Flaws of the Ing 1991 Rules (002)
Robert Jasiek
The classification of breaths as types is ambiguous.
It is ambiguous because each term related to breaths is ambiguous or
undefined.
**************************************************************************
Flaw 62:
The rule that restricts removal due to invariation is ambiguous.
It is ambiguous because the term invariation is ambiguous.
**************************************************************************
Flaw 63:
The rule that stones live or die according to whether they can be
removed is ambiguous.
It is ambiguous because the term removal is ambiguous.
**************************************************************************
Flaw 64:
The rule that ko prevents invariation is ambiguous.
It is ambiguous because the term invariation is ambiguous.
**************************************************************************
Flaw 65:
The rule that there are three types of ko stones is ambiguous and wrong.
The rule is ambiguous: It is insufficient for distinguishing ko stones
from other stones, compare flaw 29.
The rule is wrong: Matti Siivola has discovered such quadruple ko stones
that are even worth playing under what one can roughly expect as rules
about fighting kos or disturbing kos. Since there are quadruple ko
stones, there are at least four types of ko stones.
**************************************************************************
Flaw 66:
The rule that divides "ko positions" into "fighting ko" and "disturbing
ko" is ambiguous.
It is ambiguous because each of the terms "ko position", "fighting ko",
"disturbing ko" is undefined.
Example (1):
. # . # O .
# # # O O O
. # O . O .
It is unclear whether there are two fighting kos or one disturbing ko.
Example (2):
. # . # O .
# # # O O O
. # . # O .
It is unclear whether there are two fighting kos or one disturbing ko.
One should not underestimate a flaw just because it is "only" ambiguous!
**************************************************************************
Flaw 67:
The rule that every "ko position" must have an "outcome" and that the
game must not end without "result" is ambiguous.
It is ambiguous because each of the terms "ko position", "outcome",
"result" is undefined.
--
robert jasiek