stones at most, more commonly with a fixed color and no komi) and that *for money*!! Nowadays this is not the case anymore: maybe the increase of pro-tournament prizes change the noble way to be the best of two players fighting *their best* at their *respective* level!
Anyway, I think such an idea may be interresting to motivate players: when weaker, I will fight my best because I have a chance to win, and when stronger, I *have* to fight well :-)
We could think of a rating system where you play your first, say, 20 games without handicap to get a starting rating, and then to receive or give handicaps automatically in tournaments. We could then consider a rating as fixed after a bunch of 20 more games...
Or any other system that will always generate tense and dangerous games! That will be, at least for me, a great motivation to play more :-)
(but then I do not care much for my rating :-))
Don Groves (2006-11-21 00:45:58)
Go: Komi
Hi Thibault, I'm confused as to why elo ratings matter. Go has used komi a long time to compensate for the first move while chess never has. But in chess, you have narrower rating groups, so practically never is an expert matched against a novice. Since in Go we have only three rating groups, these uneven matches happen many times. Until we have enough Go players to have more rating groups, a sliding komi scale would be a way to level the playing field a bit. PS - I'm not interested in traditional Go handicap games -- the empty board is the only true way to begin, IMHO.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-11-21 11:22:58)
Go handicap and rating
It makes sense. That's an interesting idea.
However I feel it could be quite difficult to balance the handicap with ratings and to keep the results of the games coherent. Finally, it is another rating system. Thinking about that...
Previous thread - http://www.ficgs.com/forum_read_1611-Go-Komi.html
Thibault de Vassal (2006-11-21 11:32:39)
Go: Komi
Stones handicap or Komi handicap is handicap anyway... I'm not sure it makes sense to change the Komi (Lionel would agree, I think).
As I just said in another thread, if we add a handicap system which gives chances enough to weak players against strong players, I'm afraid results & ratings / ranks don't mean anything anymore then, at least more aleatory. This is another game... (and such 'strange' rules might frighten beginners).
I think it could be ok (as another challenge) in an unrated tournaments category.
Lionel Vidal (2006-11-21 13:03:54)
Oops, sorry!
After rereading my last message, I saw I forgot a negation that change the whole meaning: I meant a komi change would *not* occur soon in the Japanese scene IMO!!
Otherwise my whole point and argument is nonsense... anyway, while I would prefer 6.5 (just to play the very first move identifying myself to some of my Go hereos... come on, just grow up :-), I can live with the still much uncommon 7.5 :-)
Lionel Vidal (2006-11-21 13:47:55)
Komi vs handicap
IMO, Thibault is quite right: it would make no sense to increase Komi instead of playing with handicap stones.
To give points or to give stones is not the same: the very nature of handicap stones is pedagogic, that is to help *both* players to improve. Go strategy is complex, but can often been seen as a delicate balance between power (thickness) and territory (points). Handicap stones are put on Hoshi on purpose: to help the weaker player to build and use thickness, the most difficult concept to master compare to territory, where a beginner can actually count concrete points (or so he believes at first :-)
Playing at 9 handicap stones, or giving, say, 100 points komi is not the same and never will be: the weaker player has no chance with such a komi, because he will have no anchor to help his stones live and will probably be completely destroyed... but much worse, he cannot improve his play easily because he'll never be in a position where he could *try* to think strategically.
IMO, true go is not non-handicap go, but
a fair game where the tactical and strategic true nature of the game is preserved. How could we say that, for instance, Dosaku 'Go Saint' games are not true go, when he was at least one stone stronger than all his fellow pro players, giving them Black (no komi at that time) or one,two stones?
The beauty of handicap go is that IMO it *is* still true go :-) You can compare to chess where giving a piece, say a N as Lasker used to do, change the strategic nature of the game through a controlled exchange policy.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-11-21 13:57:05)
Komi 7.5
"In China, the usual compensation point was 5.5, but 7.5 is now standard."
