3.5 komi in 9x9 = really good for black

mangue: It is clear that it is inaccurate because it does not "kill" the dead stones.

do you think it is accurate?

mangue: i do think the same way!

the score on player resign should not be displayed, because irrelevant and inaccurate
ex:
http://brainking.com/en/ArchivedGame?g=1677284
it should seems clear that white has more than 1 point... but it does not change the result, black resigned.

It is just a suggestion to removing the misleading point calculation

It would be handy to be able to download an .sgf file, similar to the PGN code available for chess games. The format is fairly simple and, of course, supports all of the basic Go constructs available here, including komi and handicaps.

hexkid: Thanks for the advice.

Flummoxed: Many people here have had their fist contact with Go a few weeks ago when Fencer introduced the game on BrainKing. As you win even with all stones marked dead, I'd try pointing to your opponent that no stones are dead in that game (even if you have to offer him F6), and then accept the correct score of "White wins". It is my understanding that winning by 30 points is exactly the same thing as winning by 0.5 point as far as the BKR and statistics go.

I have a problem with an opponent who refuses to end a game in a reasonable manner. More than once he has marked all the stones on the board as dead.

http://brainking.com/en/ShowGame?g=1633225

Edited: As Hexkid thought it was just a misunderstanding about how to end the game. Silly me.

Salkkuman: I would vote for 6.5 for all sizes. For those who think komi should be larger or smaller for 13x13 or 9x9, consider this:

Yes, there are typically fewer points in 9x9 or 13x13...
...but the first move is also that much more important.

I believe most sources agree these two factors balance out so that komi should be the same on small boards.

In actuality, I would prefer a configurable komi, so we could specify it at game start, but I don't know how that would work with the current rating system. Fancier go sites are able to make games rated all the time, regardless of settings tweaks, but BK is limited in that regard. Perhaps only rated for default settings (komi 6.5, no handi)?

Salkkuman: As with so many things in Go, the Sensei's page about Komi is inconclusive

hexkid: With normal I ment, outside of BK.

Salkkuman: Currently on BrainKing, komi is 5.5 for a 19x19 board, 4.5 for a 13x13 board and 3.5 for a 9x9 board.

At the current playing level of most of the people (me included, rating notwithstanding) maybe a komi of 0 (zero) would be nice :)

headius: No. The normal is 6.5 in all these sizes if I had understand it right? At the current playing level of most of the people it is not problem, but of course more equal the better. I personally are not so sure which would be right komi.

Has there been any word on getting komi fixed? With a too-low komi (drastically low in 13x13 and 9x9 sizes) white is at a distinct disadvantage.

try hex against the computer.

http://www.mazeworks.com/hex7/index.htm

is not it? I havent play since a while... I used to play it on playsite.com but they remove it.
it is a very clever game and I will sure play some games here too

Thnx fo link.

mangue: Draw is impossible in Hex.

it is similar to line of action for the strategy, but there are probably more draws in hex

Salkkuman: Yes, it's a very simple idea (but nevertheless hard to play).
And it has nothing to do with Go.

estanto: ty, so the game idea is to connect one side to an other

Salkkuman: But that isn't the Hex game invented by Nash.
Here is an example of a game I played (and lost) at LittleGolem http://www.littlegolem.net/jsp/game/game.jsp?gid=396096&nmove=66

Friker: http://edweb.sdsu.edu/courses/edtec670/Cardboard/Board/H/hexgo.html - first hit on google

I dont know the rules of HEX. Can you send me the rules? (or link)
friker(at)centrum.sk

Are there any GO players here who also play HEX? This is the game invented by two men independently- one of them was John Nash a part of his work in game theory at Princeton. I'm curious if there are many players in the USA. I tend to think of this game as a avariation on GO- certainly seems to have been inspired by GO.

of course I could have done that against you salkkuman, but this is not fair and Fencer could rule such case (ex: http://brainking.com/en/ArchivedGame?g=1593749 )

There was something going on sometime about if players disagree about the dead stones. How it should be done if one player have blocked other and there cannot be any conversation?

marfitalu & headius: Thank you both.

Fwiffo: I think this is probably what you meant, but to clarify...when handicap stones are placed, every source I know of says white plays first. I think the exception is perhaps the handicap of "1" where black still plays first but white gets no komi.

If BK is allowing black to play first after placing handicap stones, that is certainly not correct.

