Author: Pekka Karjalainen
Date: 22:39:43 02/13/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 13, 2002 at 18:01:51, Uri Blass wrote: >On February 13, 2002 at 17:42:08, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > >>On February 13, 2002 at 17:35:57, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>Even if I suppose that we know to evaluate only checkmate in chess more time can >>>help because knowing the final result of the game one ply earlier can help in >>>part of the cases to find the right move. >> >>Go has no checkmate. The game is over when both players agree it is over. > >I do not understand. >if both sides need to agree that one of them won the game then I can avoid >losing in go. >I simply will never agree that the game is over. Then nobody will want to play with you. Go requires good manners and understanding of the game. BTW, even if you just keep on playing, the game will eventually end when you no longer have legal moves. The practice of agreeing about the game being over is used to avoid this tedious exercise. Do you keep on playing chess when you are down two rooks or more and have no attacking chances? > >There must be a position in the board that means by definition that the game is >over. >Otherwise the game has no meaning. Not true for all games. > >Uri Pekka Karjalainen
This page took 0 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.