Playing Team Go

I edited my list of ranks so that it includes @Conrad_Melville’s 9k. Could you add 9k to your suggested teams, too, @bugcat?


Me too.

If it’s slow correspondence format count me out. I know that I’m going to get busy/bored and drop out. Long format is too much for me to handle.

Done c:

I feel like the problem of fast correspondence would assume you in fact have “fast correspondence with your team-mates” I.e can be in similar time zones or some clever distribution of times zones.

Otherwise I imagine it’s just the team captain making moves or timing out, whichever is likeliest.

I mean you could use conditional move feature in some instances to speed up a sequence of moves that were discussed

1 Like

If you are still interesting in participating, please reply with answers to the following questions:

  1. What time settings do you prefer? How fast can you play?
  2. Would you be willing to be a team captain?
  3. What format would you prefer? That is, 2 teams? 3 team round-robin? 4 teams?
  4. Any other general comments, suggestions?

My answers:

  1. I would prefer Fischer timing with a 5 day initial/max, and +1 day per move. I think that’s the fastest that I could manage if there is to be discussion.
  2. I would be willing to be a captain, but would prefer to defer to any higher ranked players that would want to captain.
  3. I prefer either a single game between 2 players or a 3 team round-robin. I think this would depend highly on how many people remain interested in playing. For 3 teams, I would like to see at least 4 players per team, so if less than 12 still want to play, I think we should go with a single game of 2 teams.
  4. Generally, I think this game would rely heavily on the captains leading their teams. They should exercise discretion in managing time and choosing when to close discussion in order to make a move. I think the games would unfold with each team sharing their thoughts and discussing on each other’s ideas. Maybe a few players won’t be so heavily involved every single turn, but they should still be able to share their ideas as they can.
  1. Anything that gives around 1 day to deliberate a move with the team would be fine with me.

  2. Yes, but if there’s a higher ranked player who really wants to, I’d rather have them be the captain.

  3. 3 team round-robin or 4 teams bracket. 2 teams would be too many players to keep discussion manageable.

  4. No comments, I bet the details will become clear when playing start.

  1. The slowest I would want to go is one move / day. Possibly some timezone grouping could be used to get it down further than that, even. Fischer is good because we get a time buffer.

  2. I’m not willing to be captain. I am very unreliable and I procrastinate a lot almost to the level of a mental condition, which is already screwing me over in more important things than a Go game.

  3. I’d like a three player round robin. Smaller teams give the weaker players a chance to make their suggestions and have their mistakes explained properly.

  4. This might be controversial, but my opinion is that no “tools” should be available: no bots, no analysis, not even the score estimator.


I definitely agree with no bots and no score estimator. However, I think it would be tricky to have discussion while saying that players are not allowed to use the analysis tool.

  1. A move per day, give or take, seems ideal.
  2. HAHA. No.
  3. More smaller teams seems better, but I don’t mind much.

About analysis disabled, I think that team effort would take the place of analysis here. Putting our minds together to choose our move. So, not disabling analysis because of “cheating” but rather to reinforce the team spirit.

1 Like

Actually, yeah, I can see your point – there has to be freedom to analyse.


But how would sharing our thoughts work without using the analysis tool? I was imagining that each team would set up a private demo board to follow and discuss the game. Then, the players could share variations to demonstrate their ideas. If we forbid analysis, then I think that would mean forbidding variation sharing as well, which would make discussing ideas much more awkward (and remove the need for a demo board, I guess), since I guess we would have to exchange ideas through coordinates?

  1. Fischer with +1 day per move sounds good. I can play faster but probably not discuss and play faster than that. I would need to fit in discussion between work, family and sleep.

  2. I would prefer not to Captain, mainly because I’m but sure I can handle the responsibility without really understanding what the responsibility is!

  3. 3 team round robin would be nice but I’m not fussy.

  4. Is there a way of being notified that discussion is on? Or will it just be a matter of checking a thread fairly frequently? I’m not sure I have my notification settings set correctly to avoid missing things. Although I’m happy to check ogs repeatedly when I can!