Sources :
http://senseis.xmp.net/?Komi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komidashi
Lionel Vidal (2006-11-21 14:12:35)
Komi 7.5
Well, in France too, it is officially 7.5 in tournaments, with counting based on the chinese method (and you have to ensure that both players played the same number of stones), but with no provision for complex cases (multi-kos, complex sekis...). In practice, it works!
I wonder if the japanese way of counting makes a difference in komi value... I'll check that...
Don Groves (2006-11-21 20:49:23)
Go: komi
Hello Lionel (and Thibault),
I think you misunderstand what I wrote. I am suggesting "reducing" komi in certain games, not "increasing" komi as a way to handicap games. I agree the games should not be handicapped. I do not agree that a much higher rated player playing white should receive 7.5 komi against a much weaker player. The much stronger player already has a great advantage and does not need to be compensated for the weaker player making the first move.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-11-21 21:30:43)
Go: komi
Hi Don.
As Lionel explained to me a few months ago, Komi shouldn't be interpreted as an advantage or handicap !
I first thought komi could be 0... but it doesn't make any sense in Go philosophy & theory. Komi's purpose is only to make the game fair, and the estimated value seems to be about 6.5 or 7.5
Don Groves (2006-11-29 08:04:02)
Go: Komi revisited
This may have already been discussed but I wasn't around then. ;) I've read in more than one place that komi in Chinese scoring should be half the Japanese value or 3.75 instead of 7.5. Comments please.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-11-29 12:19:13)
Go: Komi revisited
Hi Don.
"should be"... maybe depends on the level of play ?!
Where did you read this ? Any links ?
Don Groves (2006-11-29 23:01:22)
Go: Komi revisited
Forget what I wrote ;) Chinese komi is only 3.75 but they both add it to white and subtract it from black!? Thus, 7.5 added to white gives the same result. In one place I read about this, they left out the second part, which led to my confusion.
Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-07 17:37:16)
Scrabble
What about a "komi" ? :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-03-12 15:31:09)
Major update : SSL encryption forms
Hello to all.
This is the last major update before money tournaments can start...
Now you can login through SSL encryption forms, meaning the best security to prevent hacking.
You should use SSL encryption forms only to browse the whole site with HTTPS, particularly if you wish to enter money tournaments later... It is also strongly recommended to change your password regularly (at least 8 characters, numbers & letters is best).
Thus you should always see HTTPS:// before the url after you login.
Feel free to follow this link for more advices about security & phishing :
http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#security
FICGS now uses SSL data encryption, hash functions and a bunch of other security features...
4 login forms is a lot but thus anyone can connect, even with browsers that doesn't support HTTPS and Javascript.
Also a few minor bug fixes and improvements, komi updated in .SGF files, reinforced hash functions, last connection date displayed in profile and so on...
All feedbacks are welcome :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-05-03 02:13:44)
Go championship cycle
1st FICGS go WCH will start in a few months, but I'm still not really satisfied with current rules :
"FICGS world Go championship is first a round-robin tournament, involving 11 players including the 6 players who won or lead most Go tournaments started during the previous year and the 5 highest rated players, among players who entered the waiting list. If more than 2 players win (or lead) a tournament with equal score, no win is granted. A win in a "pro" tournament is worth 9 "kyu" wins. A win in a "dan" tournament is worth 3 "kyu" wins. In case of equality, the next places will be taken in account.
The winner of this tournament is the challenger for FICGS world champion title. In case of equality, the winner is the player with the highest tournament entry rating (TER), If this rule can't designate a unique challenger, current ratings will be considered. If current world champion defends his title, they will play a 6 games match. In case of equality (3-3), the winner is the former world champion.
All games are played in 30 days + 1 day / move. Komi is 7.5 points. Rules for Go are chinese rules, as defined by the Chinese Weiqi Association."
