Dieter: Shape (2023-02-28 14:15) [#12214]

Looking at your chapter on shapes, I was reminded of my own way of thinking about shape earlier in the days. I no longer think that way, but it took a lot of discussion where I was holding my ground against those who argued like I do now. So I'll leave you to convince yourself (or not) that shape, as a concept that embodies efficiency of used stones, can't be reduced to a visual shape of stones in one color.

There need to be opposing stones, otherwise such close formations of stones are already inefficient. The position of these opposing stones will determine the purpose of the formation (cut, connect, jump out ...) and the efficiency by which they are achieving that purpose (the less excess stones used the better)

See a static treatise on shape

The reduction to stones of one color may be best confined to what we call suji or haengma, i.e. how to move from one stone. There are intrinsic aspects of the solid connection, the diagonal move, one space jump or knight's move, that can be discussed in isolation, still one always needs to apply the haengma to a situation, i.e. there will be opposing stones.

See haengma tutorial for beginners

One of the risks of thinking in one color, is that one becomes infatuated with e.g. bamboo joints or table shapes, because they're so beautiful! One of my revelations when reviewing games with AI, was that it considered such connections to be slow, regardless of the shape. Being infatuated with the shape, I didn't even consider not connecting.

See slonection and Dieter Verhofstadt/Patterns In Mistakes