  1. Fisher, 5 day initial/max, +1 day per move is fine. I would also suggest a weekend pause, as it would give a chance to recover time if a team fell behind. Because a discussion is involved, it would be harder, compared to a 2-person game, to catch up by playing two moves in a day. This is not a deal breaker for me, however. NOTE: I am unavailable from 4 a.m. to 4 p.m. (Eastern Standard Time) weekdays. I am online from 4 p.m. to 10 or 12 p.m. virtually every night (with a break for dinner, etc.).
  2. I can’t be a captain, due in part to my schedule. Also, I think the stronger players should captain.
  3. I have no preference. I think the 2 teams might work best because it would allow for occasional absences of a player without creating a crisis. I like the idea of a round robin, but it would take a year, I imagine.
  4. Agree.

Re Analysis: Analysis has always been a part of correspondence games (in chess for example). It is, next to time, the main characteristic distinguishing it from live play. Without it, it would be awkward to discuss moves.

Bots: Bots cannot be consulted in any games per OGS site rules.

  1. Fischer with 1 move/day is fine with me.

  2. I’m fine with being team captain if necessary. If someone else would prefer to captain, though, I’m also happy to act as a regular participant.

  3. I’d prefer 3-team round robin. It seems like the best balance between too many/too few players. Since we’d be playing our two games simultaneously, I don’t think it will take any longer than the 2-team or 4-team options.

  4. I suggest that the games be played even, no handicap. Between any two teams, rank won’t differ much.


You convinced me on the 3-team format. I wasn’t thinking of it as simultaneous—but of course.

  1. Something like the ladder or ogs site tournaments would suit me, that’s basically +1 day per move?

  2. I’d prefer not to be but could if needed.

  3. All seem fine, the 3 team simultaneous round robin sounds interesting.

  4. It’d be nice to have a demo board of the game to discuss things on. I think you can set up a group message on the forums and it notifies you that there’s messages, or least you can still heart things/tag people etc? Like the variations can be shared in the demo board but the chat can be separated out to avoid clutter?


So when are we gonna get going?

  1. I think we have essentially reached consensus on the time settings:
    Fischer, 5 days initial/max, +1 day increment per move, pause on weekends.

  2. Potential captains

    • @GOkyle 4k “I’m fine with being team captain if necessary”
    • @Vsotvep 5k “Yes, but if there’s a higher ranked player who really wants to, I’d rather have them be the captain.”
    • @shinuito 6k “I’d prefer not to be but could if needed.”
    • @yebellz 7k “willing to be a captain, but would prefer to defer to any higher ranked players”
    • Did I miss anyone?
  3. In addition to the potential captains, we have @bugcat 4k, @Gia 25k, @teapoweredrobot 8k, @Conrad_Melville 8k that responded to these questions. That makes a total of 8 players, which I think would limit us to playing a single game between just two teams, even though there was significant interest in playing a 3-team round robin.

Proposed Teams

I picked the two strongest willing players as captains, the distributed the remaining players by rank using the Thue-Morse sequence.

Team A

Team B

However, if anyone else still wants to sign up, please speak up to confirm and we can redistribute to add them.

  1. Analysis will be enabled, but players should not use the score estimator or any bots/AI tools. Game should be an even game, randomly assign the color for the teams.

Any other thoughts, comments, objections, suggestions?

I also propose that we use either Chinese rules with a komi of 7.5 or New Zealand rules with a komi of 7, but I’m flexible about this.

What rules should we play with?

  • Chinese, 7.5 komi
  • New Zealand, 7 komi
  • Japanese, 6.5 komi
  • Something else (please comment)

0 voters


Hm, I see the balance is a bit off with me the only TPK. If it’s better to wait this one out until more lower ranks express interest, it’s fine with me.

@_KoBa @S_Alexander @dej @cromone @Brianvy @unicycleOLI @Jascooper

All of you showed interest in the poll above, so, do you still want to play?