Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 12:31:31 06/08/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 08, 2002 at 13:36:41, Gareth McCaughan wrote: >No. Russell has every right to think what he pleases and say what he >pleases. However, if he doesn't know much about the games he's >comparing, I see no reason to take any notice of his opinion about >which game is more difficult or deeper. My statements that the game of go is not more "difficult" or "deeper" than chess are based not on the difficulty in evaluating a position. In that respect, go is more difficult. My point is that go is scalable, and since it is, the size of the board does not matter. So the fact that go is more popularly played on a 19x19 board (and thus creates a ridiculous branching factor) has no bearing on the difficulty of the game. In other words, go played on a 2x2 board is still go. With the differences in rule sets aside, 2x2 go is certaily not more complex than chess. These beliefs require no more knowledge about the game than the basic rules. I don't even need to know about ko or differences in super-ko or position repetition between the different rule sets. All I needed to know to form this opinion was that go is scalable, and that go played on smaller boards is not complex. Russell
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.