Is there an error in the diagram, or am I missing something? What's the point of move 359 (x here; in the diagram on the main page)? Why not simply kill white with
in the following diagram? (Even creating a double eye with a seems better than x.)
White is already dead so playing in your diagram isn't necessary. Playing a is also not necessary since black is alive as it is.
Oh, you're right. But then I see even less reason to play x. Why not play y instead (move 360, in the main diagram) and give normal life to that group, ending the dependence on multiple ko once and for all?
If Black simply plays at y then white can end the ko to live with the group at the top. On the main page it says that both players were almost out of time, so Black decided to turn the game into a no result because he couldn't figure out if he would win by playing something else (like y).
Even if black lets the group at the top live, he still wins with 12 points, if I counted correctly. (I'm assuming the white stones in the center and the southeast are all dead, as well as the black stones in the northwest.) I'm a bad player, and I can't count well enough to be sure enough about a 12 point win in the last minute of the game, but I'm surprised that even a professional player would have the same uncertainty.
John F. You've got to see the bigger picture.
1. This was under Chinese rules, where (technically) superko applies. This is really a triple ko but the superko complicates things so that the fourth ko can come into the equation. Yi Ch'ang-ho is, of course, not used to Chinese rules.
2. This was a PR game held on the open-air board in Fenghuang to mark the restoration and opening of the Southern Great Wall. Yi and Chang are great friends. There was therefore the possibility, hinted at but never confirmed, that Yi opted for an unusual finish that would please many people. Being short of time was (in that alleged scenario) a convenient excuse.