Not clear enough, quite complicate and strange, even if I like the idea of a 2-stages tournament (round-robin tournament then challenger vs. champion match) and to give the opportunity to the best rated Go players to enter it without playing tournaments before... Other questions, double round-robin or not, should it be open to all players.. Feel free to suggest your ideas for a nice Go WCH cycle ! :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-05-15 15:16:41)
Double RR Go tournaments
Does it make sense to organize double round-robin Go tournaments ? .. or is the Komi fair enough ?!
Mikhail Ruzin (2007-05-30 13:08:42)
White win the game
Hi Phil.
And what is question about game 9752?
White win the game. Its clear.
There are not any groups with unknown (questionable) status.
Use MultiGo (for example) to count result of game. (M19 stil not defended)
"Chinese Rule:
White: 191.25 = 186 (Points) + 3 (Shared) / 2 + 7.5 (Komi) / 2
Black: 169.75 = 172 (Points) + 3 (Shared) / 2 - 7.5 (Komi) / 2
W + 10.75
Japanese Rule:
White: 119.5 = 100 (Territory) + 12 (Black's Dead) + 7.5 (Komi)
Black: 98 = 98 (Territory) + 0 (White's Dead)
W + 21.5"
Thomas Tamayo (2007-08-15 14:40:37)
White is far ahead
Corners are important, but a quick count shows white with at least 90 + komi, black with around 65. Since B has to escape around e6 B can't hope to get much more while W will continue to earn points.
Game 13059, though, is a mis-resignation. I set it up as a problem at http://www.godiscussions.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3856
Ulrich Imbeck (2007-09-15 13:35:18)
komi
Has the chinese counting komi?
Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-15 13:55:14)
komi
?! .. sorry Ulrich, you mean ?
Ulrich Imbeck (2007-09-15 16:54:00)
Komidashi
Komi is the short word of komidashi. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komidashi
It means points added to one player's score as compensation for playing as White.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-15 17:46:41)
Go tournaments
This message is displayed before to enter a Kyu/Dan/Pro tournament... (by the way there's a mistake, it will be corrected soon) I hope it helps.
"All games are played in 30 days + 1 day / move. Komi is 7.5 points.
Rules for Go are chinese rules, as defined by the Chinese Weiqi Association. Both players must play until one resign, both players pass (then resign or call referee) or game is adjudicated. It's up to the players to discuss the score at the end of the game, so calling referee should be exceptional. Scoring method is area scoring with chinese counting. Positional superko rule apply, it's impossible to repeat a previous board position ('incorrect move' message would be displayed)."
Thibault de Vassal (2007-11-07 21:36:55)
Go game 9307 score
Could someone confirm that according to FICGS rules (chinese counting, Komi 7.5), the score in game 9307 after removing groups m17, h3 is W+0.5
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=score&game=9307
Actually my opponent should have won the game, his first pass (probably because of a bad count) just gave me the point I needed :/ .. Now an interesting question, as there's no possible draw (that's a pity), would you resign in such a case ?
Thanks for your answers.
Mikhail Ruzin (2007-11-08 10:54:22)
Go game 9307 score
Yes, according to FICGS rules (chinese counting, Komi 7.5), the score in game 9307 after removing groups m17, h3 is W+0.5
Black pass is fatal mistake.
The second question is too hard 8)
Don Groves (2008-08-10 00:32:11)
Komi
Yes, Andrew, the second player is compensated with some number of stones, usually between 5.5 and 7.5 (ties are eliminated). This is called komi. I don't know what the komi was in the MoGo match.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-10 07:45:29)
Mogo
So mogo gets to put down 9 stones to start with but I dont know whether he moved first or second - it sounds like he moved first and there was no Komi. Anyway its a big handicap but the breakthrough appears to be that the win was achieved on a 19x19 board in a "long" game (1 hour) Kim didnt use so much of his time but said more time spent would not have made any difference prononcing Mogo invincible at 9 stones and very difficult with 8 stones. The programmers were excited because they said 1 year ago they needed 18 stones now 9 and maybe a year to lose the other 9! If they can maintain this rate of improvement then they are suggesting that in a few years mogo could be the strongest go player in the world. Interestingly there is a reversal here with chess: programs being stronger against humans the shorter the game (ie blitz) but Mogo did better with more time! I guess this is about the time Mogo needs to assess the long term consequences of each move.
