For me this is probably the case. I often play stronger than my rank, but stay there because my blunder rate remains high.


This seems to be an excellent way of understand go competence, and putting it this way makes it clear to me why I don't expect to reach shodan. I don't know most of these things, and despite having tried to learn them, I still don't know them. I have gone over the life and death issues of the L-group for example many times, playing it out, thinking about it, comparing variations...and still I forget.

This does seem like the right way to progress for those that are able to.

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

daal



I don't know you or anything significant about you, so I can't say anything trustworthy, and what I do say also risks being impertinent, but FWIW there is something that is coming over strongly: you do like validation by means of grades. Apart from shodan, you made extensive mention of grades in learning languages. As you know, my background is as a linguist and so I have dealt with very many linguists, almost daily over 50 years. I don't think I have ever come across anyone in that field so keen on grades. Instead, I know people who have targets such as being able to listen to a film in a foreign language, or learning all the dirty words. The nearest people I know to your kind of target-seekers are those who try to learn, say, 1,000 words for vegetables. You obviously know yourself best, but I'd say that more functional targets like these make sustained learning easier than abstract grades such as shodan. The immigrants you mention who get by without reaching A3 or C1 or whatever seem like successes rather than failures to me - they have achieved sufficient competence for their needs and are now getting on with other things.

Unless it is specifically having the label shodan next to your name that motivates you, I'd say that simply improving at go and so appreciating go better is sufficient reward for working harder at it. If you can learn to enjoy that, you may be motivated to study even more, and, as I've said, shodan may creep up behind you.

To pick up on one particular point, you say you've studied the L group in depth, variations and all, and have forgotten everything. I don't think the aim ever should have been to remember these details. All you need for shodan is a clear understanding that the L group is dead, plus the reassurance that you have seen (not necessarily remembered) the reasons why. Knowing all the variations is a matter for higher dans.

As for blunders, they seem to increase with age, but not because of dead brain cells. More a matter of "can't be bothered to focus properly" with so many other things I want to do. That is how it is with me, at any rate. I normally play go only when I'm too tired or lazy to do the other things. As I've spent so much time on go over the years, I can go onto auto-pilot - usually crashing in the end but I can often have a long enough flight to let my brain have a snooze. There are books in the chess world on how to avoid blunders but I haven't bothered with them. Fortunately, my proclivity for blunders does not interfere with my ability to understand and appreciate and enjoy something of what is going in pro games, nor does it stop me learning more and increasing my enjoyment. That's my target.

A question more relevant to your theory is - how accurately does the US Go Congress represent a sample of the wider population? I personally find it hard to believe that a tournament with little in the way of monetary reward (which in fact requires significant expense) would draw a sample such that every other person has some innate ability that I do not.

If half of the people so excited about go (and have the time, money, etc.) that they make it to the Congress are dan-level, to me that's a pretty positive statement about the accessibility of 1d. Compare to chess, where my 1d-ish 2000 rating puts me at the 95th percentile of US tournament chess players. Granted, that includes lots of young kids and occasional players, but it's probably at least the 80th percentile of people who would attend a Chess Congress if there were one.

Disclaimer: I have been 4k for years

Basically every player has two levels: your level of understanding and your level of play. The gap between those two is called frustration. It is caused by losses that are due to other things than your level of understanding.

What other ways to lose a game are there than have a worse understanding than the opponent?

1. Resigning too early, too often, for the wrong reasons
2. Running out of time
3. Making blunders

This can be trained: you can develop fighting spirit, time management and concentration. When you have developed those mental assets, which are circumstancial to the game, the only remaining reason why you'll lose is because the opponent has better understanding (or sheer statistics). Then you can work on your understanding.

Many students of the game work very hard on strategy, tactics and technique, to be frustrated the wins don't follow. Often this is because their level of play remains restricted by lack of fighting spirit, time management or concentration. While it is perfectly possible to train those aspects, somehow it is not taken very seriously. Sometimes I even feel that people inflict stupid losses on themselves, in order to keep a self image of a much higher level of understanding than they actually have, which is unfortunately destroyed by their perennial blundering.

So, first bring your level of play closer to your level of understanding. The positive feedback will be plenty. Then improve your understanding and the play will follow.

The data here might interest you, I can't vouch for its accuracy though: http://senseis.xmp.net/?RatingHistogramComparisons

The following refers to German 1d.

The minimum investment is ca. 1500h playing plus 1500h study.

Talent helps but limited talent can be compensated by greater effort. A minimum talent is necessary. E.g. somebody without the ability to think one move ahead never becomes 10k, let alone 1d. I know such people who simply lack such abstract thinking ability entirely.

There are lots of topics of go theory but a 1d does not need to be strong at all of them. He should have a solid knowledge of the basics of most of them so that he can compensate or hide his weak topics. A 6d must be reasonably strong at all topics incl. those still missing in the literature. A 1d can postpone them.

There are topics and related skills that each 1d has:
- he does not make any DDK mistakes (2k still occasionally make such mistakes)
- his reading is good
- he has at least basic LD knowledge, although he does not get all LD right
- the blunder rate is ca. 2 per game
- he applies basic endgame theory, although he still makes mistakes but not in large numbers any more
- he has a good representative knowledge of many (but not very many yet) details of various fundamentals of various kinds; it does not matter which details, but the selection must be broad enough to be representative for various aspects of go knowledge

I can recommend quite a few very helpful, additional topics but they are not shared by all 1d.

