|
The motivation for formulating the Nihon Kiin's Laws of Go came from the thousand-year ko problem that occurred in a two-stone game between Segoe (7 dan) and Takahashi (3 dan) in 1928, and the ko problem that occurred in the first game of a ten-game match between Go Seigen and Iwamoto Kaoru in 1948. The famous indirect-ko problem that later occurred in the second game of a three-game match between Go Seigen and Takagawa Shukaku created a movement toward rationalization of the rules in the Nihon Kiin, causing the Board of Directors of the Nihon Kiin to take the noteworthy step of organizing a Rules Reform Committee in 1962. The professional go players on the committee were Maeda (9 dan), Murashima (7 dan), and Fujita (6 dan). The committee also included Hayashi Yutaka, Yasunaga Hajime, Shimada Takuji, and Kaise Takaaki. The "Igo Kempo Soan" (Draft Constitution of Go) published in 1932 by Yasunaga in Kido was a very valuable first step toward the formulation of the rules of go. The studies of the rules contained in Shimada's book on the mathematics of go.*1 are essential reading for any student of the rules of go. Of particular value in this book is the discussion of "The Rationalization of Go" by two Americans, John M. H. Olmsted and Karl Davis Robinson. Also worthy of great attention are the proposals made by the go rules theorist Kaise (of which I have only the version printed in the Hayashi's Go Encyclopedia). This outstanding group of specialists set to work on the Japanese rules and produced a proposed revision in 1963, which was then further revised and published in the December 1964 issue of Kido. We will get to this later. The Nihon Kiin has not yet formally adopted this revision.*2 In initial formulations of the rules the greatest weight was laid on defining life and death, but as the difficulty of this gradually became apparent, there has been a gradual shift in the direction of formulating the rules without defining life and death. You can see this shift clearly by comparing the original and revised editions of Shimada's book. Continuing from the excellent work of my predecessors, I would like to discuss the problems of the rules of go and make my own suggestions.
|