Life In 19x19
http://lifein19x19.com/

My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove its worth)
http://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=11029
Page 2 of 2

Author:  RBerenguel [ Sun Nov 09, 2014 3:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re:

EdLee wrote:
RBerenguel wrote:
Btw, for a 1/20 win rate you'd need to be something like... 4d EGF? (since we have a couple EGF 7d here) ballpark number, maybe 3d is enough
Hi Elom, since KGS has a nice graph feature,
would you like to restate your target to something like
"solid KGS 3d by Nov 4, 2019" ?
This way, any forum member or anyone else can easily check on your progress.
(Well, as long as KGS is around. Your "Online playing schedule" says
"Every 500 Years". Does it mean you play very few online games ? )

Related: you have every right to keep all your personal info private.
Only if you'd like to share: what's your age range (in increments of 10 or 20 years) ?
What's your experience background ?
(Example: engineering, business, arts & humanities, math, science, etc. )

Also, there may be pros or near-pro amateur high dans (8 or 9 dans) lurking this forum.
They may even occasionally submit their opinions or move commentaries
via anonymous accounts or other existing accounts.
And a 5% win rate against them in an even game is... non-trivial.


Antti, In-Seong, Alexandre & Svetlana have been here on multiple occasions, so this makes the quest hard already :D

Author:  RBerenguel [ Sun Nov 09, 2014 6:31 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove it's wor

Krama wrote:
RBerenguel wrote:


I only found intermediate problems.

Where did you find elementary problems?

(I am talking about the finished decks)


I have converted the cho-elementary SGF to an Anki deck (without solutions.) Get it here.

Author:  Aidoneus [ Sun Nov 09, 2014 2:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove it's wor

RBerenguel wrote:
Aidoneus: I am a happy EasyGo user (and I used its SRS abilities, it's pretty good), but I also had Anki (I got it 5 years ago just to support its developer) and I wanted problems only (no solutions, no clicking) so I decided to use Anki for it. Some scripting chops and you can create problems from images in no time.

Edit: also, Anki syncs across devices, so I can do my tsumego/language or whatever learning with any device I'm using at the moment.


I am new to iOS, so I hadn't paid attention to the thread about EasyGo. For now, I'm trying out the light version but will probably upgrade next payday (along with buying some SmartGo books).

Author:  Elom [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:02 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove it's wor

schawipp wrote:
Elom wrote:
When doing easy problems, it is important to look at the answers.


I do not get the point. An "easy" problem means that I see the solution within seconds and am quite sure about it - why looking at the answer then? :lol:

On the other hand, if you think you've solved a harder problem but the answer was different, it's important to disprove your own "answer" in order to clearly understand the difference (often it's e. g. a Ko instead of a clean kill or gote vs. sente etc.).


Yes :) for that reason, I personally prefer looking at the answers. When I say easy problems, what I mean are easy given average amount of time, in other words, if medium means 50% one minute time limit, and easy means 90% with the same time limit for each problem, lower the easy problem time limit so much that you only have 50% hit-rate, getting through the problems as fast, and quickly as you can possibly muster. Therefore, you want to see many, many answers that you may figure out in a minute, but not necessarily in 20 seconds. It's all about the subconscious, and while you may think you're learning nothing, in a game situation you'll suddenly surprise your opponent, or moreso, YOURSELF, from reading faster than you thought possible.

Now, I know for some, that disciplining yourself not to check the solutions prematurely is a hard task. Discipline is an important part of becoming good at Go-- or anything, for that matter. Because I don't that Skipping the Solu is an extremely big deal compared to actual reading practise, since harder problems solutions are for more specific shapes than easy problems solutions, Some may choose to start of by not looking at the answers at all until he/she is disciplined enough to begin looking at the answers. But I think that the answer could often expose you to new ideas.

RBerenguel wrote:
Antti, In-Seong, Alexandre & Svetlana have been here on multiple occasions, so this makes the quest hard already :D


Whew! And In-Seong is EGF 8th Dan, isn't he? Considering that EGF 6 fans only muster something like a 10% winning ratio against the EGF 8 Dan ex-insei from Korea, (two stones away from top pro level!), I certainly have an ambitious quest ahead of me!

