![]() StartingPoints Aliases (info) Referenced by
|
No Pass Go
Keywords: Rules
Go played with rules amended so that neither player can pass, and a players without a legal play loses (suicide, or at least suicide of one stone, being illegal). Historically this was called nimgo by Bill Spight in the 1970s. (Also called Conway go by some.) With the benefit of hindsight, it is one attempt to adapt go to the ending condition that is fundamental to CGT. But the game isn't close enough to ordinary go for that to be an acceptable translation. You must have captured stones replayed on the board for that (as in so-called Lasker-Maas rules). See a number of threads on rec.games.go for more detail (e.g. search for 'nimgo').
Jasonred : AH! I have heard of this rule in other board games! Such as... monopoly. I hear in the states they call in "Go to Jail" though. Some call it "Do not collect $200"...
Chris Hayashida: I thought "No Pass Go" was asking you not to surpass Go-sensei. :) 1 x 5 Nimgo
Black cannot take back, by superko.
Can Black win 1x5 Nimgo? Yes.
Black makes a strategic sacrifice.
Now White cannot take back, by superko.
Does Black have to sacrifice at move 3? Yes.
Jasonred : Hmmm.. so, how much area or territory or prisoners over the course of the game doesn't matter, just make you opponent not have a legal play left? ... Not very good for 19x19 boards I suppose...
Jasonred : Why? Territory doesn't matter anymore, as you can play in your opponent's territory without a care. all you need to do is get as many separate eyes as possible, making sure that you haveenough that on you have a minimum of two eyes on your opponent's turn. Also, it's going to be really cool endgame, cause decision of kill or do not kill come into play.
In this case, for example, don't ask how it reached that point, the correct play is at the circled point, the square there is just asking for havoc. As far as I can tell, this is just close to the only possible endgame position, the others being one side having 3 eyes to one eye ratio, or a ko, or superko, or somewhat. But this would probably be like the most common. Having 2 eyes isn't good enough anymore, you need more than your opponent. all in all, a weird game. I wouldn't mind a game of 9x9 Do Not Pass Go though. Any takers? Robert Pauli: I disagree to Lasker-Maas rules having any relevance in equalizing no-pass go with stone scoring (and with what else?). It's not liberating prisoners, it's releasing them!
To take John Rickard's example (RGG 01.09.1997):
After White sacrifices 3 stones to shrink Black's big eye
down to 1 point, she fills one of her 3 eyes. Under unamended no-pass rules, Black is now forced to fill one of his 2 eyes
and eventually lose the game - ignoring the fact that he is leading by 3 stones on the board.
Allowing Black to liberate a black prisoner (after a balanced prisoner increase) and to fill his eye with that stone would serve him nothing. What he needs is the allowance to release a white prisoner (dropping it back into the supply) in exchange for not having to add a stone onto the board. By the way
This is a copy of the living page "No Pass Go" at Sensei's Library. ![]() |