craig@dcl-cs.UUCP (Craig Wylie) (01/09/86)
Anybody interested in seeing and discussing go problems on the net ? Perhaps the problems of implementing go could also be discussed. Craig -- UUCP: ...!seismo!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!craig| Post: University of Lancaster, DARPA: craig%lancs.comp@ucl-cs | Department of Computing, JANET: craig@uk.ac.lancs.comp | Bailrigg, Lancaster, UK. Phone: +44 524 65201 Ext. 4146 | LA1 4YR Project: Cosmos Distributed Operating Systems Research
bad@npoiv.UUCP (Bruce Dautrich) (01/14/86)
I my opinion the net is a perfect place to discuss go problems or implementation of cumputer programs to play go. An in order to get the ball rolling here is one: +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--O--+--O--+--+ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--X--+--O--X--+--+ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--O--+--X--+--+ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--X--+--X--+--+--+ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Problem: O's move. X intends to blockade the O group by the X play at 6,5 if things go well. In order to frustrate this wild scheme of X's, you must "look before you leap". (Test for 9-kyu). Have fun! Bruce Dautrich
howard@well.UUCP (Howard A. Landman) (01/21/86)
In article <4132@npoiv.UUCP>, bad@npoiv.UUCP (Bruce Dautrich) writes: > > +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | > +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--O--+--O--+--+ > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | > +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--X--+--O--X--+--+ > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | > +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--O--+--X--+--+ > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | > +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--X--+--X--+--+--+ > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | > +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | > > X intends to blockade the O group by the X play at 6,5 if things go well. A few comments: (1) Having played several games of Go via net mail, I find that one line per row and two chars per column is adequate. It also uses only 1/3rd the characters of Bruce's format, which lets an entire board to fit on one 24-line screen with room to spare: A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T 19 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 19 18 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + O + O + + 18 17 + + + + + + + + + + + + + X + O X + + 17 16 + + + . + + + + + . + + + + O . X + + 16 15 + + + + + + + + + + + + + X + X + + + 15 14 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 14 (2) It really helps if the star points are indicated (as above). Some people prefer to use '*' instead of '.', but I find that '.' is easier to discriminate. Some people also prefer to use '*' or '@' instead of 'X'. (3) I don't understand the comment about blockading at the 6,5 point at all. X already occupies one 6,5 point (O15) and would be much better off connecting at O16 or P15 than playing P14 (the other 6,5 point). It would help if the axes were labeled. The standard way of doing this is with letters for the columns and numbers for the rows (as above). The letter I is omitted to avoid confusion with the numeral 1. See, e.g., Takagawa, The Vital Points of Go, p.2 (Nihon Ki-in, Tokyo, 1958). I don't particularly like this lettering because it adds a mildly annoying complication to Go programs, but it seems to be the international standard. I believe it was used in the first USENIX Computer Go tournament, for example. Does anyone know of any standards for ASCII board presentations? What, for example, is the format used by Bruce Wilcox's "Nemesis" program? As for the answer, it wouldn't happen to be N17? Howard A. Landman "About to lower the average IQ of California and raise that of Arizona"
scottha@athena.UUCP (Scott Hankerson) (01/26/86)
Howard Landman writes: >A few comments: (1) Having played several games of Go via net mail, I find that >one line per row and two chars per column is adequate. It also uses only 1/3rd >the characters of Bruce's format, which lets an entire board to fit on one >24-line screen with room to spare: > > A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T > 19 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 19 > 18 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + O + O + + 18 > 17 + + + + + + + + + + + + + X + O X + + 17 > 16 + + + . + + + + + . + + + + O . X + + 16 > 15 + + + + + + + + + + + + + X + X + + + 15 > 14 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 14 > >(2) It really helps if the star points are indicated (as above). Some people >prefer to use '*' instead of '.', but I find that '.' is easier to discriminate. >Some people also prefer to use '*' or '@' instead of 'X'. I agree that the tighter format is nicer, not because it saves space but because it is much, much easier to read. I thought that this came up earlier though and it was decided to use a format that was just the opposite (as follows): A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O . . 18 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . O X . . 17 16 . . . + . . . . . + . . . . O + X . . 16 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . X . . . 15 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Personally, I prefer this format because the dots are even less distracting than the plus symbols. The star points, again, are easy to spot.