Don Groves (2008-09-20 05:03:31)
MoGo
Hi, Andrew -- It would be an amazing feat if MoGo programmers could eliminate its nine-stone handicap in only one year of development. With each stone eliminated, the combinatorial aspects increase exponentially and the human advantage in pattern recognition and game understanding increases in proportion.
FYI - In a handicap game, the weaker player always goes first (ie., plays black). The handicap stones are placed on predetermined points and that constitutes black's first turn. White plays next and they alternate the remainder of the game. Komi still applies unless otherwise agreed.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-02-28 03:35:14)
Svante Carl wins FICGS Go WCH (again)
Congratulations to Svante Carl von Erichsen who keeps the FICGS Go champion title by beating Ke Lu 5d on an impressive 5-0 score, also reaching a rating of 2653 !
A rematch just started between our two top Go players, as Ke Lu convincingly won the 3rd FICGS Go WCH preliminary tournament by 7/7
You can follow the games here :
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__GO__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000003
Svante Carl kindly accepted to answer a few questions on his match :
FICGS - Hello Svante Carl, first of all congratulations for your win in the FICGS
correspondence Go championship final. Your opponent was Ke Lu 5 dan, you
won 4 games out of 5 already (the last game is not finished yet), how do
you explain such a result?
Svante Carl -
Hello! Thank you very much! It is certainly astonishing for me that I
was able to hold my own in these games. I believe that the main factor
that helped me in getting on even terms with such a strong player was
that I could spend much more time analyzing each move than in a
face-to-face or online direct playing situation.
FICGS - Did you have a particular preparation or plan before to start the games?
Svante Carl - The only things I planned beforehand was to really give my best, and to
make the games as distinct as possible.
FICGS - The site will now try to attract more correspondence Go players from Asia
(with a few chinese, japanese or korean words on the home page already),
what do you think about the games format played at FICGS
(30 days + 1 day / move, chinese rules komi 7.5 points) and the championship rules?
Svante Carl - I like the format. I am also interested in the rules of Go as well as
the rules that surround Go, like tournament rules and time settings.
My current conviction is that the "real, pure" Go rules are area rules
with superko, and territory rules should be seen as a shortcut which
should give the same result. I have come to think that the "Taiwan
rule", i.e. White gets a point of compensation if Black got the last
play (before the first pass), is a sensible part of the rules. FICGS
has taken a very easy route by declaring the rule set and leaving
negotiation of the result to the players. While in the end, it is only
important who won, I think that showing a result as e.g. "White+3",
"Black+Resign" adds a lot of flavour.
As a time system, I think that bonus time (a.k.a. Fischer time), like on
FICGS, is a very general and sensible approach to timing a game like Go.
I think that many "real-world" tournaments and internet servers will
switch to that in the future, for all, blitz, speed, normal, slow, and
correspondence games.
The championship format is quite nice. I like the title
holder/challenger way of tournament series. The only thing I would like
to see is some sort of nigiri to determine the colours in the odd game.
Attracting players from Asia is really a worthwhile goal. I look
forward to playing players from all over the world.
FICGS - Does correspondence Go bring you something more than real time Go?
What is more addictive according to you?
Svante Carl - Since I think that analyzing is a forte of mine, I might be a bit
stronger at correspondence Go than at "real time" Go. I don't think
that one is more addictive than the other.
FICGS - Do you often play real time Go online? What servers do you prefer?
Svante Carl - I usually play on KGS, but not too much, perhaps one or two games per
week on average, often in "bursts". KGS is quite nice, but not perfect.
Sometimes I play at CyberOro, but there is much less communication; I
like to watch pro games there.
