C[omp]ute

From: andrew cooke <andrew@...>

Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2016 16:21:36 -0300

It took me some time to work out what was "wrong" (unsportsmanlike)
with Black 121, as described in Kawabata's "The Master of Go".  Since
I think I now understand, I'll set it out here:

The way that the game was arranged meant that there were long periods
(several days) between sections of play.  During these periods the
players can analyse the current position and study future moves.

Within this schema, whoever plays last, before a break, is at a
disadvantage, because the followng player knows the exact state of the
board, and so can plan ahead.  To ameliorate this, the final play is
kept private (written down and sealed), revelaed only when play
restarts.

However, this is not the direct source of the unsportsmanlike
behaviour associated with Black 121.  The actual problem is more
subtle.

Consider being required to make a critical play near the end of a
session.  If you could somehow postpone that play until after the
break, you would have much more time to consider your options.  One
way to do this is to instead play a simpler, more conservative move,
that has a simple, single response.

This is what Black 121 involved.  It was the final, sealed play of the
day.  And it was (allegedly) a "time wasting" move as suggested above.
So it was intended to buy Otake time - he had the recess to think
about his "real" move.

Andrew