Go Memes Pedantry

I think both the words “stones” and “jump” are used metaphorically in discussions about Go and other games. Strictly speaking, none of the playing pieces in various board games actually physically jump themselves. Instead, a player may pick them up and moves them to a new spot, maybe while passing over another piece. So, even in a game like checkers, the word “jump” is used in a metaphorical sense. Of course, I think this metaphor is natural since the actual motion of the playing piece is like that of it jumping over another.

In Go, the stones don’t move after they have been placed (except to be removed when captured), but frequently discussions about Go involve metaphors about the “movement” of the stones, and even the word “jump” is widely used in various Go terms, like One-point jump at Sensei's Library, Monkey Jump at Sensei's Library, Two-point jump at Sensei's Library, Diagonal jump at Sensei's Library, etc. Although the individual stones are not being moved after they have been placed, the metaphor still seems natural when one views groups of stones as a collective whole, with the concept of “jumping” relating to how the group changes and expands it area of influence.

While a lot of these abstract board games could be played with game pieces that consist of actual stones, quite often, however, the game pieces are not actually made of stone, nor necessarily in some sort of shape that would resemble a natural, found stone. Go “stones” is metaphorically understood to refer to the playing pieces used for Go, regardless of their material(s), provided they suit the purpose. I think that one could extend this analogy to call the playing pieces of other games as “stones” as well, however that might not be commonly done, except for some games like mancala or curling. Some other games might even use manufactured playing pieces made of stone, even if the users might not call them as such.

1 Like

Returning to chinese checkers, I don’t think that what the pieces are made of is relevant. You can have plastic pegs and stone marbles but they are still called pegs and marbles.

I’d be interested to see a reference where chinese checkers pieces are called stones. That would sure shut me up :smiley:

I’m not a research service, and I am not trying to shut you up. This began as a discussion about jumping stones. Now I see the ground has shifted to semantics/linguistics.

As a kid, through elementary school, we played a lot of marble games, Chinese checkers, and mancala (as I have talked about in other threads). The stones in mancala, by the way, also jump—from bowl to bowl. (I acknowledge that quotidian people may call it “moving,” but getting out of a bowl actually requires jumping, albeit with the help of a human hand.) We usually played with a commercial set at a quasi-rec center, but one kid had a collection of light and dark stones (dark gray gravel that was widely abundant), so the game could be played anywhere by digging some shallow holes in the dirt. Under the influence of mancala, I think, we tended to mix our terms in CC, between “marble” and “stone,” but I can’t rightly say which was dominant. Even “piece” was used occasionally.

1 Like

That’s why it’s in the Pedantry thread, where the denizens enjoy sententious banter :smiley: :smiley: :wink:

I’m totally with you on this one. Checker’s stone definitely jump. No-one said that jump had to mean unassisted self-propelled jump.

You said so! :smile:

more easy tsumego:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r85Fl5UZq18&t=563s
Bear finally gets the ring and goes to the swimming pool

2 Likes

anger?



well… ok.

Wouldn’t that anger you, to be attacked by your enemies?

1 Like

No. One expects to be attacked by enemies. What is more dangerous and triggering is to be attacked by “friends.”

2 Likes

As a first step why do we call chinese checkers, chinese checkers?

2 Likes

In the United States, the commercialization of Halma (invented c. 1880) occurred in the early 20th century. That coincided with a period of national fascination with the exotic side of Asia, particularly China (despite the so-called “Yellow Peril” propaganda in the first two decades of the 20th century). Consequently, associating the game with China was nothing but a sales gimmick, and “Chinese” checkers was born. I once saw an early Chinese checkers board in an antique shop. It was called “Hop Ching Checkers.” Especially interesting was that the board had 5 rows in the home triangles, rather than the modern 4 rows. I would have bought it, but it was very expensive.

