2006-04-28 newest contents, 2009-01-17 last update, 2006-04-28 first day online, Robert Jasiek
version 3; 2006-04-14 day of the original

WAGC rules | FLAWS | MODEL | INFORMAL rules | PRECEDENTS | WAGC intention

Model for the World Amateur Go Championship Rules

In principle, the World Amateur Go Championship 1979 Rules (WAGC79) can be modelled in a design similar to the Japanese 2003 Rules (J2003). However, modelling WAGC79 is significantly more difficult than modelling the Japanese 1989 Rules (J1989). Therefore a formal model for WAGC79 has not been found yet. Here the remaining key problems are described: "alive" and "partially perfect pass".


The problem to define "alive" for a model of WAGC79 is already solved:

Step 1

WAGC79 tries firstly to define concepts of "eye shapes" and secondly to derive the concept "two eye formation". This approach fails because there are arbitrarily many different "eye shapes" but only one kind of "two eye formation". The inverse order would work: firstly define "two eye formation" and secondly derive all "eye shapes". However, it turns out that concepts of "eye shapes" are entirely superfluous for defining "alive". Therefore a model for WAGC79 should omit all concepts of "eye shapes".

Step 2

The concept "two eye formation" works for so called independent life - but what about so called coexisting life (seki)? J2003 has already provided suitable concepts: uncapturable, capturable-1, and capturable-2.

Step 3

Step 4

Chris Dams has proven: Hence also the terms two-eye-formation and two-eye-alive are superfluous for a model of WAGC79. It suffices to use J2003-alive only. In other words, also for WAGC79 the terms uncapturable, capturable-1, and capturable-2 are the best choice to describe alive.

Partially Perfect Pass

WAGC79 does not simply allow passes but restricts them by restrictions for direct kos, dame, teire, etc. For the researcher, the problem of modelling all this is a nightmare. It is as difficult as finding and defining "capturable-2" in J2003. Even worse, several restrictions have to be considered. The following is a draft for them.



Besides, many related terms like score-improvement, score-maintenance, independent-dame, strict-two-eye-region, etc. have to be defined so that those terms can be used by rules for the restrictions.


Because WAGC79 sets life and death requirements for both the alternation and the analysis, defining one type of "force", as it is done in J2003, might not be enough. This does not make research easier. At least, all kinds of "force" are related. Whichever definitions will be necessary here, they can be derived from that in J2003. While it could make a model for WAGC79 much longer, it is a comparatively easy remaining problem for the researcher.


A good model for WAGC79 will be like J2003 with additional rules and terms to achieve a partially perfect pass. Concluding, necessarily application of WAGC79 is more difficult than application of J2003, which models J1989.