Is it always within the rules to resume play after both players pass?

It was said in the heat of the moment and, i dont care what you think about the chat, it was after they cheated!!!

1 Like

It has already been well established that by the rules of this site, your opponent did not cheat.

1 Like

Not only the rules of the site, but the exact rule you quoted: it says you are allowed to resume!

… and it’s interesting that while complaining about the bad sportsmanship of your opponent, it sounds like you want to claim a win where actually you haven’t won yet. You know for sure that the opponent can do better, yet you want the game scored to you because they pressed pass. Doesn’t sound very sporting to me…

1 Like

Like at the game record I pass on move 86 , black pass on move 87, goes to scoring they do not like the score. Most like cause i won by 0.5 pts. They disagree on something that is not a life/death problem. Then it is my turn i pass on move 88, They play L11 on move 89. The rules only allow you to play out life/death problems not to win the game, after seeing the official score form the site. That is cheating. All I want is for the site to fix this problem I don’t care that I lose. I was cheated, I was not the first and will not be the last.

If they played L11 on move 87 I would not be here today. That is not cheating.

For what it’s worth, I do see your point. If it’s down to 0.5 points and you pass, then you discover you miscounted, I don’t think the “can play on” rules are here for that.

It’s a bit of a shame how you approached reporting the problem - all aggrieved and accusatory. It’s just a fact that this method of reporting perceived issues doesn’t win support.

But I do agree that it’s a problem worth fixing, given Jokes Aside’s fairly straightforwards suggestion for how to fix it.


I am not accusing any one of cheating, that was a example that of the type of cheating that i was talking about that someone wanted to see.

I would like the site to not let players to go back and play something that is not part of the life/death problem. Only allow them play out the life/death problem and ban all other moves that may cause someone to make another living group elsewhere. That causes them to win the game. I am open to other or better suggestions. Do you have any?

As I said, I think JA’s suggestion is a good one: don’t show the score until both players have agreed the life and death status of stones…


Would this end up being something similar to how scoring is done on KGS and Tygem?

Dunno - never play at those inferior places! :open_mouth: :wink: :smiley: :stuck_out_tongue:


No stones are ever presumed dead. All fully surrounded areas are selected as territory and you need to tell the system which additional stones (if any) are dead.
Once these have been agreed on, then the score is given. Only if dead groups can’t be agreed upon is play resumed, with no score having been shown.

I don’t think @Jokes_Aside suggestion will work as intended. I know OGS’s score estimator isn’t great in mid game but it is pretty much correct by the time people are passing. In the example game, SE has white ahead by .5 points before passing which is enough info to play exactly the same as in the game.

@MOC0390 I echo everyone’s opinion that I find your comments way more offensive than your opponent resuming play.

“It is ok that I did X because they did Y first”. This is just bad logic. By the same logic, if someone steals bread from a shop, is it ok for the shop owner to murder his family in response? Y needs to be an appropriate response to X. I don’t think harassment is an appropriate response to your opponent resuming play. If you really felt like your opponent cheated, just call a mod to clarify the rules without throwing insults around.


The difference is that using SE is invisible to opponent and effectively frustration free. I don’t see why someone would use it during scoring if it’s available all the time.

We are not suggesting to restrict SE in this context, are we?


@Jokes_Aside My point is simply that there is no difference between SE on the move before passing and the actually score after counting.

So if these are the same thing, I don’t see why we should allow people to see one but not the other.

In addition, during scoring, it is easy to miss a single stone and forget to mark it as dead. If you can see the score during counting you can at least check to ensure that OGS count approx matches your own count. If not then maybe you forgot to mark stones dead.

However I don’t feel strongly either way. I think the best solution to this problem is to study really hard to become stronger where it isn’t a problem! jk :stuck_out_tongue:

Well, yeah… I don’t disagree. There is a tradeoff, but imho it’s minor. It’s more of a judgement call, but given the solution works well on other servers, I wouldn’t hesitate trying it out.

And you are right in a way - the only way out of adding ridiculous moves after the thing is done is getting stronger. Being able to notice that before the game tells you in your face is Step 1. (For example by using Score Estimator). As you get stronger you might start noticing it yourself and reacting to the problem earlier. In the end strategy is about being able to predict the outcome before it happens. So at some point you are able to grasp your score in the end-game, then you learn to estimate it during the middle game or even in fuseki to adjust the strategy accordingly (complicating if behind, simplifying when ahead). Simple isn’t it? :wink:

Proposed solution tries to solve a very particular source of frustration for beginners and effectively help them get over Step 1 in their path to everlasting enjoyment/frustration (choice is yours) Go can bring.


Everyone is focusing to much on the example. My original post was is it cheating after each player pass back-to-back for anyone to go back and try to win the game, that is not part of the disagreed groups. That is the heart of this topic, not the game itself.

But about the game:
I have no problem with anyone using the SE in game, cause I use it myself. I ,personality, only use it to confirm if my count is roughly right. I feel that my opponent did not use the SE at any point in the game. I counted that I was up 56.5 to 56, on move 85. I checked with the SE it told me, I was right. I was happy I winning. My opponent had the same opportunity to do the same. I feel that they did not count or use the SE. That is a sad fact of my opponent. Then I pass then my opponent pass and we enter counting, with no groups that can be disagreed upon. Cause all group are all alive. I win the game by 0.5. They disagreed with the score of the game. But there is no disagreement to be had. I claim that it is cheating for anyone to go back and try to win any game that is close, in the matter that my opponent did.

Here is my response to everyone comments about the chat.I DO NOT CARE, but I will said one thing. In chat they said they will do it again to won another games.

1 Like

On this server, no it is not cheating. In a real tournament, yes it’s probably against the rules of the game, but at this stage that isn’t how this server is programmed and your opponent has acted well within his legal rights here.

1 Like

So help me get this straight.

You would be ok if your opponent would have done the same thing before you went through the ‘pass-pass’ phase. Let’s say he checked SE just before the counting phase and said ‘ah-ha, I’m losing lets do something silly’. But because he didn’t know about SE (which you were using to drive the game home) and did the very same thing AFTER exchanging the passes you find that he cheated you?

Btw. I’ve given my original suggestion to drive the topic to some constructive conclusion. Otherwise I don’t really see this going anywhere. Try to be honest with yourself and explain what kind of outcome do you expect from this thread.

Do you have any idea on how to do this?
Are you able to explain to a software which move is resolving life/death problems and which is not? Please tell us.

Otherwise, please, just rely on moderator’s opinion after you call them.

It a suggestions.