213.73.66.71: Re: Clarification, please (2006-03-02 23:07) [#1190]

RobertJasiek: Looking up my archives, it was as follows:

• "... 3) Alternation of the game before the first succession of pass plays occurred without any problems.

• 4) Then the first pass play of the first succession of pass plays was done by RJ and occurred without any problems and while both players did not say anything.

• 5) Then the second pass play of the first succession of pass plays was done by CM and occurred without any problems and while both players did not say anything.

• 6) At that moment strategically the board position was as follows: CM had strategically living stones and other strategically dead stones. RJ had strategically living stones and other strategically dead stones.

• 7) Then play continued in alternation of plays with RJ only making board plays, CM only making pass plays, RJ making the last of the board plays before the next succession of pass plays. The board plays of RJ approached all strategically dead opposing stones and removed such stones as soon as some were breathless. These plays by CM and RJ were made reasonably quickly with two exceptions: Twice CM used a few minutes each to smoke... During that continued alternating play problems did not occur yet and both players did not say anything, except that CM indicated to smoke just before he did.

• 8) Then reasonably quickly the first pass play of the second succession of pass plays was done by CM and did not cause any problems at that time. Both players did not say anything at that time.

• 9) Then reasonably quickly the second pass play of the second succession of pass plays was done by RJ and did not cause any problems at that time. Both players did not say anything at that time.

• 10) Then reasonably quickly the third pass play of the second succession of pass plays was done by CM and did not cause any problems at that time. Both players did not say anything at that time.

• 11) Then reasonably quickly the fourth pass play of the second succession of pass plays was done by RJ and did not cause any problems at that time. Both players did not say anything at that time.

• 12) Then the clocks were stopped.

• 13) Then after the fourth pass play of the second succession of pass plays the following occurred: While CM was about to remove stones that had been strategically dead before the first succession of pass plays, RJ pointed out to think that CM had probably done a (strategic) mistake, that the rules did not allow removal of any stones after the fourth pass play of a succession of (two plus two) pass plays, and that the rules allowed only fill-in counting to be done.

• 14) CM and RJ disagreed about the legality of the possibility of removing any stones after the fourth pass play of the second succession of pass plays and therefore asked the referee to judge. ..."

So yes, the first succession of exactly two passes was followed by my board-plays and his pass-plays, and then the second succession of pass-plays occurred that consisted of four pass-plays. Bill, do you think that it makes an essential difference?

213.73.66.76: EUR 0.02 more (2006-03-03 09:40) [#1204]

RobertJasiek: This is not how Ing rules think. The first two pass-plays are reminders that now the removals begin. Either by informal removal or, if not sufficiently many stones are removed informally and thereby the players do not then both pass to confirm the Game Pause phase of informal removals, by alternating play removals. - However, since there is so much ambiguity in the official Ing rules, from now on I rather prefer to choose the safe way when playing under official Ing rules: continue board-plays to remove as many stones as I like before I make my first pass-play, unless I should be in time trouble (in which case my opponent may force me into more time penalty points anyway, but I do not need to force myself into that).