endgame (Was [computer-go] Re: Should 9x9 komi be 8.0 ?])

[Don Dailey]

steve uurtamo wrote:
>>  So I don't think
>>  sophisticated ko fights are resolved but I not strong enough to really
>>  quantify this.
>>     
>
> It's very often the case that games between, say, two 7d players on KGS
> will come down, in large part, to one or two or three ko fights and their
> resolution.  or even the threat of a ko fight if one player is weak enough.  i'm
> not sure that even the strongest amateurs count all of their ko threats
> correctly ahead of playing them (the game is quite dynamic, after all) but
> this is way, way deeper water than i tread in, so i don't have any real idea.
>
> i just wonder if anyone has tried to beat these programs by initiating a
> complicated but critical ko fight.  i'd think it'd be a can't-lose if you chose
> it correctly.  i wonder if it's a repeatable way to beat these guys, or if the
> depth is handled just fine.
>
> the thing that got me thinking about this is that i've never seen an MC
> player really play out a ko fight.  (or perhaps they are in their own cryptic
> MC way that i can't see).
>   
Perhaps I don't know what I'm talking about here,  but is it possible
that most ko fights can be avoided?    Perhaps ko fights introduce too
much uncertainty and they look for a more simple way to proceed?    
I've seen lot's of positions where there is a ko back and forth 2 or 3
times and the computer used every other turn to do something
constructive in some particular area - then when it stopped fighting it
stayed interested in that other area.   I don't really know if what I
saw meant anything - it involved only 1 ko point.    Is that still
considered a ko fight?     It "seemed" to me to know what it was doing, 
picking (what seemed to me) just the right moment to abandon the ko.

- Don



> s.
> _______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> computer-go at computer-go.org
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
>
>