FICGS - Do you use softwares that assist you in your games (FICGS rules allow
this)? What do you think about computer Go in general nowadays?
Svante Carl - I only use a board or a simple SGF file viewer for analyzing. There are
no playing programs that could help me. The programs have advanced
quite much recently, but I think that it will still be a long time
before they can beat me in an even game. Currently, most tests of these
programs are against professional players with high handicaps, and I
think that this is a good situation for the bots, since they get
exponentially weaker the further the game is from the end -- high
handicap practically eliminates the opening, their weakest spot. I
would like to see more tests against amateur players at the bots' own level.
FICGS - Do you play other games (board games, video games...), what is your
favourite one?
Svante Carl - Go is certainly my absolute favourite. I also know chess, although I am
really weak at that. I also like "german board games", there are some
really nice pearls there. In video games, well, there are also some
pearls, but they get drowned by a mass of ... not so good games..., I
don't waste time looking at that scene any more. I also played some
online poker, but it wasn't able to keep me interested.
FICGS - Will you defend your title again against Ke Lu who also won
the 3rd wch tournament?
Svante Carl - Of course, I am looking forward to that!
FICGS - Could you give us your impressions on the games, how it
went from the beginning to the end, do you think that
time pressure were a non-negligible factor in the result
(the clocks of Ke Lu were quickly near 1 or 2 days left)?
Svante Carl - I was a bit surprised that he let his time drop to such a low level
right at the beginning, perhaps he was not familiar yet with the vacancy
feature at FICGS. I can't see his reasons for this, or how much time he
actually could spend on his games. I was ahead in each game when it
timed out, though.
I think that game 2 was quite even from the start. The skirmish in the
lower left resulted in me capturing a little group, but he got a nice
framework on the lower side. My prospects of reducing this were a bit
hampered by the fact that my right side group was not completely
settled. I found a way to sacrifice some stones to settle my group
while fixing the framework's extent and keeping sente to secure my top
side, at which time, the game was still almost even, but I think that I
was a few points ahead then. Later, I could seal the top side with some
extra points through some rather blunt forcing moves.
In game 3, my opponent made an approach with White 24 that is usually
regarded as bad in this situation, because the pincer Black 25 works out
very well in conjunction with the stone on the left side. He tried to
settle with White 26, but I refused to make things so easy, even though
the result from the usual joseki would not have been bad. He resisted
Black 27, but I think that White 28 is an overplay. The resulting fight
left me with nice profit in that corner and sente, while he made some
centre thickness. I then tried to carefully neutralize this thickness,
but I may have played some slack moves in the course. Later, I was able
to keep a little moyo in the lower right centre, and then I poked into
his right-side territory where he had left a serious weakness earlier.
Game 1 started out with an interesting fight in the upper right. After
White 42, both the three captured black and the two almost captured
white stones retain some serious aji, which I came back to fix on my
side a few moves later. When I could set up a splitting attack with
Black 77, he was able to connect his two weak groups, but in bad shape.
I continued to keep this dragon separated from the top, planning to
invade the top side afterwards. However, with White 110, instead of
connecting by playing B6, he saved some centre stones, and I proceeded
to separate and kill the dragon. He may have overlooked that my upper
left side group was still able to live after 110 and 111.
In game 4, after White 22, Black's stones on the left side have a
strange relation. The three stones in the corner are a bit far from
C10, but putting another move here is way too slow. He tried to remedy
this situation with the following moves. After Black 27, there are
weaknesses left in both sides' shape. When I entered with White 32, I
thought that his weakness at F13 would let me settle easily, but he
attacked very hard. After White 60, there are some weaknesses in my
shape, but he also has a weakish group in the centre. Playing at K10
with White 76 before taking the two stones with H2 felt very important
to me. At move 94, I couldn't find a good move to complete my moyo at
the top, but I thought that I had found a good point to invade. This
was much harder than I thought, since after Black 95, the 3-3 point
fails to live. With 96 and 98, I thought that I would get a ko, but he
played a line that I had excluded earlier on account of too many cuts in
Black's outside shape. However, with Black 107, he made things very
difficult for me, since cutting at P16 doesn't work out too well -- my
inside group doesn't have enough liberties. I cut at Q14 instead with
the hope to at least get some outside forcing opportunities that might
have been able to keep me in the game. I think that Black 115 should
have been at R12, because after White 116, R12 and N16 have become miai.
