Re: [pbmserv] question about the game "Alak"

[Lyman Hurd <lhurd@yahoo.com>]

As stated the rule against playing where a stone has
just been removed is more restrictive that "ko" as it
also eliminates many of the positions considered snap
back which are legal in go.

Also, the Japanese ko rule does not completely
eliminate repeition as evidenced by triple ko.  The
Chinese rule simply makes it illegal to reproduce a
board position and so it does eliminate the
possibility.

Cheers,

Lyman

--- Richard Rognlie <rrognlie@gamerz.net> wrote:

> According to 
> http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/12153
> 
> * Black and white take turns placing stones on the
> line. Unlike Go, this
>   placement is compulsory if a move is available; if
> no move is possible,
>   the game is over.
> 
> * No stone may be placed in a location occupied by
> another stone, or in
>   a location where a stone of your own colour has
> just been removed. The
>   latter condition keeps the game from entering a
> neverending loop of
>   stone placement and capture, known in Go as ko.
> 
> * If placing a stone causes one or two groups of
> enemy stones to no
>   longer have any adjacent empty spaces--liberties,
> as in Go--then those
>   stones are removed. As the above rule states, the
> opponent may not play
>   in those locations on their following turn.
> 
> * If placing a stone causes one or two groups of
> your own colour to no
>   longer have any liberties, the stones are not
> suicided, but instead are
>   safe and not removed from play.
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 12:26:52PM +0100, Kevin
> Buzzard wrote:
> > Alak is "1-dimensional go", as implemented on the
> PBEM server. I've never
> > played Alak before and was contemplating having
> a...erm...go. But I
> > don't understand the rules! I know something about
> usual (2-dimensional)
> > go, but can't follow the second example in the
> Alak rules: the position is
> > 
> > XX-XXO-
> 
> If X plays to the - adjacent to the O piece, the
> results are
> 
> 	XX-XXOO
> 
> forcing X to play to the space, and ending the game.
>   X wins 5-2.
> 
> if O plays between the XX's, you;ll get something
> like
> 
> 	--O--O-
> 
> X should not be able to play in the --'s, so has to
> play on the end.
> 
> 	--O--OX
> 
> and then the game would continue (I think)
> 
> > (on a 7 by 1 board) and the rules say that O could
> play the blank square
> > on the left (capturing all 4 X pieces---this much
> I understand), or he
> > could play in the blank square on the right,
> forcing X to play the last
> > remaining blank square and X wins 5-2. I don't
> follow this last bit at
> > all. By my understanding of the rules of 2-d go, O
> is not allowed to play
> > in the blank square on the right because he
> instantly then loses both of
> > his pieces, and suicide is illegal in 2-d go.
> Isn't it?
> > 
> > Can anyone clarify this?
> 
> So, apparently, I need to clarify the rules, eh?
> 
> -- 
>  /  \__  | Richard Rognlie / Sendmail Ninja /
> Gamerz.NET Lackey
>  \__/  \ | http://www.gamerz.net/~rrognlie   
> <rrognlie at gamerz.net>
>  /  \__/ | Creator of pbmserv@gamerz.net
>  \__/    |                Helping reduce world
> productivity since 1994
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@gamerz.net
> with
> 	unsubscribe pbmserv-users@gamerz.net
> as the BODY of the message.  The SUBJECT is ignored.
> 
>