NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/rec/games/go/2879

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-26 | 1.5 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!psuvax1!psuvm!gdh3
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 07:27:50 EST
From: <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.games.go
Subject: Territory v. Points
Lines: 18

Reading some of the recent postings, it seems that many participants
are unaware of the near equivalence of the two counting systems.  This
near equivalence results because, if an equal number of black and white
stones are played during the game, then, when the dead stones are placed
within their territories for counting, the Japanese style points differ
from the Chinese style territory by the same amount for black and white.
This also assumes that all dame and ko have been filled in, and that
there are no seki.  The main way in which it is possible for the two
results to differ is if one player passes more than the other, resulting
in fewer stones played by one player.  In Japanese style games it is
to your advantage to pass if the opponent makes an empty threat in the
end game, in Chinese style, no advantage.  The effect of a seki might be
serious if one player has more stones involved in the seki than the other.
Dame and ko would usually be filled in alternately by black and white and
thus have no important effect.  In conclusion, in the great majority of
games, the Chinese and Japanese scores will differ by only one or two
points, and a game where the counting method decides the outcome is quite
rare.            Mitchell Timin