The root meaning of sente (先手) is "playing first" (having the initiative). A player has sente if it is their turn and they do not have to answer their opponent's last move. Thus, a player who has sente can decide where to play next.
A move is sente if the opponent has to answer it, so the player who plays it will have sente after the exchange. For example, in this diagram Black can play in sente, because White has to answer to avoid dying. Not to have sente is to be constrained into a direct answer to your opponent's previous play. This state of affairs is called gote: having gote, taking or accepting gote.
The English term most closely connected is therefore the initiative: which changes hands during the game.
A move may also be called sente because of the local conditions (sente position), even if the opponent does not answer it. This is theoretical rather than practical: after all one can only say what ought to be answered, not what will be.
The opposite of sente is gote. Sente or gote is often a large difference: If you do the same thing in gote that could also be done in sente, that is a big difference - you lose a whole move. Players obviously will prefer sente sequences, other things being equal.
An example where this error has been made is in this diagram. Black plays atari with , White answers at
, and Black connects at
. Black has defended the right hand side here, but would have done better by playing at
immediately. This also threatens to capture the two white stones (by playing 2), but if White now answers, Black has sente and can play elsewhere.
Also note that sente is relative: If Black play at here early in the game, White will not answer at
, but play elsewhere, because the threat of capturing the two stones is not large enough. Of course, also in this case
rather than
is still the correct move.
Comment: If the area to the right is Black's, is unlikely to be sente. It would be larger than the threat to take White's stones. -- Bill Spight
Dieter: The above comment may account for a good definition of sente: A move is sente if the value of the follow-up move (when the move is not answered) is larger than the value of the move itself (when the move is answered).
Of course this definition assumes we know the value of a move (deiri counting). In yose (endgame) we can calculate it (miai counting). It also assumes that for each move there is another move of appoximately the same value.
Jan: I have also seen the word 'sente' used as a noun - a certain move is Black's sente. I'm still not entirely clear on what that means, and (more importantly) why that implies that Black will get that move before White - is that because of the proverb 'Sente is worth twice as much gote'?
Bill: Sente is a noun.
If a play is considered Black's sente (see sente position) it carries a threat that is larger than its reverse sente. When the ambient temperature is cooler than the threat but hotter than the reverse sente, Black will normally be able to play the sente and get a response before White can afford to play the reverse sente. That's why Black owns his sente.
Funkybside: During game 6 of the 59th Honinbo, 13k* enfo recalled an unknown 6d's definition of sente. Sente is a move you hope your opponent won't respond to. Of course this isn't helpful to a beginner, and totally ignores the concept of gote- but it sure is an interesting and realistic idea. One that seems to describe actual play as opposed to some 'ideal' concept.
Gabaux: Could some of you guys show a position, where both players have a sente? The question arised yesterday, when I played a game with a rather newbie go player.
Bill: See Double Sente.
Charles Matthews There are a couple of separate issues here.
Here is an example of double sente play. It is likely to be treated as sente by White because Black next at a is very big territorially and affects White's base too. (See though How big is the 6 point double sente for fuller discussion.) But if White plays first at
, Black is quite likely to treat that as sente also, to preserve the corner territory. That is, a play here is potentially sente for either side.
This is a different type of position.
If Black plays the marked stone, should White treat it as sente, by answering at a? Assume White's alternative is to play the marked stone in the right corner.
Black's threat is to play next at b, which is big in terms of territory. White's threat is to play next at c, which may call into question the safety of Black's corner.
In this case White's play is likely to create a more serious threat. Black ought to treat it as sente. This is not just a question of territory. The priority given to plays may also involve questions of attack and defence.
Grindel <-- some lowly 30Ker on KGS
I think double sente would be more like Black playing a sente against White but White doesn't respond by defending the stone in danger, and instead plays sente against a black stone. This forces Black to consider the loss of his stone against the gain of a capture. In this case Black would connect and leave the white stone for later consideration. This however has shifted the initiative from Black to White.
Bill: That's not unreasonable, but, as it happens, double sente refers to a different kind of situation. What you are talking about is discussed on the in-between move and Mutual damage pages.
ProtoDeuteric- Is there such thing as "sente-gote" or "gote-sente" (as a term), where your opponent plays some sente move, and your response (gote?) must in turn be responded to?
Niklaus: This is referred to just as a gote move by the one who played first. See for example the diagram on the gote page.
See also: