The graph of this player clearly starts around 12k.
Did you learn go and improve to 12k here on OGS? Have you ever played a game in real life on a real board and scored that? Have you never realised that territories need to be closed areas? Or did you know but then because OGSās previous scoring let you be lazy and score an incomplete game thought that was a nice thing about playing Go here instead of following the rules?
Iām trying to understand how we get into this situation of non-beginners not understanding the basic rules. To give an analogy, itās like a 10 year old child being told that if they want food they need to put it in their mouth and chew and being surprised, because until now whenever they were hungry they were magically teleported into a hospital and fed on an IV drip and never realised that was weird.
Given you and opponent have already played 184 moves in that game, I donāt really see how itās a chore to need to play another 5 to close the territories so you can count it properly. Indeed if you leave the position as it is then if black goes first he can jump into the right side and reduce it a lot, changing the score significantly.
2 Likes
First please let me point out that you tone is rude and condescending thus makes one less prone to post to forums. I play go for fun not to be scolded.
To answer your question both have played in person but also improved dramatically on this site. I do understand the rules of the game but also feel if we should disagree with the scoring be able to work it out among players.
It is our choice to play the end game or not. I preferred the the old scoring system was smart enough to understand implied boundaries. That said a strong system that does not is fine if the option is simply given to change blanks to points similar as removing dead stones.
5 Likes
I am inclined to agree. Which is sad for you to receive such posts and sad for us all because @Uberdude is making a valid point, just a bit insensitively 
True but
is not a thing 
@Uberdude is right that closing all boundaries before passing is fundamental to the end of the game. To not do so means all of that āterritoryā (not territory) becomes dame, which likely changes the score drastically.
The fact that the old system supported implied boundaries seems quite strange to me. By correcting this anomaly, the new system is promoting more accurate scoring. I think most would agree, that is a good thing 
As a workaround, if there is an implied boundary such that both players agree on where it would end up, then both players can count the score manually so they know who the winner is, right? 
So maybe the loser could just resign? 
7 Likes
Unless the functionality was changed with the recent update, you can click on territory to mark it as yours during the Stone Removal Phase.
1 Like
Even with open boundaries? So an area of empty points touching both colours of stones could have a mix of black territory, white territory and neutral points (dame / teire)?
You took my quote out of context for some strange reason. Indeed, the part you left out shows clearly that I donāt know whether the functionality has changed since the update. Here is the part you left out:
1 Like
Iām glad to see someone else who doesnāt use capture-go, and teaches about territory instead (going straight to the goal of the game).
1 Like
This makes no sense to me. Either one player resigns, or both play to the end. Both players agreeing to not finish the game and then expecting some reasonable outcome does not exist in any rule set for this game.
@Uberdude may have been rude in his analogy, but I feel he was not wrong.
3 Likes
For cases like this, where both players donāt want to finish the game, there should be an option to anull the game by mutual agreement?
Love the name by the way. All good to know and easy enough to play out end game. Thanks for the response
1 Like
My mistake. Sorry brau! 
1 Like
You know, all of this could be easily avoided if thereās a mechanism at the end of the game that points out (by flashing red or beeping or something) that borders are not closed yet. This could be turned on just for newer and beginning players so that they can learn about it.
When you start out playing the game a 19x19 board can be kind of intimidating and unclosed borders can be missed easily even if you know about the rule.
@UJ35812 The reason the rules of Go need the borders to be closed is because unless they are closed, either side can still reduce or even invade in some situations to change the score. Even those endgame moves that seem insignificant right now are part of overall āGo skillā. For example a pro game can go from 0.5 point win for one side to another because of a small endgame mistake. For amateurs the situation may not be as dramatic but itās still part of the game. Agreeing that unclosed borders are closed would be like agreeing on a result without both sides playing out the best moves
uhm so basically i dont care about precision scoring, its boring and takes too much time, and i dont care if i win or lose that much. i am not a professional.
to me if i lose by 2 points because its scored wrong, i just dont care. it will not make a long term difference in my rank.
thats why i miss the old sloppy robot.
1 Like
Then play those boundary closing moves in 0.5 second per move. If itās not important you can just autopilot it right? Wonāt take more than a few seconds
3 Likes
Or if itās correspondance, use conditional moves.
1 Like
I agree that closing boundaries is basic knowledge to have once you re no more new to the game.
Now when you are new, we could consider how to mimic the nearby watcher who is going to help the beginner to close the boundaries if itās necessary, and it is where an AI could be useful if no human player (like a mod or a kibbitzer) can help. AI could just come in when missing move are detected, with appropriate comments and pop up.
3 Likes
I like this idea so I will try it myself when teaching newbies. But I have a questionā¦
I have often thought that Chinese rules are better for beginners than Japanese rules (or, more specifically, that area scoring is better for beginners than territory scoring). This is because, almost invariably, beginners will play inside their own territory towards the end of the game, which reduces their score in Japanese rules but makes no difference in Chinese*. So my question: How would you approach introducing the concept of territory first under area scoring?
*provided they donāt reduce themselves to one eye or some similar blunder and ignoring the indirect difference of points lost due to missed opportunities
EDIT: See discussion below. This is NOT a good idea 
1 Like
I need to find the threads where this is discussed in detail but in short I donāt think this is right.
Maybe Japanese rules are more helpful here. In either case playing in your own territory loses you a point. In an obvious way in Japanese rules but in a less obvious way in Chinese. The only time this isnāt true is when the game is finished and you should really be passing instead of playing in your or your opponentās settled territory.
Teaching beginners that itās ok to play inside your own territory seems a big mistake to me. What you really need to focus on is what makes territory territory and working out whether any more moves there are necessary or not. If there is doubt then sure play there but review and work out if it was necessary. And if it wasnāt and you lost by 0.5 under Japanese rules then this is good reinforcement for the lesson!
4 Likes
Thatās a great idea c-moves it is 