Marfitalu: Yes probably. It is incorrect though:
0 handicap should be black starts the game, white has komi
1 handicap should be black starts the game with no komi for white
2 handicap should be black starts the game with two stones, no komi for white
etc.
I'll put it on my list :)

Hm I tried to give furbster 2 handicap stones in a teaching game, but surprisingly he got 3. It is usual to regard the placement of the handicap stones as blacks first move. Maybe it was noticed before on this board or in the Go fellowship. Have to look it up.

thanks fwiffo..i did a lot of passing.i know there is alot of diff way's to play it i played a few years ago still did not understand it then..if i took all my plays stones how did we start the same game again it is in the tournament games...not really...ok i will do that..and thanks again.

night owl: As a beginner you indeed should start on 9x9. It is more easy to handle.
the x's you are talking about are probably the marking of dead groups. When both players pass, the dead groups should be marked. Brainking helps a little with the marking. When one player disagrees (which should be expected as Brainking very roughly counts) he/she can offer a better proposal as to which groups are dead. This causes very different markings.
I hope you understand, else invite me for a teaching game 9x9.

can anyone help me out..tell me how comes if black has a few x's on one move then a few moves later black had lots of x's. i took them all..now we are playing again we are playing go 9x9..as i dont have a clue how it works..thanks

headius: correction to this; I have finished a couple games now, and BK does try to mark dead stones. I would guess that the game in question wasn't counted up simply because it ended in a resignation.

jurek, onigoroshi: The large territory would almost certainly go to white, and should be counted as white's territory. There are places along the border that should probably be reinforced, but they are all miai (http://senseis.xmp.net/?Miai) and would only make a difference of a couple points.

However, my guess why it's counted is that BrainKing's logic doesn't try to guess ANY dead groups, and so the black stones in white's large territory prevent it from marking that as territory. Also, since the game was resigned, there's no need to count them; if you both had passed, however, and marked those black stones as dead, I assume BK would then correctly count the upper territory as being white's.

All white's stones will live; only black's large group will live. Since there's practically no chance of an invasion of white's large territory being successful, it should be scored for white. If, for example, the white group at J8 only had one liberty left with black to move, things would be drastically different.

At any rate, there's no question it would be white's territory. It is not dame, because it is territory: "In the endgame, empty points on the board which are not part of either player's territory and have no prospects of becoming territory." The points inbetween white's border and black's living group are dame, however.

onigoroshi: Dame refers to areas that are neither person's territory. If dame were to be marked correctly (which maybe it should be here), then all of the upper portion of the board would be in dame.
If you look at your dame link:
White's upper-left territory is bounded by the stones D9-D8-C7-D6-E6-D5-C4-C3-B2-A2.
White's lower-right territory is bounded by the stones H1-H2-H3-G4-G5-H5-I5-J5.
Black's lower territory is bounded by the stones B1-C2-D3-E4-F4-G3-G2-G1.
Black's upper territory is bounded by the stones E9-E8-D7-E7-F7-G6-H6-I6.
The circled points are neither white's nor black's territory and considered dame.
The point marked 'a' is a potential capture by white if white plays A1 first, so black must fill this in if white plays A1, or take the A1 before white does.

jurek: Maybe this will clearify:

http://senseis.xmp.net/?Dame

the point being, that these stones shouldn't have to be explictly played to score. Many Go server client operate this way, for example the KGS client. In this case, dame points are marked and not scored.

onigoroshi: No, that's wrong. How does white have that territory? White would need stones at G8 or G9, J7 or J8, and L1 to completely section of the territory. As it stands, there are holes in white's borders. To count as "territory", you have to be able to connect all of your stones (the edges of the board count as stones for either player) in a complete loop.

jurek: no, white has all the territory *except* for black's 5 points. It's a much larger win than 11.5 to 1. Make sense?

mangue: (s)he didn't resign at the point I'm refering to.. see move 37. We were forced to keep playing...

onigoroshi: Yes, you are correct. If this game were scored after the consecutive passings (move 37), the score would be:
white: 7 territory + 5 captured black stones (B2 & C2 are dead)
black: 6 territory + 0 captured white stones
So white would win 11.5 to 1

yes, but he resigned... so you just win and the score is irrelevant

Salkkuman: why? my opponent shouldn't be able to make any live groups, and we both passed. Now we should score...

onigoroshi: Should't you finish game before end!?

there seems to be a problem when trying to score a game with less than complete borders. Case-in-point:

http://brainking.com/en/ShowGame?g=1580516

Fwiffo: ah thats even better ... i thought you could count the dead stones, but not the territory underneath them ... :)

Hrqls: you could say they count as TWO points: one point for the stones, and another for the territory under the stone.
When they are alive it is no longer your territory :)

Mirjam: nice :)
but opponents stones in my territory still count as a point dont they ?
(as long as those stones are dead, when they are alive they dont count i guess :))