Black 117 just doesn't work at all. I really got lucky in the end here.
These impressions are naturally one-sided, and I would be really
interested what stronger players might say about these games.
FICGS - Thank you very much and have good games !
Svante Carl - Thank you!
Thibault de Vassal (2010-09-17 00:29:38)
Svante Carl von Erichsen on Go WCH #4
As you probably read in the news, Svante Carl von Erichsen won the 4th FICGS Go WCH, beating his challenger Huayong Yang 3-2, Svante Carl wins the Go championship for the 4th time in a row!
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__GO__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000004
Svante Carl kindly accepted to answer a few questions on his match & computer Go:
FICGS - Hello Svante Carl, congratulations once again for winning
this match against a surprising challenger who started here a few
months ago with a 10 kyu rank, Huayong Yang, now rated 2438 after
scoring 2 points in your 5 games match (which is a great achievement
for sure). What did you think about his play & yours in these games?
Svante Carl - I think that he greatly underestimated his rank initially. As far as
I know, he had not played for a long time and believed that his
ability had therefore deteriorated. I do not think that you can drop
more than one or at most two stones, though -- it is like cycling or
swimming, you never unlearn it. I had the impression that we were
quite evenly matched in summa, but our strengths are in different
aspects of the game; I cannot really put my finger on the difference,
though.
FICGS - After a previous win, you said that you spend a quite long
time to analyze, which probably helps you to reach a higher level
than 2 dan (your EGF rating) compared to OTB play... It looks
obvious to me that correspondence chess moves generally ask for much
more time than Go moves at a high level but I may be wrong, how much
time did you spend on your longest analysis during the match? Do
you remember for which move?
Svante Carl - I usually spend at least a few minutes on each move, except when the
continuation is obvious. I often use more, and if I do not find a
satisfactory move then, I will even postpone the move to another
day, so that I can sleep over it and let my subconcious work on it.
FICGS - Do you watch other games played by your future opponent
before starting your match? Do you think that this is really important
in preparation like it can be in Correspondence chess?
Svante Carl - I sometimes glance over the games in the championship qualification tournament, but I do not try to prepare this way. I do not think that such preparation has any value in Go, especially in correspondence Go,
since you have time during the game to do deep analysis. I usually
try to take each game out of standard fuseki patterns pretty quickly,
anyway. Of course, I know that my opponents in these title matches
are always very tough and demand my utmost respect.
FICGS - Do you still follow the recent developments in computer Go?
What do you think about the latest Go engines? How much time do we
have yet before the best Go players are caught by computers according to you?
Svante Carl - I have the impression that the currently most promising technology
(Monte Carlo/UCT) has the potential to achieve a rank of about 2 or 3
dan (EGF/KGS). I think that the next fundamentally new idea or
breakthrough might add 2 stones, to get to 4 or 5 dan. I do not have
any idea where it might go from that, but I think that it gets always
harder.
What I would find interesting is having more intermediate board sizes.
The best bots are almost on par with the best professionals on 9x9
now. I would propose to try to achieve a similar level on 11x11, then
13x13, then 15x15 etc.. Regarding 9x9, I think that the currently
predominant komi of 7.5 points is too big, and that this has a
negative impact on the experiments because the bots do not play in a
balanced environment. It might be worthwhile to introduce the Taiwan
rule (last move compensation) to get more fine-grained scores.
