# Chinese neutral points?

In practice, you don’t have to actually award the half-point for each dame for using the half-counting method. Instead, people can just count the unfilled dame and subtract it from (361 + komi) to get the total number of points shared between White and Black.

I’ve never heard this one before. I think that area scoring rules are actually much easier to understand than territory scoring rules. I think the only tricky part, for Chinese rules in particular, is being aware of which cyclical patterns can cause a “no result” vs which are forbidden by superko (other area scoring rules, like AGA, NZ, Tromp-Taylor simplify this to just always applying a superko rule and doing away with “no result” outcomes).

By the way, under the Japanese rules, players are technically supposed to fill in all dame (except those that must be left open to preserve sekis), since the definition of seki depends on which stones “possess dame”, which is a phrase that has some degree of ambiguity.

6 Likes

Historical note: I give up trying to understand Chinese rules.

1 Like

Chinese scoring is easy to understand. Remove all dead stones.

Black’s points = Black’s stones remaining on the board + Black’s territory
White’s points = White’s stones remaining on the board + White’s territory + komi.

The rest is counting tricks if you play on a real board. If you play on OGS, you don’t need counting tricks.

11 Likes

personally i feel like chinese (or some other variant of area scoring) is the most basic of rulesets:

do you control more of the board than your opponent? if so, you win.

7 Likes

(barring seki) Chinese rules are much simpler IRL. You only have to count one side and subtract form 361!

In practice, this looks like:

1. removing all (agreed upon) dead stones
2. filling one color, usually black(?)
3. removing the other color
4. counting all the stones left on the board. Very easy because you can rearrange them however you want. Groups of 10 is nice.
3 Likes

Step by step illustrated

4 Likes

This can’t be right. Dame points are either unoccupied, or occupied randomly by black or white, meaning that the Chinese score would have a random component.

1 Like

This description seems to say nothing about dame points.

1 Like

bro just fill dame

2 Likes

If all count, better put stones on the dame.

When you cannot put stones like in a seki. then the case is explained in the topic too (1point for eye in a seki or 0.5 for each player for dame between both opponent)

In chinese rule we count all, we maximize the global occupation. So you better play the dame as they are points. Ofc if both players take 1 point each time , it balance and the difference will not change unless the last will give one more point (case of a odd number of dame )

Now if you get confortable with the chinese rules, you can easely explain why it works.

• why can i put back the prisoners in the bowls?
• why the score is the same as with the Japanese rules (modulo 1 point)?
• why there is the modulo 1 point?
2 Likes

There is no random component. Either a dame has been filled, then it’s 1 point for the player who filled it, or it hasn’t, then it’s 0 point.

The proper way of playing under chinese rules is to fill as many dame as possible.

5 Likes

What do you mean by this? The typical definition of dame points is that they are empty points on the board that are not surrounded by only one players. Do you mean something else by dame?

To clarify, where people have talked about “filling dame”, they mean in the sense that dame would be filled by the players playing additional moves (in the typical alternating fashion) on the board.

2 Likes

yebellz is correct.

Officially, the result of a game is determined by

``````black's points - 180.5 - komi
``````

or

``````white's points - 180.5 + komi
``````

To make this work, we have to guarantee

``````black's points + white's points = 361
``````

So each side gets 0.5 from a neutral point.

Many believe
`black's area - white's area - komi`
is the number we look at at the end of the game, which is mathematically correct, but if you use this formula you have to count both sides.

3 Likes

This is the only posting here that makes sense to me; thanks.

2 Likes

In these two equations, the value of “komi” term should actually be half of the komi (3.75 for Chinese rules).

3 Likes

Right. To be more precise, 3.75 is the komi in the official Chinese rules; 7.5 is the komi that yields an equivalent result when we count in a different manner (comparing black’s points vs white’s points).

In fact, I just found all of this is in Chinese Rules at Sensei's Library (the link Chinese 2002 rules)

4 Likes

What does this mean? Also, is the same komi really used for all board sizes? That is remarkable.

1 Like

Actually I’m not sure what “this” refers to in your question. I’ll explain what I think you are asking.

``````black's points - 180.5 - komi
``````

If we compare black’s (or white’s) points with roughly half of the board, i.e. using the number above, then the komi should be 3.75, according to the current Chinese or AGA rules. But if we use the following formula,

``````black's area - white's area - komi
``````

the number we plug in for komi is 7.5 instead.

Not sure about komi for other board sizes. I don’t know if official rulesets (such as Chinese, Japanese, Korean, AGA, EGF, NZ) have anything about komi on other boards, since 19x19 is the mainstream.

3 Likes

what do you mean?

What does who mean?

3 Likes