It's perfectly reasonable to make inferences based on what I said - no offense taken, though I don't think this applies to me. I brought up grades so much because I thought many people might not be aware that a system for assessing language achievement exists, and that it can be compared to go levels. Not grades, but the pleasure of learning is what motivates me most.



I'm not concerned personally with reaching shodan. Although there is room to disagree, what I've noticed is that working harder brings results only up to a point, and I find it curious that this point is below the level at which one is considered competent at go. Despite the fact that I am not improving, I still enjoy studying. Indeed, I may not be diligent enough, or not put in enough effort, but my feeling is that with the diligence and effort I have put in, I ought to be competent by now. One of the reasons I say this is that I know what amount of work and diligence is necessary to become competent in other areas, such as language.


Same here. While much of the focus of this discussion has been my abilities or lack of them, that was not really the intent of my question. Rather, it is to question why it is that some people cannot manage to achieve a level that some call "competent." If anything, I am more interested in words such as "competent," "proficient," and "skilled" than I am in the word "shodan" which is indeed somewhat arbitrary. I do however find it irritating that the rank after my name indicates that I only have a vague idea of what I'm talking about when it comes to go. I suppose that this has some justification, but as I said, it's not just about me. Lots of people try and fail to improve and find themselves stuck at a point often well below shodan, and I wonder why it is that they (we) can't seem to get a better handle on the game.

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

I've long accepted you as a worthy co-commentator of the game, so don't worry about that kind of impact of your rank. As for your playing level, see my previous post.

If you still want to make a concerted effort to get there in a reasonable amount of time, you can count on us. I for one still am sure it is possible.

Except that there are people who fight when they shouldn't: unwarranted invasions and the like.

When I play unwarranted invasions - as far as I can speak for me - it's not because of "too much fighting spirit". It is rather a sign of impatience and lazyness, i.e. I want getting a certain situation resolved as quickly as possible. Instead of seriously counting and thoroughly estimating the overall situation I play a do-or-die move and hope my opponent will play some sub-optimal continuation.

It feels similar to trying out a "good-looking" move in a Tsumego without having it fully read out.

I can see both symptoms in my play, they may be an important part of the reason why I'm still around 3-4k and not 1d...

The gap gets bigger as we get older. This is why old men are grumpy.

_________________
Help make L19 more organized. Make an index: https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5207

Interesting question, interesting discussion.
May I give you a view from the bottom? I am a 'mere' 8k, far from shodan. I am not dan or shodan. I am not even sure I aspire to become one. I don't consider myself to be competent. In fact I have already accepted that I will never reach such a level. I just enjoy the game, the company of other players, the atmosphere at the club, etc.
Yet, in my area, go is not very well known and not much played. So, friends (yes, I have some, and go players can be friends with non go players) consider me to be an experienced or even competent go player (haha).
What I want to say is: like many things, (also) competence is relative.
I am less competent than others, but more competent than some.

Hi Daal

This is my latest game. Can you review it and tell me what moves you would never come up with if you had played this game?

Knotwilg

I would not think of

_________________
Occupy Babel!

Cool exercise! Hope you don't mind that I jump on it. I didn't apply much reading, but just noted some stuff that popped up for me in terms of "I'd not think about this" - so it isn't much of a review.



What strikes me the most is that you are much better at playing elsewhere and not stubbornly trying to save things you can instead give up for profit elsewhere (in addition to sharper and more accurate reading heh).

As for the question? I have pondered it myself - especially seeing those players with 1000+ games played and still DDK or high SDK. I think it relates to why you play? To me Go is the competition and the struggle to improve. But for several of those players I believe Go is relaxing after work, or just playing something during your commute - with rank improvement as a happy byproduct but by no means a thing to work actively towards.

Also I don't think Shodan is some lofty goal only a few can reach due to talent - but I do think it represents a rather high investment in time and effort to get there (certainly has for me and I'm nowhere close). Getting there is work, especially if you're not young and plastic (brainwise), so not everyone has the passion or the dedication to get there, even if they claim it as a goal.

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

Hi guys, nice to see so many responses.

Most of your comments are absolutely right, which means your level of analysis is higher than my level of play.

- you all saw that my harrassing of the black group at the bottom was not severe enough and lost tempo, so that black could form a good moyo at the top
- while attempting to make a good invasion, I neglected my left side group, which came under severe attack and almost died

Three concepts or attitudes stand out as marking the gap (if any)

- leaning maneuvers
- assessing which stones are (not) important and should (not) be saved/attacked
- (shying away of) ko

Here's a more specific self review, addressing your questions

But first: what to learn from this exercise? I think that you all have dan level analysis but either lack the confidence or some more local prowess to live up to it in your games. I still advocate a diet of fighting spirit / time management / concentration to bring your playing level closer to your level of understanding, but definitely doing lots of tsumego increases confidence in your local power and the local power itself.

I wouldn't have come up with:

I want to come back on this one. I disagree: if your goal is to become KGS shodan, then this is a perfectly reasonable goal. We should not question your goals because it's these goals that motivate you.

What I question (and agree with most) is that you will become shodan just by following the classical path of improvement. You might or might not, and might go fast or slow. Instead of convincing you to replace your goal of becoming shodan with a more vague goal of becoming better at Go in a different way than measuring your results (but by pats on the back, or by self consciousness of your mastery of topics ...), I encourage you to achieve your goal and really pursue it by changing those things that matter most to get better results.

So you want to beat shodans 50% of the time. Why do you currently lose more often? What are the determining factors? Change those.

(I have my answer ready, as you know: it's fighting spirit, time management & concentration. But please develop an answer for yourself.)