FICGS - What programs did you use this year to analyze? (just trying, of course it may be part of your secrets ;))
Svante Carl - It is not a secret. I just use an editor, usually EidoGo or CGoban3, to visualize the variations I imagine.
FICGS - Finally, what thoughts would you like to share on your 5
games, that could help us not to miss the best times or to help us to understand the most complex moves...
Svante Carl - I cannot give a detailed commentary, but I can try to summarize my impressions.
I think that Game 5 was quite balanced until move 21, but I think that
the white invasion was a bit ambitious then. Of course, White did not
need to die there, but after moves 32-33 I think that Black had a good
result anyway (move 32 should go out faster in my opinion; note how
E14 helps Black in enclosing White).
In Game 3, I think things got quite difficult for White in the lower
left, but I let him take the initiative by backing off at move 35 (I
should have simply closed off F10 then). White gained control of the
centre as a result, and in the large endgame, I lost too many points there.
In Game 4, I fell behind in the opening through some slow moves (there
was some discussion on the Life-in-19x19 forum about this, see the
link in the comments of that game). In the endgame, Black then lost some points in the centre, so that I was a bit ahead when the game timed out.
In Game 1, I made some bad decisions on the left side, and never
managed to turn things around. I think I was behind by about 5 points in the end.
In Game 2, I think that Black should not have ignored move 24. After
I got quite some territory from my moyo and also reduced his top side, I could play it safe.
I look forward to the games with Olivier Drouot that recently started,
but I also hope that Yang Huayong will re-enter the championship cycle.
Thibault de Vassal (2011-10-11 11:37:09)
Go Komi 7.5, advantage for Black/White?
A topic on the game of Go.
Someone suggested that the current FICGS Go champion should be able to decide the color of the 1st game (the WCH final match is played in 5 games) because the komi may be an advantage for White.
I'm not favourable to this idea because IMO the komi "may be" an advantage for White or Black according to the players level, and it should be about equal for top players (9p, theorically). Anyway, I guess that the champion has quite an advantage already by playing the final match only.
Any opinion on this?
Don Groves (2011-10-12 01:05:09)
Go Komi 7.5, advantage for Black/White?
+1 ;-)
Don Groves (2011-10-12 05:51:16)
Go Komi 7.5, advantage for Black/White?
I think we can assume the Go WCH will always be between high level players, no?
Thibault de Vassal (2011-10-12 11:25:21)
Go Komi 7.5, advantage for Black/White?
Sure, but the komi may have a different impact on 5 dan players than on 9p ones. Actually I have no idea, maybe the top players here have an opinion on this?
Don Groves (2011-10-12 11:41:02)
Go Komi 7.5, advantage for Black/White?
Why not leave the decision to the champion and let him/her choose? Then no one has to guess what their opinion might be. Seems a simple solution to me...
Thibault de Vassal (2011-10-12 12:28:43)
Go Komi 7.5, advantage for Black/White?
IMO the format shouldn't depend on a player's decision. And one never know what can happen, if the champion is unreachable during a while then the games could start late or a color should be chosen by default. Doesn't look great to me.
Don Groves (2011-10-13 00:05:36)
Go Komi 7.5, advantage for Black/White?
I surrender ;-)
Thibault de Vassal (2011-10-14 20:56:07)
Go Komi 7.5, advantage for Black/White?
Let's just wait for more opinions on this...
Thibault de Vassal (2011-12-05 17:28:11)
Timing
About the rules:
"All games are played in 30 minutes + 10 seconds / move. Komi is 7.5 points. The first three rounds will start at the date indicated as "deadline" at 13:00, 15:00 and 17:00 server time. The last three rounds will start at 13:00, 15:00 and 17:00 server time the next day. It is possible to enter the waiting list until the end of the tournament (please also warn the tournament director). Please do not try to create any game by yourself as all games will be created by the tournament director."
Server time is french time...
Thibault de Vassal (2013-07-15 14:16:39)
Interview with new FICGS Go champion
Yen-Wei Huang, winner of the 8th FICGS Go championship, kindly accepted to answer a few questions for this very interesting interview!