1 Like

Looking back, it appears that no one ever answered @Lys’s question about why glass marbles are called “marbles.” The answer is that early marbles (aggies) were typically made of agate, a decorative stone of great variety and popularity in the lapidary field. People might well confuse some agate with marble, or perhaps marble was also used at that time (I don’t know). Glass marbles were a later development, in my day, and were considered an abomination by my parent’s generation. Aggies were still around and prized when I was a kid, and I had a few of them, including several “shooters.” Not sure where my collection is now. I think I passed it on to my “little brother” when I became a teen.

4 Likes

This meme confused me as we usually oppose big moves vs urgent moves to point that urgent comes before big.
But maybe that is that was intended?

The immediate perception is that the runner (in blue) stopped short of the base (white square on ground) in order to trick the defender (in grey) into thinking that he was already safely on base (preventing the attempted tag by the defender from having any effect) and thus the defender did not actually bother to complete the tag, allowing the runner to then touch the base and establish a safe position. Alternatively, one might view it as the defender knowing that the runner has not yet touched the base, but then having a mental lapse of not completing the tag, due to the runner inexplicably stopping short. Either way, it appears that the runner got away with something that he should not have.

The reality is not readily apparent without additional context about the state of the game. At the beginning of the clip, you briefly see the catcher (man in heavy padding standing behind the batter) throwing the ball towards the defender seen later in the clip. Since the batter (in blue) is not making an attempt to run to first base and the catcher had the ball, we can conclude that the runner was apparently trying to steal a base (attempting to advance, without the ball being put into play by being hit by the batter). Note that during a steal attempt, the defender needs to specifically tag the runner (with a glove holding the ball) before he reaches the next base. However, the crucial part of missing context is that the pitch just thrown towards the batter (and caught by the catcher, right before the clip began) was ruled as a “ball” (an invalid pitch) and happened to be the fourth thrown at the batter, which lets the batter freely take first base and advances any other runner(s) that must be pushed forward. Actually, at very the beginning of the clip, you can also just barely see a bat flying away from the batter, which is presumably due to the batter throwing the bat back towards a helper that will collect and organize equipment. The batter did this since he was already aware at that point that a fourth ball had been ruled and that he was granted a free pass to first base. However, it is very easy to overlook this subtle detail, since it is only a blur seen for a fraction of a second at the beginning of the clip.

Since the batter was awarded a walk (a free pass to take first base, due to four balls being pitched), any attempted steal is nullified (essentially treated as having never happened) and the runner is anyways awarded a free pass to advance to second base (since he started at first base and was forced forwards by the batter taking first base). Thus, there was no need for the runner to attempt to reach second base before being tagged, nor did the defender need to attempt to tag him, since all of that no longer matters. Thus, given the full context, it becomes apparent that most likely the runner and defender also became aware of situation as it was unfolding (possibly due to the umpire in black informing them), and hence there was an apparently abrupt cessation of effort. At the very end, the runner extends his foot to touch the base and smiles, perhaps just to create a funny moment, rather than making an actual sneaky play.

8 Likes

I’m not any wiser, but I appreciate the pedantry.

6 Likes

I wasn’t any wiser after reading the comment @Gia mentioned, but I am now somewhat wiser after having read @yebellz’ explanation. Thanks!

6 Likes

immagine

A similar graph (even if white was always winning) , and it’s setted to “score”.

5 Likes

That looks like a L&D situation where a large group was wrongly assumed by both players to just be alive.

KataGo would be going like:

Move 90: Blunder! -50.7
Move 91: Blunder! -53.1
Move 92: Blunder! -52.8

and so on, until someone finally realizes that “Oops, I guess that group wasn’t alive after all :sweat_smile:

Edit: Or maybe you were just being merciful to the 12k

5 Likes

Where does a Go Meme about Go Memes Pedantry go?

Should there be a Go Memes Pedanty Go Memes thread? I mean, it’s just pendantry all the way down.

4 Likes


What?

1 Like