5 ms·

Trouble is, from the existing title it's not clear who had the handicap. So the poster is right to try and fix it.

• deleted 13d ago
  [deleted]
• qnpnpmqppnp 12d ago
  It's not clear from the revised title either though. In fact I found it even more confusing. The issue is the ambiguity of the wording "with a two-stone handicap", not where it's located in the sentence.
  • edh649 12d ago
    I would probably phrase it as 'Go grandmaster Shin defeats two-stone-handicapped AI KataGo'
    • criddell 12d ago
      Are there ads on the page? If so, let’s A/B test that along with “Grandmaster Shin Savagely Beats Handicapped Opponent”.
      • nottorp 12d ago
        Sir, have you considered a career in social networking engagement? Edit: 10 years since i made the HN account and I only now notice you can't see the scores of other people's comments. Here's hoping the brilliance of the above comment is appreciated.
      • plagasul 12d ago
        Made my day
  • nottorp 12d ago
    I only saw the "revised title" and yes, it's still confusing :)
• shagie 12d ago
  With a two-stone handicap, Go grandmaster Shin defeats AI KataGo. Or Go grandmaster Shin, playing with a two-stone handicap, defeats AI KataGo.
  • simiones 12d ago
    The problem is that "with a handicap" is in itself ambiguous. People sometimes use it positively, sometimes negatively. That is, you say that Shin had a two-stone handicap, that can in itself be understood as either "Shin was given an advantage of two stones over the AI" (the reality) or "Shin was playing with a disadvantage, giving the AI two extra stones" (the more common reading of "to have a handicap").