[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [gnugo-devel] atari_atari and restricted_defend1

From: Gunnar Farneback
Subject: Re: [gnugo-devel] atari_atari and restricted_defend1
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 15:56:49 +0100
User-agent: EMH/1.14.1 SEMI/1.14.3 (Ushinoya) FLIM/1.14.2 (Yagi-Nishiguchi) APEL/10.3 Emacs/20.7 (sparc-sun-solaris2.7) (with unibyte mode)

Inge wrote:
> Of course, you are right again.  But if I had started coding on
> pattern matching code we wouldn't have anything right now.

Really, setting up a pattern matcher isn't all that hard.

> The only really silly attack threat that I can think of is a
> self-atari, and those could be avoided by testing for it explicitely.
> Do you have other examples?  Remember that we are talking about
> combination attacks here and most of the time a few stones have to be
> sacrificed before the real attack appears.

Self-atari is in most of the cases very silly, yes. But also in a
situation like this

..XOO   ..XOO
...XO   .baXO
...XO   .cdXO
...XO   ..eXO
-----   -----

I'd say that d and e are both quite silly. The only really interesting
move is a, although b and c may occasionally be useful too. (Notice
that we're talking about combination attacks. b and c are more
interesting in the context of owl attacks.)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]