Yes, that’s probably what happened… either inadvertently or maliciously… however, I’m asking about how to handle tricky cases (teire, seki, etc.) properly so that we get it right next time.
I want to learn how to properly mark stones as live, dead, seki, etc. It does not help to simply tell me that I must have done it wrong in the past, which I already know.
Please teach me how to use the scoring mode properly.
What is the proper procedure for marking stones in seki? How does one mark teire points? What does it mean when you click on an empty point and it turns red? How does one mark “eyes in seki” as not territory?
I created the following fake game as an example:
How would one properly mark the status of the groups and other key empty spaces (e.g., eyes in seki, teire point, neutral points in a seki)? Note: I already know the proper status of the groups/key points, but I just want to learn how to properly mark this in OGS’s scoring interface.
If possible, could someone fork this game with me (unranked, no time limit) so that we can experiment with the scoring mode to see how to properly mark the stones?
Yes, for my example game, I’m interested in the case for Japanese rules. Again, I’m aware of what the correct marking should be, but I just want to learn how to use the interface properly to make those markings.
I think this has been a potential source of confusion for myself and likely others as well, since dead stones are also shown as transparent, and thus it becomes natural to assume that all transparent stones are already marked as dead. It seems the subtle difference distinguishing between the two cases (dead vs unsure) is whether or not there is a colored square over that stone as well, correct? What is the default behavior if these “unsure” stones are left unresolved?
This is what I had thought the red markings meant, but I seem to have had trouble with this feature in the past. In a correspondence game (when my opponent wasn’t even online), I had marked a teire point as red and accepted the position, but then later after my opponent had accepted the score, the red marked teire point wound up being counted as territory. Maybe my opponent had toggled the point back to non-red, but shouldn’t that cancel my acceptance?
This is really only true in principle, assuming that both players are strict about procedure, since nothing in the system actually forces players to fill in all dame before counting. In practice, players often end the game before all dame points are filled, sometimes even when there are some simple teire that need to be resolved. Thus, it is not uncommon practice to see players just simply acknowledge teire points when counting, rather than actually filling them in (if not forced to). Should the correct scoring procedure be to resume all games if the dame have not been filled in?
@Françisa, would you be willing to fork this game with me (unranked, no time limit, Japanese rules, you can have the winning color) so that I can experiment with the scoring mode to learn how to properly mark the stones?
Can you link this game? i don’t mean a demo but a real game.
It’s quite possible that the score was correctly counted. Just the board dots displaying wrong in the end state.
The teire is at M10 (which I marked, but didn’t bother contesting since it didn’t matter).
[quote=“Pempu, post:25, topic:3246”]
It’s quite possible that the score was correctly counted. Just the board dots displaying wrong in the end state.[/quote]
You’re right, as that appears to be the case for this game. The point is marked as territory, but appears to have been correctly not counted. Rather than a scoring bug, this is a display/interface bug.
I said “appears buggy”, and indeed it did. Now from your explanation (for which, thank you), I understand that it is working as designed.
However, a lot of people are confused by this design, and some seem to make mistakes with it (or get tricked by others). Since OGS has no online help system to explain it, users will continue to have a difficult time, especially as they see the stones changing state without any input from them. Telling us to explain it to others is a band-aid, the interface is not good even if it’s bug-free.
In addition, the collaborative way scoring is done (at least it appears to be, the interface IS confusing) seems to leave it wide open for a race condition - griefers can get you to misclick on “agree” if they are lucky. At which point the game is over, with no possibility of fixing the result. Am I wrong?
