From: Larry Kaufman <lkaufman <at> WIZARD <dot> NET>
Date: 9 jan 2000
Subject: Re: Russian Japanese Handicap Match and Kyu-Dan Test

At 08:21 AM 1/9/00 -0500, you wrote:
>I have a little philosophical disagreement with Larry Kaufman on this
subject.
>
>Larry feels that a fair handicap is one which gives the handicap receiver a
>50% chance to win.
>
>However, I feel that a fair handicap is one which gives the handicap
>receiver the chance to learn something by losing a relatively close game,
>while giving both players the opportunity for an enjoyable and interesting
>experience.
>
     Not much disagreement, Sam.  In the U.S. we normally do not aim for a
"fair handicap (which I define as 50-50).  Instead, we normally use the
largest handicap that still leaves the handicap giver as the favorite.
This should produce about a 60-40% win ratio for the giver (actual results
are probably closer to 65-35).  Perhaps you favor an even higher win ratio;
this would correspond to the "reduced handicap" system which we
occasionally use, in which the handicap is the next one smaller than the
one that would be called for on our usual rules.

>Handicaps are necessary because without them the stronger player will just
>crush the weaker player with ease and neither player will be interested in
>playing again.
>
>So, handicaps just make the game interesting for both. They are not
>intended to equalize chances.

     As I said, I don't disagree, but I would point out that in many Go
clubs in Japan a system is used that does produce almost exactly even
chances in every game, so either approach has its supporters.
>
>I had a bitter experience with this at the US Shogi Championship last year.
>This event was played under Larry's accelerated handicap system, as I call
>it.

     It was played under the usual method as described above.

 I had to give a 6-kyu player a handicap of 6 pieces,

     The record shows the game was played at 4 piece.

and he turned out
>to be stronger than 6-kyu. I eventually won the game, but it was a very
>long struggle and I was sweating bullets the whole time. It was a very
>unpleasant and unenjoyable experience.

     Some players enjoy a difficult challenge!  If I am to play a weaker
player, I enjoy the game most if the handicap gives me about a 60% chance
to win.
>
>Because my game took so long, I had to play a shodan, giving him a lance
>(kyo) handicap, immediately without any break. I lost a long and difficult
>struggle which I felt I was winning.
>
>It later turned out that this supposed shodan was actually a 4-dan, so
>under Larry's system he should have been giving me the handicap of bishop
>instead of me giving me the handicap of lance. In that case, I would have
>had a good chance.
>
>My opponent, who had received lance odds from me, went on to win all of his
>games and the tournament, which got him a prize of an airplane ticket to
Japan.

    This is all true, but was a result of the player in question being
misidentified.  Whether this was due to language problems, dishonesty, or
just extreme modesty (the player called himself 1 Dan, so no one thought he
might be the same person as was on our list at 4 Dan with the same common
last name) I can't say.
>
>These problems would have been avoided had the traditional handicap system
>been used.

     Not really; you would have played him even and still probably would
have lost.
>
>Sam Sloan

     Larry Kaufman