[Computer-go] double ko seki on KGS

18 views
Skip to first unread message

Hiroshi Yamashita

unread,
Oct 21, 2012, 5:38:40 AM10/21/12
to compu...@dvandva.org
Hi,

I saw an interesting game.

http://files.gokgs.com/games/2012/10/21/globax-AyaMC2.sgf
In 337th move, W passed, but B took ko in double ko seki.
And in 339th move, W had two forbidden ko points by super-ko rule.
And B won finally.

Is double ko seki not available on super-ko rule?

Regards,
Hiroshi Yamashita

_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
Compu...@dvandva.org
http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go

Robert Jasiek

unread,
Oct 21, 2012, 7:04:21 AM10/21/12
to compu...@dvandva.org
On 21.10.2012 11:38, Hiroshi Yamashita wrote:
> Is double ko seki not available on super-ko rule?

Coexistence in double ko, which starts from one of its stable states, is
possible under Positional Superko, Situational Superko and Natural
Situation Superko, but the possible and the correct move sequences vary.

http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/e3.html
http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/superko.html

The existence of further kos on the board can sometimes (not always)
make a double ko instable.

--
robert jasiek

Erik van der Werf

unread,
Oct 21, 2012, 7:14:31 AM10/21/12
to compu...@dvandva.org
On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Hiroshi Yamashita <y...@bd.mbn.or.jp> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I saw an interesting game.
>
> http://files.gokgs.com/games/2012/10/21/globax-AyaMC2.sgf
> In 337th move, W passed, but B took ko in double ko seki.
> And in 339th move, W had two forbidden ko points by super-ko rule.
> And B won finally.
>
> Is double ko seki not available on super-ko rule?


Of course double ko seki is available; White's pass here was simply a
blunder due to the positional superko rule.

Erik

Mark Boon

unread,
Oct 22, 2012, 1:46:02 PM10/22/12
to compu...@dvandva.org

On Oct 20, 2012, at 11:38 PM, Hiroshi Yamashita wrote:

Is double ko seki not available on super-ko rule?

Double-ko is available, but it's not a stable situation like a dead group or a living group. So it needs to be resolved before passing.

Mark

Mark Boon

unread,
Oct 22, 2012, 1:50:34 PM10/22/12
to compu...@dvandva.org
Oops, I misunderstood, so forget that remark :)

Robert Jasiek

unread,
Oct 22, 2012, 1:54:03 PM10/22/12
to compu...@dvandva.org
On 22.10.2012 19:46, Mark Boon wrote:
> it needs to be resolved before passing.

Under which rules other than greedy ancient?

--
robert jasiek
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages