Life In 19x19 http://prod.lifein19x19.com/ |
|
J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered http://prod.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=18372 |
Page 1 of 2 |
Author: | Cassandra [ Thu Sep 16, 2021 12:07 pm ] |
Post subject: | J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
Using the Commentary and the L&D-Examples, I will try to find out what the IMPLICIT Japanese understanding of the intended application of Article 7 of J89's legal text is (and what -- according to Western understanding -- should have been EXPLITELY described). Commentary 7.1.U-type of stones Alive stones = A) Two solidly connected eyes. B) Large eye that can be divided (=> A), even if the opponent plays first. C) Not solidly connected eyes (at least two). D) Filled large eye as a seki. Implicit understanding: Fencing stones (not marked here in the diagrams for the sake of clarity) are considered to be of the 7.1.U-type. 7.1.C-type of stones Alive stones = A) B) C) Uttegaeshi's (aka "snap-back") potentially captured stones. ------------------------- NOT SHOWN: Move sequences. Implicit understanding: Presupposed basic knowledge? Implicit understanding: Stones that could be re-established in total because they were previously captured, are of the 7.1.C-type. Total re-establishment will result in territory. ------------------------- NOT EXPLICITLY mentioned: Nakade. Implicit understanding: Presupposed basic knowledge? Implicit understanding: Stones that could be re-established in total because they were previously captured, are of the 7.1.C-type. Total re-establishment will result in territory. 7.1.D-type of stones Dead stones = A) B) C) Uttegaeshi's (aka "snap-back") potentially capturing stones. Dead stones = D) Large eye with nakade. E) One solidly connected eye & one false eye. F) One not solidly connected eye & one false eye / two false eyes / one solidly connected eye. ------------------------- NOT SHOWN: Move sequences. Implicit understanding: Presupposed basic knowledge? |
Author: | Cassandra [ Fri Sep 17, 2021 1:09 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
L&D Example 1 J89's judgement of L&D: ![]() ![]() Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() --------------------- NOT SHOWN: Further sequence. Implicit understanding: Presupposed basic knowledge? Considered redundant? Implicit understanding: Stones that could be re-established partially because they were previously captured, are of the 7.1.C-type. Partial re-establishment will result in seki. Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Implicit understanding: Because White's single stone in the corner was previously captured, White could create permament stones of her "out-of-body", i.e. on board points that were NOT previously occupied by captured stones of her. Thus, her captured stone is of the 7.1.C-type. Out-of-body creation of 7.1.U-type stones will result in seki. --------------------- NOT SHOWN: Further sequence. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? |
Author: | Cassandra [ Fri Sep 17, 2021 3:35 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
L&D Example 2 J89's judgement of L&D: ![]() ![]() Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Implicit understanding: Because Black's stones in the corner were previously captured (with ![]() ![]() The "out-of-body area" can be separated by 7.1.U-type stones from the "capture area". Out-of-body creation of 7.1.U-type stones will result in seki. --------------------- Misleading! J89's comment on L&D Example 2 ALSO describes ![]() But ![]() So this should be an UNADAPTED RELIC of the initial version ("if capturing ... enables ..."; i.e. "if THE PROCESS of capturing ... enables ..."). Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? |
Author: | Cassandra [ Fri Sep 17, 2021 4:08 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
L&D Example 4 J89's judgement of L&D: ![]() ![]() Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() --------------------- Misleading! J89's sequence on L&D Example 4 ends with the position at left. But NO White stone has been played AFTER Black captured her stones at the top. So this should be an UNADAPTED RELIC of the initial version ("if capturing ... enables ..."; i.e. "if THE PROCESS of capturing ... enables ..."). ![]() Implicit understanding: Because White's stones at the top were previously captured (with ![]() ![]() The "out-of-body area" can be separated by 7.1.U-type stones from the "capture area". Out-of-body creation of 7.1.U-type stones will result in seki. Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? |
Author: | Cassandra [ Fri Sep 17, 2021 6:29 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
L&D Example 5 J89's judgement of L&D: ![]() ![]() ![]() Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? ![]() Judging ![]() --------------------- Implicit understanding: Because White's stones at the top were previously captured (with ![]() ![]() The "out-of-body area" can be separated by 7.1.U-type stones from the "capture area". Out-of-body creation of 7.1.U-type stones will result in seki. Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? ![]() Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? |
Author: | Cassandra [ Fri Sep 17, 2021 10:24 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
Summary 7.1.C-type stones Subtype "Complete re-establishment" Stones that could be re-established in total because they were previously captured. Total re-establishment will result in territory. Uttegaeshi => Commentary Nakade => NOT explicitly mentioned Subtype "Partial re-establishment" Stones that could be re-established partially because they were previously captured. Partial re-establishment will result in seki. => L&D Example 1 => L&D Example 5 Subtype "Out-of-body re-establishment" Because stones were previously captured, permament stones of that colour could be created "out-of-body", i.e. on board points that were NOT previously occupied by the captured stones. Out-of-body creation of permanent stones will result in seki. => L&D Example 1 => L&D Example 2 => L&D Example 4 => L&D Example 5 The "out-of-body area" can be separated by 7.1.U-type stones from the "capture area". => Re-establishment is considered a GLOBAL issue. => L&D Example 2 => L&D Example 4 => L&D Example 5 Cause and effect relationship Capture of stones and re-establishment of stones have to be in a cause-and-effect relationship. Cause = ![]() Effect = ![]() ------------------------ ![]() Neither ![]() ![]() Neither ![]() ![]() |
Author: | Cassandra [ Sat Sep 18, 2021 1:58 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
Commentary 7.2.D-type of ko J89's judgement of L&D: ![]() ![]() Black should have played teire at A before the game stopped. Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Implicit understanding: There are NO ko-threats during L&D status confirmation. Capturing into a single ko-shape allows playing two moves in a row locally. 7.2.Y-type of ko J89's judgement of L&D: ![]() ![]() ![]() There is no need for Black to play teire at A before the game stopped. Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Implicit understanding: There are NO ko-threats during L&D status confirmation. Capturing into a single ko-shape allows playing two moves in a row locally. ------------------------------- Please note that the result would have been the same if White had NOT captured into the ko-shape in the corner. Implicit understanding: There are NO ko-fights during L&D status confirmation. 7.2.Y+R-type of ko J89's judgement of L&D: ![]() ![]() ![]() The lower corner is and remains a double-ko seki. There is no need for Black to play teire at A before the game stopped. Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? Already shown with 7.2.Y-type of ko? Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Implicit understanding: There are NO ko-threats during L&D status confirmation. Capturing into a single ko-shape allows playing two moves in a row locally. There are NO UNREMOVABLE ko-threats during L&D status confirmation. Misleading! The specification of the corner is NOT required for ![]() The L&D-status of Black's stones in the upper corner has already been decided by ![]() Nevertheless, the second half of the double-ko cycle in the lower corner is shown explicitly. Implicit understanding: There is NO double-ko during L&D status confirmation. Misleading! The specification of the corner is NEITHER required for ![]() ![]() ------------------------------- Please note that the result would have been the same if White had NOT captured into the ko-shape in the upper corner. Implicit understanding: There are NO ko-fights during L&D status confirmation. |
Author: | Cassandra [ Sat Sep 18, 2021 3:59 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
L&D Example 7-1 J89's judgement of L&D: ![]() ![]() Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Implicit understanding: There are NO ko-threats during L&D status confirmation. Capturing into a single ko-shape allows playing two moves in a row locally. ------------------------------- Please note that the result would have been the same if White had NOT created the ko-shape in the corner. Implicit understanding: There are NO ko-fights during L&D status confirmation. |
Author: | Cassandra [ Sat Sep 18, 2021 6:40 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
L&D Example 7-2 J89's judgement of L&D: ![]() ![]() NO judgement on the L&D status of the lower corner. Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Implicit understanding: There are NO UNERASABLE ko-threats during L&D status confirmation. Capturing into a single ko-shape allows playing two moves in a row locally. Misleading! The specification of the corner IS REQUIRED for ![]() The L&D-status of White's stones in the upper corner has already been decided by ![]() Nevertheless, the capture of White's stones in the lower corner is shown explicitly. Implicit understanding: An UNERASABLE ko-threat is NOT a means of creating stones of the 7.1.C-type. |
Author: | Cassandra [ Sat Sep 18, 2021 1:44 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
L&D Example 8 J89's judgement of L&D: ![]() ![]() ![]() Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Implicit understanding: There are NO ko-threats during L&D status confirmation. Capturing into a single ko-shape allows playing two moves in a row locally. There is NO double-ko during L&D status confirmation. Misleading! The specification of the ko-shape IS REQUIRED for ![]() Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? Implicit understanding: There is NO double-ko during L&D status confirmation. There are NO ko-threats during L&D status confirmation. Capturing into a single ko-shape allows playing two moves in a row locally. ============================================= ============================================= MISTAKE in J89's INITIAL version??? This diagram shows the CORRECT judgement when applying J89's initial version of the L&D status confirmation. Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() First attempt. AFTER White's single stone in the double-ko has been captured, NO (new) PERMANENT White stone can be played, due to J89's (initial version) double-ko cycle. ----------------------------------------- Second attempt. AFTER White's single stone in the double-ko has been captured (with ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Author: | Cassandra [ Sat Sep 18, 2021 7:28 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
L&D Example 11 J89's judgement of L&D: ![]() NO judgement on the L&D status of the double-ko seki at the bottom. Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Implicit understanding: There are NO UNERASABLE ko-threats during L&D status confirmation. Capturing into a single ko-shape allows playing two moves in a row locally. There is no double-ko during L&D status confirmation. Misleading! The specification of the ko-shape IS REQUIRED for ![]() The L&D-status of White's stones in the upper corner has already been decided by ![]() Nevertheless, two passes for the remaining ko-shapes at the bottom are played explicitly. Contrary to the commentary (7.2.Y+R-type of ko), recapturing into the double-ko is left out here. Implicit understanding: An UNERASABLE ko-threat is NOT a means of creating stones of the 7.1.C-type. |
Author: | Cassandra [ Sat Sep 18, 2021 9:27 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
L&D Example 12 J89's judgement of L&D: ![]() ![]() ![]() Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Implicit understanding: There are NO ko-threats during L&D status confirmation. Capturing into a single ko-shape allows playing two moves in a row locally. Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Implicit understanding: There are NO ko-threats during L&D status confirmation. Capturing into a single ko-shape allows playing two moves in a row locally. Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? Implicit understanding: There are NO ko-threats during L&D status confirmation. Capturing into a single ko-shape allows playing two moves in a row locally. |
Author: | Cassandra [ Sun Sep 19, 2021 1:15 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
L&D Example 16 J89's judgement of L&D: ![]() ![]() ![]() Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? Implicit APPLICATION: There are NO ko-threats during L&D status confirmation. Capturing into a single ko-shape allows playing two moves in a row locally. There is NO double-ko during L&D status confirmation. An UNERASABLE ko-threat is NOT a means of creating stones of the 7.1.C-type. Blueprint is the sequence in the commentary (7.2.Y+R-type of ko). Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? AFTER Black's single stone in the double-ko has been captured (with ![]() ![]() Alternatively, Black could be content with having placed a (new) PERMANENT stone with ![]() ============================================= ============================================= MISTAKE in J89's INITIAL version??? This diagram shows the CORRECT judgement when applying J89's initial version of the L&D status confirmation. Please note that the points T are territory! Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() The capture of White's two stones at the left (with ![]() ![]() Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() The capture of Black's single stone at the left edge (with ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Author: | Cassandra [ Sun Sep 19, 2021 5:42 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
L&D Example 17 J89's judgement of L&D: ![]() ![]() ![]() Please note that there is NO explicit status for Black's stones in the double-ko in J89's comment to this example. Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? Implicit APPLICATION: There are NO ko-threats during L&D status confirmation. Capturing into a single ko-shape allows playing two moves in a row locally. There is NO double-ko during L&D status confirmation. An UNERASABLE ko-threat is NOT a means of creating stones of the 7.1.C-type. Blueprint is the sequence in the commentary (7.2.Y+R-type of ko). Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? AFTER Black's single stone in the double-ko has been captured (with ![]() ![]() ![]() Alternatively, Black could have captured into the double-ko with ![]() ![]() -------------------------------------------------------- AFTER Black's three stones in the corner have been captured (with ![]() ![]() Alternatively, Black could have played into White's eye in the corner with ![]() ![]() ============================================= ============================================= MISTAKE in J89's INITIAL version??? This diagram shows the CORRECT judgement when applying J89's initial version of the L&D status confirmation. Please note that the points T are territory! Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Author: | Cassandra [ Sun Sep 19, 2021 11:39 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
L&D Example 18 J89's judgement of L&D: ![]() ![]() ![]() Please note that there is NO explicit status for White's stones in the double-ko in J89's comment to this example. Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? Implicit APPLICATION: There are NO ko-threats during L&D status confirmation. Capturing into a single ko-shape allows playing two moves in a row locally. There is NO double-ko during L&D status confirmation. An UNERASABLE ko-threat is NOT a means of creating stones of the 7.1.C-type. Blueprint is the sequence in the commentary (7.2.Y+R-type of ko). Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() NOT SHOWN. Implicit understanding: Considered redundant? AFTER White's single stone in the double-ko has been captured (with ![]() ![]() Alternatively, White could connect in the corner with ![]() ![]() ============================================= ============================================= MISTAKE in J89's INITIAL version??? This diagram shows the CORRECT judgement when applying J89's initial version of the L&D status confirmation. Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Author: | Cassandra [ Sun Sep 19, 2021 4:13 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
L&D Example 25 J89's judgement of L&D: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Misleading! J89's comment on L&D Example 25 should be an INCORRECT follow-up of the correct (!) initial version. ![]() ![]() ============================================= ============================================= Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ============================================= ============================================= Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ============================================= ============================================= ERRONEOUS comment??? ![]() ![]() However, this is a CONTRADICTION IN TERMS, because ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() --------------------------- ![]() ![]() However, this does NOT follow the mechanism that is defined in the legal text! ![]() ![]() |
Author: | Cassandra [ Wed Oct 06, 2021 4:43 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
L&D Example 23 J89's judgement of L&D: ![]() ![]() However, ... ... J89's intended result CANNOT be reached with the already known procedures! White's stones at the upper edge would remain uncapturable, due to the cycle in the corner. Implicit understanding: The "sending three, returning two" cycle in the corner is considered inappropriate for establishing Chôsei for White's stones at the top. The commentary to this example refers to the purpose of the game of Go, stated in Article 1 of the legal text, which is "a competition for more or less territory". Article 10, Clause 2 clarifies that prisoners reduce opponent's territory. During actual PLAY, the cycle in the corner would not run forever, as Black benefits by one surplus prisoner per pass. This cycle is clearly DISADVANTAGEOUS for White. However, during STATUS CONFIRMATION, captured stones do NOT count. Nevertheless, and similar to implicit Japanese understanding that the assessment of the L&D-status of a group should not depend on a ko-fight, it seems to be implicit Japanese understanding that the assessment of the L&D-status of a group should not depend on such "fake" (with regard to actual PLAY) Chôsei. This implies that we could introduce a "pass-for-Chôsei" as an indication that the IMMEDIATE repetion of such "fake" cycle is forbidden. Similar to "pass-for-ko" being an indicator that the IMMEDIATE recapture into a ko-shape is forbidden. So, Black could capture all of White's stones at the top. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ As mentioned in the commentary, a White move in the corner during actual play would turn the position into a seki. Thereafter, Black could capture nine White stones (with ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Please note that in the status confirmation, Black would be unable to play ![]() |
Author: | CDavis7M [ Wed Oct 13, 2021 6:27 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
Cassandra wrote: L&D Example 2 ... Misleading! J89's comment on L&D Example 2 ALSO describes ![]() But ![]() So this should be an UNADAPTED RELIC of the initial version ("if capturing ... enables ..."; i.e. "if THE PROCESS of capturing ... enables ..."). Cassandra wrote: L&D Example 4 There seems to be an implicit misunderstanding. I don't read any requirement in Article 7-1 (or elsewhere) of the Japanese Rules for the new stones that cannot be captured to have been placed after the stones have been captured. Where in the rules do you think it says so? If anything, Example 1 shows new stones that cannot be captured that are only placed after stones are captured and Example 4 shows new uncapturable White stones that are only placed before the other White stones are captured. So the interpretation of the Rules should allow for the new uncapturable stones to be placed before and/or after the capturing. This is a valid interpretation of "又は取られても新たに相手方に取られない石を生じうる石". ... J89's sequence on L&D Example 4 ends with the position at left. But NO White stone has been played AFTER Black captured her stones at the top. So this should be an UNADAPTED RELIC of the initial version ("if capturing ... enables ..."; i.e. "if THE PROCESS of capturing ... enables ...").[/color] -------------------- Cassandra wrote: Commentary If failing to specify the ko wouldn't change the result then by definition the Examples are not "misleading" because there is no wrong idea or impression that can be taken. I'm not sure what you were trying to do there.... 7.2.Y+R-type of ko ... Misleading! The specification of the corner is NOT required for ![]() ... Misleading! The specification of the corner is NEITHER required for ![]() ![]() ... L&D Example 7-2 Misleading! The specification of the corner IS REQUIRED for ![]() ... L&D Example 8 ... Misleading! The specification of the ko-shape IS REQUIRED for ![]() -------------------- Cassandra wrote: L&D Example 8 Maybe there is no requirement for the uncapturable stone to be placed after the capturing? Maybe it is enough to show that the new stones retaking the kos before capturing Black cannot be captured. The same goes for Example 16.... MISTAKE in J89's INITIAL version??? ... First attempt. AFTER White's single stone in the double-ko has been captured, NO (new) PERMANENT White stone can be played, due to J89's (initial version) double-ko cycle. -------------------- Cassandra wrote: L&D Example 18 I can't even begin to guess what you are trying to do with Example 18 but this has no relation to the Rules or the other examples. The point of Example 18 is that 隅の曲り四目, 両劫ゼキ, and セキ崩れ are already defined and no further assessment is needed. If the Life and Death of the position in Example 18 were to be assessed according to the other Examples, I think it that this position having Bent 4 and Double Ko would work similar to the Bent 4 and Double Ko Example in Article 7-2 where the ko passed for is the ko of the stones being assessed (Bent 4). Then the double ko seki would collapse.... ... MISTAKE in J89's INITIAL version??? This diagram shows the CORRECT judgement when applying J89's initial version of the L&D status confirmation. Why ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() -------------------- Cassandra wrote: L&D Example 25 There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding here. The single black and white ko-stones are dead stones. This is why points "a" and "b" are dame (they are not surrounded by living stones of one player). The fact that a and b are dame was already discussed in the comments to Article 8. Points a and b being dame is why the 6 black stones (including the single black stone) are living seki stones. Yes, the single black ko-stone (黒一子) is deemed a dead stone when its life and death is assessed, but the 6 black stones (黒六子) including the one ko-stone are deemed alive when their life and death is assessed. 黒六子 have dame and so are seki stones. This is clear to me when reading it in Japanese. There is no discrepancy here. I don't know what rules you are reading.... ERRONEOUS comment??? ![]() ![]() However, this is a CONTRADICTION IN TERMS, because ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() --------------------------- ![]() ![]() However, this does NOT follow the mechanism that is defined in the legal text! ![]() ![]() --------------------------- Cassandra wrote: L&D Example 23 To me, this is a definition that is telling the players to play these moves in the game, just as is done with other board positions. Also, from my review of the Life and Death examples, White would not connect.
... J89's intended result CANNOT be reached with the already known procedures! White's stones at the upper edge would remain uncapturable, due to the cycle in the corner.[/color] |
Author: | Cassandra [ Wed Oct 13, 2021 7:30 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
CDavis7M wrote: There seems to be an implicit misunderstanding. I don't read any requirement in Article 7-1 (or elsewhere) of the Japanese Rules for the new stones that cannot be captured to have been placed after the stones have been captured. Just to give you a comparable example to think about: "Only if this move is played now, your group that is currently caught in a semeai will be alive." "Only after this move is played now, your group that is currently caught in a semeai will be alive." Cause: A move is played. Effect: A group is alive. |
Author: | RobertJasiek [ Fri Oct 15, 2021 8:19 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: J89's Article 7 (L&D):: Reverse engineered |
I disagree with your implicit understandings related to ko because these are not the only possible understandings. |
Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |