Counterintuitive point count

We played a game in which intuitively white was winning by quite a lot, but after we both passed the points were counted in such a way that Black won (there were a few . This also made my ranking drop. Is there anything I can do in this situation?

Game in question: IGLO

Thank you very much!

For counting to work you need to close the borders properly. The game wasn’t over yet, neither of you should have passed.

You can ask a moderator to annul the game. (Not sure if they’ll do it, but worth a try.)


I called the moderator and reported it as “other.” Clicking the “report user” button felt kinda awkward, as my oponent did nothing wrong. We’ll see how it goes.

1 Like

You are 15k, don’t you know you need to surround areas for them to be territory?

That’s fine, I’m sure the mods don’t mind.

Just for your own enjoyment of the game: make sure you understand what went wrong there. Ask, if you don’t.

1 Like

It’s definitely a great lesson that human beings and computers look at a Go board in a very different way :slight_smile: I only started playing online recently, most of my experience is offline games, where this wouldn’t be an issue.

Oh, but it would! You can’t count the game in the state you ended it, that’s simply impossible.


To explain a bit: can you tell me if F18 belongs to black or to white? And if you can, can you explain why? After that note that A5 is in the same area as F18, so needs to be given to the same player.


You are correct, it’s impossible to count the points. However, a human intuitively knows that the chances of Black making a comeback from that board are minuscule. In an offline game the distinction between passing because the game is fully played out and passing as resigning (there’s no point in continuing the game) tends to be lot more fuzzy than on a server (at least in my experience). If my oponent and me disagreed about the result, we would simply continue playing, and got the game to a point in which we would be able to count the points.

1 Like

OK, I see your point. But in that case you black is basically resigning without actually saying that. That is somewhat different from the formal rules of go, but who cares if both are happy. The server though doesn’t know about any agreement or assumed resignation, so it takes the two consecutive passes as a sign to begin counting, which doesn’t work.

So in this sense you may be right about a difference between online and offline play. But to be honest I’ve never seen such a ‘pass-pass’ as assumed resignation between experienced players. I recommend sticking to the more formal procedure: explicitly resign ar close the borders and count.


I guess this is a question of local culture. I would say that the distinction irl is usually very clear. Either one player resigns or you play to counting. I can see that if is near the end of the game you might say something like “I’m sure I’ve lost so should resign but do you mind if we go to counting” at which point you might play out the last moves quickly to enable counting.
Or if it’s too close to tell then you definitely have to play out to the end.

Tldr, passing is not the same as resigning irl either


This is not a thing.

Today’s 15ks are yesterday’s 22k. Because of rating recalculation. I see 5-6ks trying to make a seki when the outside group is dead.

1 Like

In casual real-life games I’ve played on a physical board, there is a pretty clear difference. In normal friendly and casual games, casual enough to where I’m chatting with my opponent or other people as we play, for games that go to scoring, a typical ending of the game might go like like:

“Okay, looks like that’s just about it, I don’t see anything left, so I pass”.
“Yep, I pass too”

and then we count.

or this kind of thing might happen:

“Okay, looks like that’s just about it, I don’t see anything left, so I pass”.
“What about this?” (plays at a potential weak point inside the other person’s area, the second move in a row by this player because the first player just passed).
“I think I can just defend like this” (responds)
“Ah, right, okay I pass too”.

Not uncommonly the “pass” moves are omitted in highly casual settings, but when they are, there is usually verbal reference to the game being done (i.e. literally no useful moves left) and that both sides are explicitly agreeing that this is the case:

“I don’t see anything left to play, shall we count?”

(In this case, the online server equivalent can only be to explicitly pass, of course, since the server isn’t going to understand chat by the players about there being no endgame moves left)

Whereas in case of a player having lost and ending the game early, in a casual chatty game it might happen like this:

“That fight really didn’t go well for me, can we stop here?”


“Huh, that fight really didn’t go well for me, can we stop here and review how that happened?”

And even in highly casual settings, in the clubs I’ve been in, explicitly using the word “resign” is not uncommon too:

“I resign. I really didn’t expect that group to die there!”

(In all of the above cases, the online server equivalent would of course be for the player who acknowledges they lost and who is initiating the early stopping of the game, to click the resign button).

Comparing the two kinds of cases above, scoring vs resignation, even in the implicit cases, there still isn’t much overlap in final things one would say and confirm with the opponent between scoring vs resignation. This is driven by the fact that game ending for scoring is necessarily by mutual agreement of there being no useful moves left… whereas game ending by resignation is unilateral and asking the other side if it’s okay to stop the game early is more a matter of politeness rather than it actually being up to them to agree if the game is over.

Are you saying that in your social group, players often mix up these two kinds of ways of ending the game, or sometimes even mutually pass in order to indicate resignation? That would certainly be a very confusing norm to have!


I’ve only seen this in case someone resigns just after a blunder, and asks to count the game without the blunder. For instance, failing to notice an atari during the endgame. The player who’s stones got captured resigns, but then says, “do you mind if we count what the score would have been if I had answered the atari?”. Then the players undo the blunder, fill the remaining endgame moves quickly, and count the game.