# Japanese Counting Example

This article provides some step by step examples of Japanese counting and a few tips to make it easier. Japanese counting is the counting technique used in Japan for territory scoring.

# Example 1: the Example Game

The position is taken from the page *Example Game*.

## Prior to counting: Note the territories

- White has two live groups, top left and bottom edge.
- Black has two live groups, bottom left and right side.
- White has two dead stones on the right.
- White has captured one black stone during the game.
- Black has three dead stones on the top left.
- Black has captured two white stones during the game.

Strictly speaking, status and territory assessment and removal of dead stones don’t actually belong to counting but to scoring.

## Prior to counting: Remove the dead stones

The dead stones are removed and placed with any prisoners captured during the game (in the lid of the stone-bowl). The points where the dead stones were are marked with circles in the diagram.

- Black now has four white stone prisoners.
- White now has four black stone prisoners.

## Step 1: Fill prisoners and dead stones in

The prisoners and dead stones are now filled into the territories of the same color. Generally, the smaller areas are filled in. The filled in stones are marked with a circle.

Hint: Fill in small areas first.

## Step 2: Rearrange areas

Three of Black’s stones are moved from the top of his area to the bottom. This leaves a nice rectangular area, three by five. The moved stones are shown with squares where they used to be, and circles where they were moved to.

Rearranging areas makes counting easier.

Two of White’s stones are moved similarly.

## Step 3: Count

Black has one area: 3 x 5 = 15 points. Black’s score is 15.

White has one area: 3 x 3 = 9 points. White’s score is 9.

Black is the winner(if komi is not used). He won by 15 - 9 = 6 points.

Note: Komi is usually added at the end of this step.

# Example 2: 19×19 Game

= prisoners + removed stones

Note that dame are left unfilled.^{[1]}

Noname: Usually, stones are placed on **‘a’** and **‘b’**. then start counting. perhaps both players did. It's just not recorded in kifu.

-------- Other ways of rearranging 30 points. . . . . | . . . . | O O O # | O # . . | O # # # | . # . . | # . . . | # # . . | # . # . | # # . . | # . # . | O # . . | O . . . | O # # # | O # # # | # # . . | # . . . | # # . . | # . # . | # # . . | # . # . | # # . . | # . . . | O # . . | O # # # | # # . . | # . . | O O . . | O . . | # # . . | # . . | # # . . | # . . | # # . . | # . . | --------

50:42

Main-- noname

# Notes

[1] Not filling dame is common at higher levels, but may cause problems at or below weaker SDK level; see also *Territory scoring on Go servers considered harmful*.

Note that this statement about not filling dame is almost surely mistaken. Since 1989 the Japanese rules make stones with unfilled dame seki, so that they make no territory. It is only for seki that you leave unfilled dame for scoring and counting.

noname: 기보의 기록은 여기까지다. 공배의 메움은 대국 수순이 아니므로 누락되어 있을 뿐이다. 실제 현장에서는 두 대국자가 다 메우고 계가했을 것이다. 통상의 관례대로 그리했을 것이다. 나는 다만 그것을 생략해 기보 그대로만 놓고 보여줬을 뿐이다. 보다 엄밀한 의미에서. 착점은 종료되었고 득점 행위와는 무관하다. 일본룰로서는 겉치레 요식행위일 뿐이다. 실물 대국에서 계가시에 돌이 비틀어질 빈틈의 여지가 없도록 미연에 방지하는 조치로서의 의미밖에는 없다. 기보가 작성되는 공식 대국에서는 사후에 참조할 수 있으므로 이런 무의미한 절차는 생략하고도 불편없이 해낼 수 있다. 문제나 시비가 발생하더라도 다시 하면 그만이니.

# Discussion and queries

## Counting in tens and twenties

I’ve played many, many games on-line (where scoring is trivial) but only a couple dozen or so in person. After playing a game in person, I’m often amazed at my opponent’s quick re-arrangement of the stones and rapid tallying of the score. I’m sometimes afraid to touch the stones after the game ends for fear of confusing things. (Seems rude to me not to help out, but I’d rather be rude than mess up the scoring.)

I wonder if anyone can comment on a technique that my Japanese and Korean friends seem to use to simplify the actual counting.

I’m figuring this out as I compose this, but they appear to arrange the stones to form areas of 10 or 20 points of territory. They use two stones to indicate 10 points and 4 stones to indicate 20 points. The confusing thing is that they use stones already on the board, so a 10 point territory is actually 2x6 with two stones in the middle (and a 20 point territory is 4x6 with four stones in the middle).

So at a glance you can tell the score in this is example is white: 65, black: 50.

One subtlety is that sometimes they get a little sloppy moving the stones around so that the other player’s stones are sometimes used to form the borders (like the indicated stones on the left). The colors of the 2 or 4 stones in the center of the open areas indicates the owner of the territory.

Do I have this right?

-- RexWalters (wrex 12k on KGS)

Robert Pauli: I like that *very* much for its flexibility at the borders and its ease to perceive. However, I prefer 10 as 3×4 with two in the center. 3×7 with one inside also is handy.

### Useful shapes for counting

At the top left corner is the basic “10” shape, which is very easy to recognize. Below it white has two such shapes side by side to demonstrate it.

Upper right is 2 x 10. Such an area is easy to construct on the side, as you know the star point (marked) will be on the 10th row.

On the right side black has yet another easily recognizable shape of 20.

At the bottom the stones are in “multiples of 5” shapes. A big territory will often be easiest to count by arranging it to this kind of shape. Also, 2x5 sometimes fits where 3x4 wouldn’t.

Also note that when there is a large lump of stones of the same color, and elsewhere on the board are some scattered small areas (of the same color, of course), you can make a 10 size hole in the lump to fill the scattered points.

There are also a couple of tricks to making counting easier:

- always place the prisoners in hard-to-count areas first (typically small groups, or eyes within a long thin string of stones)
- when filling in the dame points, take scoring into account
- so is it correct to say you could take unplayed stones — i.e., stones from a bowl — and place them in the dame, as this wouldn’t change the scoring either way? — geno
- Correct.

- so is it correct to say you could take unplayed stones — i.e., stones from a bowl — and place them in the dame, as this wouldn’t change the scoring either way? — geno

Noname --

5×4

--------------------------------------- 12−2 | . . . . # . . . # . . . . . . . . . . | 10× | . # # . # . . . # . . . . . . . . . . | | . . . . # . . . # . . . . . . . . . . | | # # # # # . . . # . . . . . . . . . . | | . . . . . . . . # # # # # # # # # # # | | O O O O O O . . . . O O O O O O O O O | | . . . . . O . . . . O . . . . . . . . | 15+15 | . . . . . O . . . . O . . . . O . . . | | . . . . . O . . . . O . . . O . . . . | | . . . . . O . . . . O . . . . . . . . | | O O O O O O . . . . O O O O O O O O O | | . . . . . . . . . . . # # # # # # # # | | # # # # # # . . . . . # . . . . . . . | 10+10 | . . . . . # . . . . . # . . . # . . . | | . . . . . # . . . . . # . . . . . . . | | . . . . . # . . . . . # # # # # # # # | | . . . . . # . . . . . . . O O O O O O | | . . . . . # . . . . . . . O . . . . . | 5× | . . . . . # . . . . . . . O . . . . . | ---------------------------------------

Even if we shift stones around to facilitate counting, the result is still black 6, white 5+komi.

This board illustrates why it is good counting technique to fill the dame before removing dead stones and filling in area. A dispute could easily break out over who owns the 3-3 point.

## The ultimate counting solution :-)

or, of course, the ultimate solution:

- always win by resignation :-)

-- Bass