Re: [gnugo-devel] New edge joseki patch

[bump]

SP Lee wrote:

> +Pattern EJ102
> +#spl 3.5.5
> +
> +?XX..
> +.O*O.   block is mandatory. Tenuki is disasterous
> +.....
> +.....
> +-----
> +
> +:8,J

Evan wrote:

> Is a full J classification needed for these patterns?  Is j or t
> sufficient instead?  J classifications are valued highly enough that
> they can cause problems in some cases.

Paul wrote:

> Maybe this pattern is too general too?  How about adding something
> like
>
> !weak(A)
>
> where A is the X string.

SP Lee wrote:

> I think we need a complete example for the need of constraints. I
> couldn't imagine why this move is wrong when X string is weak. One thing
> is sure. When X plays on *, O can't block any more and the two O stones
> become as weak as dead compared to the three X stones.

I tend to agree that even if the X stones are weak, a move in
the area is almost always urgent. However the solid
connection might not be the right move. It is often better to
play as follows:


.XX..
*O.O.
.....
.....
-----

:8,J

This would be subject to a constraint

.XX..
*OaO.
.cbd.
.....
-----

:8,J

; !oplay_defend(*,a,b,c,d,c)

On the other hand if the constraint is not matched or for
other sometimes for reasons then the suggested move is
sometimes better. In the game in question, both moves are OK.
In open board positions, the extension to the left is
likely better.

Dan