I will be honest and will not say i am 100% clean. this is japanese scoring and no score estimator. i didn’t count before the game ends.
so the story is, we both passed on move 277 and 278, and the game goes to scoring phase. i was down by 2.5, but the auto score gave a dame (a19), a false eye (a17), to W, and W would need an extra stone to connect to the main group, so that would be 3 less points for him.
I’m confused. It sounds like the SE wasn’t estimating properly, so you resumed the game to fix that problem. How is this considered unethical or legitimate? It’s imperfection is exactly why we have the ability to resume. Or am I missing an angle here?
Only that its also the players responsibility to try to eliminate possible causes for a wrong scoring (like leaving positions unfinished).
slight problems arise, when players only become aware that something isnt quite right by means of the end-game-score-calculation, because at that point technically the players have agreed the game has ended. its still fine to resume in that case, the game needs finishing after all, but its even better to not let it come to that .
but yeah… this certainly is a very mild case of “game resumption related issues” and theres no need to feel like a scumbag over it.
(i falsely called it SE , when its the end-game-score-calculator…)
To be honest, I don’t think anybody would ever figure out what EGSC means if we used it. I didn’t immediately recognize SE, but it came to me after a moment, just by following common sense. EGSC is a tad outside the realm of “sounding it out” common sense . So I tip my hat to you. It may not be technically correct, but I feel it is right
It sounds to me like you are conscious of the moral implications of resuming. Your opponent did not say anything in chat that would suggest they were upset, so I don’t imagine they felt slighted by this. If you are really worried, you could reach out to them, address the situation, and offer a humble apology. You said it was an oversight, versus being lazy about filling in the board and hoping the EGSC would figure it out correctly. And it seems, based on your negative comment about your own behavior (“as any scumbag would do”) that you wish things had gone differently.
We all make mistakes. The important part is that we learn from them and try to do better next time. When something like this happens, emotionally process it (which you have), learn what you can (which you have gone the extra mile to do with this thread), and then leave it behind you; ready to be a better version of yourself in future encounters. From my viewpoint, you have come completely full circle in this situation.
Your self-analysis and contemplative behavior is encouraging to me. I don’t see this very often in competitive space. It gives me hope that others I encounter, who are not brave enough to speak up, might feel and process their own folly’s and mistakes as you have. So I thank you, for sharing your experience and helping to reaffirm my hope and trust in my fellow human beings
There is no reason to resume the game if white has to fill the points without doubt. You can easily change the state of any string (black, white and empty) to what it should be.
E.g. mark the dame, the false eye and the connection as neutral.
If your opponent hadn’t agreed with you, resuming the game would be a valid option.
I was in a game just the other day where the EGSC wouldn’t allow me to mark the points on the board that I wanted. When I clicked on the affected intersections it highlighted an entire swatch of coordinates as dame or as one player color. We had to resume to fill it in to get around that behavior. Is there a way, beyond just left clicking with my mouse, to control the individual state on a per intersection basis?