_______________________
- Hello Yen-Wei and congratulations for winning the FICGS Go championship! Xiao Tong was obviously a tough opponent, yet you won 5-0, what happened
during this match?
Hi Thib. Thanks again for your kind invitation. Xiao is definitely one
of the strongest Go players on FICGS, and I was really, really lucky
to have won all five games. In fact, I was behind in three of them
until Xiao made some mistakes late in the games: in game 69092, I
forced a tough ko fight which jeopardized my lower group. Xiao made a
mistake at P2 as he missed my T3 could force another ko. Game 69093
was very close towards the end but I think the move at C13 caused him
the game. Game 69096 was even closer that I won by half a point thanks
to the big 7.5 komi. The other two games were not easy either and I am
glad I could have hung on to the lead. Overall I really enjoyed our
match and I would love to have a rematch with Xiao in the future.
- You're from Taiwan, could you tell us a bit more about you? At what age
did you learn Go? Do you have any other ranks (e.g. at other sites)?
I learned Go when I was 5 and I have always enjoyed playing all my
life. I used to play on servers like KGS and Tygem and I was around
6-7 dan on these sites. Recently I don't have that much time to play
so that's why turned to turn-based server like FICGS.
- What do you think about the world of Go these days? Who is the very best
player in the world according to you?
I think the past two years were the "warring period" in the world of
Go. I would say Lee Sedol was the best player two years ago, but he
seems to have lost his dominant position recently. There are many
rising stars that are winning the world champions. I am especially
keeping an eye on Yuta Iyama, who I think is No. 1 in Japan and has
started to threaten the dominance of Chinese and Korean players.
- What about computer Go and its future? How many years do you give to the human before losing to the machine?
As a software engineer I foresee the computer Go beats the world's No.
1 player in two decades. Crazy Stone already beat Yoshio Ishida with
four handicap stones earlier this year, and I believe it wouldn't take
long for computers to beat pros in two handicap stones. The real
challenge will come when computers need to go from handicap games to
even games since they need to advance from defensive mode to attack
mode. I am really excited to see how Artificial Intelligence can
surprise us with its "creative" moves when the time comes.
- Do you use engines or databases? What advice would you give to beginners (and to your future challengers :))?
I know there are many useful Go engines and databases that are being developed these days, unfortunately I don't really know much about
them. I do use http://ps.waltheri.net/ if I need to look something up,
and I go to http://tom.com for commented games (they're in Chinese,
nonetheless). Advice to beginners: just go to any search engine and
you can easily find all the free resources you want. Advice to my
future challengers: just try the new variations since I know none of
them :)
- What new features would you like to see at FICGS?
Firstly I'd like to thank Thib for maintaining such a wonderful site.
I enjoy playing Go and Poker here and maybe I'll start playing Chess
sometime (I really suck so I'm not ready to embarrass myself yet). The
ability to play different games is what makes FICGS unique. As Thib
mentioned earlier, we need much more players, and I think FICGS simply
needs to host much more tournaments, probably some with shorter time
settings. With more games and more player engagement, more people will
stick around. Another feature I'd really like to see is FICGS client for
cellphones/tablets. The main advantage of turn-based servers is that
it allows people to play wherever for whatever period of time: a 1-min
ride in the elevator, a 10-min wait at the bus stop, or a couple of
hours at home. If playing on FICGS is made easier, I know I will be
more addicted to it :)
- Thank you very much and good luck in the next final match...
Thanks! And please go easy on our Poker match...
There are 0 results for komi in wikichess.
FICGS : komi , Wikipedia : komi , Dmoz : komi , Google : komi , Yahoo : komi
I'd rather have a Pawn than a finger. (Reuben Fine)
Some part of a mistake is always correct. (Savielly Tartakover)
Chess is 99 percent tactics. (Teichmann)
Back to FICGS , Wikichess