But can you afford to pass while retaining a 99% winrate.
This is a condition on it also. It would probably have to be late endgame where if the score difference becomes very small you still retain 100% winrate while giving up 20 points. Or you’d have to be behind by probably a lot more points than that, with not so many forcing moves on the board.
I don’t really think we should encourage people to pass mid game. It feels a bit rude to me personally to pass in order to encourage your opponent to resign.
Do I think some people will try to abuse this passing to force scoring to end games early? Probably yes. Do I think the majority of users will do it? Probably not.
Still improving the system is always a good thing. Hopefully there is some middle ground to be found that helps users with players that are genuinely trolling vs allows players to abuse the system.
The report would be about the opponent passing before the end of the game, in this case with the goal of securing a win without playing all the teire.
Although in such a case the pass could simply be interpreted as saying “please resign”. Some may find it rude, others consider it an established part of Go etiquette.
Anyway, this is a pretty niche edge case. I don’t understand the kind of hysteria in this thread. The conditions are rather narrow. There are no hordes of griefers waiting to pass and win.
I think I ran into another bug. In a tournament I was given the option to claim victory as my opponent was not connected. After waiting about 90 seconds the message disappeared. I’m not sure if it disappeared of its own accord, or if it disappeared because I was active on another tab.
Do you have a link to an example or are you talking about hypothetical strict seki scoring edge cases? (Note that even when we offered that as an option pretty much no one used it)
20% is very optimistic, especially against a 4d opponent, maybe if they had just recently played 100 consecutive games they might miss this 20 times out of exhaustion. I feel like maybe 5% or less would be more realistic.
However certainly this kind of thing players can miss, at my level or at lower levels these kinds of things, maybe slightly more complicated do get missed, and it could swing the result.
So I can understand why one might want to be able to fill dame, in the hopes the opponent isn’t paying attention or just genuinely doesn’t see that there’s an issue needing defending.
To give some further examples of the ideas of when isssue show up when dame are filled, there was some previous examples of autoscore issues like (from a while ago not recent with the server decision stuff)
six stone handicap game between a 2d and 6kyu where it’s B+9.8 according to Katago when it was scored
but if white adds a move it’s more like B+0.5, but maybe white can win without adding a move - but the aji might be quite hard to spot. The sequence might be tricky but it’s still there.
Similarly a recent enough game (still before this update) where the autoscore is having some aji with the top corner, between a 1kyu and 2kyu
I think it’s estimating W+8, possible even losing the first line stone, but if white plays incorrectly and black gets a seki or a ko or something they could conceivably flip the score and win.
A lot of these sequences might only work to full effect when the dame are filled, maybe sometimes they work ok with one outside liberty or an outside ko, sometimes they don’t work at all with more outside liberties before dame are filled I think is the point.
(I guess these examples make it seem like 10 points isn’t too bad of a guess for aji for sekis and other things causing game swinging sequences )
It was mentioned here before: using Chinese rules passing loses points before all dames are filled. This could be used to judge whether the passing happens prematurely or not. Win by server decision after three passes that didn’t lose points under Chinese rules.
Given that the opponent did pass instead of fixing the weakness, I’d say 50% is more realistic. If they had seen the weakness they would have just fixed it instead of passing.
Or maybe they had seen the weakness, but they did not know the score difference, so they were afraid that adding a move within their territory would lose the game, so they tried to pass prematurely hoping that the game would end without them having to fix their own weakness. If there hadn’t had been the anti-stalling feature, and frolag refused to pass before filling the dame, then they would have been forced to decide whether to fix the weakness or not, and the wrong decision could have cost them the game.
In any case, thanks to the anti-stalling feature they did not have to make this decision, and they won the game by Katago’s decision without having to fix their weakness. This does seem a bit unfair.
I don’t understand the concept. They needed to add this one more stone, otherwise their whole territory would explode and they’d lose a group of five stones. There would have been no need for Black to “waste time filling in those dame” if White had played this necessary move. If anyone is stalling the game here, it’s White, not Black.
Also, they only won by 10 points. It would be very disingenuous for an amateur player to claim that they are “clearly winning” to the point that their opponent is wrong to play the endgame.
In this case, @frolag was not stalling, so they should report their opponent for abusing the anti-stalling feature.
The opponent refused to play mandatory teire. It is already a bit cocky for a dan player to pass, waiting to fix at the last possible moment. Like “come on, you already lost, I have no more patience with you to play even one more stone on this board”. Both players are strong enough to know that it must be done before proper counting.
)