I think Japanese ules are more easy. But Chinese rules are not bad. What rule is better to use?
Area Scoring is marginally simpler than Territory Scoring (Territory Scoring requires some sort of pass stone in order to allow playing out scoring disputes, but Area Scoring requires no such special case), but common Area Scoring rulesets (such as NZD, AGA, Tromp-Taylor, Chinese) are vastly simpler than common Territory Scoring rulesets (Japanese)
I prefer Tromp-Taylor/NZD (they are quite similar by design), but any Area Scoring ruleset is fine. I’m not aware of any rulesets compared to which Japanese Rules is easy, though: Japanese Rules are infamously complicated
1 Like
Japanese rules are better to use. Counting in the end is much easier.
Area scoring is only easier for people who like to think formalized as it is trained in science.
As there are many players with this background, area scoring seems to be popular in discussions about the topic.
1 Like
One downside of playing Japanese rules OTB is that you have to keep all the prisoners, which has been a huge point of debate recently…
3 Likes
You ll find an incredible amount of answers in the forum.
Short story: seems easier to not count the stones but this induce some drawback, like managing the prisoners and complicated side rules for complicated positions.
I can’t say which is easier in fact, it’s more about cultural differences or everyone would have chosen the easiest way.
I don’t think so. I guess you refer to face to face and not online because it matters much less. After having a long practice in both ways I think that both have pro and cons and are pretty similar for their easiness to use. It’s easier to count less but it’s easier when you don’t have to be careful on prisoners. Put in short.
Are you suggesting that China is a country populated by scientists?
1 Like
You’re confusing Territory Counting (aka Japanes Counting) and Japanese rules.
You could make the point that Territory Counting is easier than Area Counting. That’s debatable but, being used to it, I also find it more intuitive.
However Territory Counting can also be used under Area Scoring rules (such as AGA) so in any case that’s never an argument for the additional complexity of Japanese Rules.
5 Likes
My pithy answer: Japanese rules are better for people who already know how to play Go, Chinese rules are better for beginners who don’t know how to play yet.
4 Likes
Then use Territory Counting with an Area Scoring Ruleset. AGA Rules bakes this provision into the rules, but it’s a general principle for all Area Scoring rulesets
2 Likes
One ought to keep the prisoners for midgame counting purposes regardless of ruleset, so despite preferring Area Scoring, I don’t think this is a good argument for it. A similar but subtly different argument which I think does favor Area Scoring rules is that the rules are more elegant by avoiding the need to reference prisoners
1 Like
Both area and territory scoring has a huge advantage but huge disadvantages as well (which is why both remain in use). So the answer depends on how you value those advantages and disadvantages.
Beginners may prefer area scoring because it makes playing out disputes easier. Experienced players don’t have such disputes and may prefer territory scoring because it makes shorter games without dame play and the 2 point rounding of area scores.
1 Like
I strongly doubt their respective advantages have much to do with such different rulesets remaining in use. It’s mostly due to historical/cultural reasons.
3 Likes
T
There are more scientists in China than in Japan. Check. Mate.
2 Likes
I find it aesthetically pleasing when in a board game, all that matters is what’s actually on the board. It means, for example, you can show a picture of a board and discuss the game without reference to any other information. So captures and even komi kind of bother me. Of course ko/superko messes with that too. And indeed I am
2 Likes
He’s a traitor! Get him, everyone!
5 Likes
Remember the group tax, or the preset start position? Go rules do change, and things that don’t stand the test of time do get dropped regardless of historical reasons.
The area <> territory duality is different specifically because neither is completely superior, both have some advantages and use cases.
And that’s where all the complexities come in. Unlike online Go where the number of prisoners are just displayed, in OTB the prisoners have to be kept manually. Then where should they be kept? If they should be kept at one place then how should they be enforced? What if a prisoner was found to be missing?
I’m not really against it, just that the recent incident really highlighted the complexities of this issue. IMO there should be just a way to display the prisoners even for OTB games instead of letting the players keep them.
2 Likes
I think the original post may be some sort of troll post. However, it is also quite common for this belief to be expressed. Admittedly, when I was a beginner, I also had the false impression that the Japanese rules were simpler and more elegant.
I think that this sort of mistaken impression is quite common among beginners, since they are often taught an incomplete and imprecise simplification of the Japanese rules.
4 Likes
Looking at the posts here and on Reddit where the beginners complain about Japanese rules because playing a move inside their own territory loses points, I thought many people disliked Japanese rules haha.
1 Like
From our natural progression of experiments for trying to merge the Japanese and Chinese rules (here in Taiwan), it is safe to say, the area scoring won in the end for the amateur tournaments, even with our modified “Taiwanese rules” and “Ing’s rules”, even button Go attempts over the decades. In fact, the easiest form for amateurs when given all the freedom to choose from, we eventually settled to “the threshold rule” where one side’s area reaches a certain threshold will win. (185 black wins, doesn’t even need to define komi, and can be flexible with handicaps).
But given the choices, the professionals and high dan amateurs would prefer and settle with territory scoring (not even technically Japanese rules, but a modified form). Although we still have professional tournaments that use exclusively area scoring, or Ing’s rules. So I’d say for amateurs and beginners, area scoring gives an easier time and less hassles in tournaments in comparison, but for high-level play, it seems to shift to territory scoring.
4 Likes
This is not a troll post.
1 Like