Lesson 101: Difference in Counting Rules (3)

By Nam Chi-hyung

In the last lesson, we looked at examples in which the two different rules draw different conclusions. Let’s look at some more examples in this lesson and how they are resolved in many international Baduk tournaments.

There are numerous situations which are regulated in the same way as the bent-four-in-the-corner situation.

Diagram 1

The black and white groups in this corner seem to be in a dual life because both have an eye and cannot play at A as it is. Actually, this is not a dual life situation but a big eye vs. small eye, and the black group is dead under the Territory rule ``when only one player can start a ko and the other can do nothing but kill himself, the group of the latter is considered to be dead without further play.’’ That is, only White can play A and start a ko after he captures the three △-marked black stones, so the black group is considered dead as it is.

As you may have already noticed, the logic regulating this situation is exactly the same as the one regulating bent four in the corner, and therefore the problems accompanying it arise in the same way. In other words, if there are a dual life and a big eye vs. small eye simultaneously, the result of the game may differ depending on the counting rules.

Here is another example.

Diagram 2-3

Under Territory Counting, the two x-marked points in the corner are meaningless neutral points. So, it doesn’t matter who puts his stones on those two intersections.

Diagram 3

However, under Area Counting where the stones on the board are counted, the result would change depending on who takes those two intersections. In short, if it is White’s turn, he will make a ko with 1 instead of just extending at 7 and letting Black play at 1. Black can take White 1 with 2, but Black’s capturing stone doesn’t matter under Area Counting. The only thing that matters is the stones remaining on the board at the end. Since Black has no ko threat, and White has one at 3, White wins the ko and takes the two intersections in the corner, and this will make a two-point difference.

These examples introduced in the last two lessons are representative cases showing the difference between the two counting rules. Though it’s rare to meet these situations, still they occur in amateur games and even professional tournaments. Players familiar with just one set of rules often make mistakes in their counting when the other rule is used.

There has been much effort to avoid the players’ confusion about the difference of rules; there are books explaining them, papers theorizing each rule, seminars and meetings trying to make a unified international rule, etc. However, none of them have been successful so far, which led to the following tacit agreement; when there is an international tournament, the tournament rule is decided by the rule of the hosting country or the sponsor.

The writer is a Baduk professor at Myongji University and a professional player of the game.

chihyung@mju.ac.kr