EdLee wrote:
RBerenguel wrote:
Btw, for a 1/20 win rate you'd need to be something like... 4d EGF? (since we have a couple EGF 7d here) ballpark number, maybe 3d is enough
Hi Elom, since KGS has a nice graph feature,
would you like to restate your target to something like
"solid KGS 3d by Nov 4, 2019" ?
This way, any forum member or anyone else can easily check on your progress.
(Well, as long as KGS is around. Your "Online playing schedule" says
"Every 500 Years". Does it mean you play very few online games ? )

Related: you have every right to keep all your personal info private.
Only if you'd like to share: what's your age range (in increments of 10 or 20 years) ?
What's your experience background ?
(Example: engineering, business, arts & humanities, math, science, etc. )

Also, there may be pros or near-pro amateur high dans (8 or 9 dans) lurking this forum.
They may even occasionally submit their opinions or move commentaries
via anonymous accounts or other existing accounts.
And a 5% win rate against them in an even game is... non-trivial.


Continuing From earlier, If we assume that KGS Ranks are approximately two stones weaker the EGF ranks, KGS 7 Dan is the only way to go for me. I think you suggested a good Idea, thanks :) it'd true that ever since I've started playing, in general, Moscow the time I have not been able to play many games-- not to say that I don't get periods where I am able to play more games, but the first time in my life I played a game with more than 30m main time was in the MK tournament-- over 2.5 years after learning the game. However, these days I've been able to play more, so hopefully I will add some links to the rating graphs and game records of all the servers I've joined.

A generalization by month is completely fine :) I turn 15 by late November. Surprisingly, it seems that 4ky is a little strong for a 15 year old, but as I've been playing for 3 years (started Oct 2011) my progress has been slow.

Maybe not-so-slow is the progress of my maths, I expect myself to score A's or A *'s in Maths, Chemistry, and Physics next summer :) I've recently started reading A-level math material. I don't put that down to me being genius or anything like that, unless we say that genius is interest-- I see little difference between taking a mock exam and playing a game of Go or playing a new racing game-- to me, what we call subjects-- let's say mathematics, for example-- is not a "subject" but an "Art, Skill, Discipline" just like playing Go, doing videotapes, walking on a tightrope up a hundred feet while trying not to die. Besides, my English is nowhere near thr level of my maths, and following Lee Hajin 3p's advice, "train you're strongest point and you're weakest point, I tend to do maths and English a tad more-- but you're weakest point keeps changing using that method. And math problems are tsumego, I use the above system. I hope this can tell you my "background" in a career sense :)


So, it may be youngsters naivety or just plain crazy, but "KGS 7d by November 2019, ~ EGF 5~6 Dan by November 2019". Well, better than pessimism! :lol:

Author:  Bill Spight [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove it's wor

IMO, easy problems -- and I may define them differently from you -- are not reading problems. With reading problems arguably the journey is more important than the destination. But with easy problems it is the solution that is important. So why not look? :)

Author:  RBerenguel [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:20 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove it's wor

For maths I've always encouraged my students (when I had) and my friends (when we studied together) to just make very fast runs of problems trying to find the "knot" that needs to be solved. Great training for exams, and also for just "knowing" what the hairiest issue is.

But for go, this has never worked for me. You can only go "that fast" when using paper-bound tsumego, and if you go too fast in digital tsumego, you are very likely to fall prey of shape-clicking. This is why I have problems in Anki: I can't click on them, nor can I see the solution.

Author:  RBerenguel [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:23 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove it's wor

Bill Spight wrote:
IMO, easy problems -- and I may define them differently from you -- are not reading problems. With reading problems arguably the journey is more important than the destination. But with easy problems it is the solution that is important. So why not look? :)


I classify Cho Chikun's elementary problems set as easy. It is, I can solve them all (a couple though still get my brain blood flowing.) It's essentially shape-sense at this point "huh, I know this shape, I have read it already 6 times." But I'm finding it makes a deeper mark on my brain *not* having checked the solutions for them. In some cases I have been wrong 5 times, and I've found later (either by my own reading or because the problem appeared in an NGA assignment) and then, realising my folly, the impression I got from my own stupidity was stronger than just failing the problem, even if it was 5 or 6 times in a row, checking the solution afterwards.

Author:  Bill Spight [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove it's wor

RBerenguel wrote:
Bill Spight wrote:
IMO, easy problems -- and I may define them differently from you -- are not reading problems. With reading problems arguably the journey is more important than the destination. But with easy problems it is the solution that is important. So why not look? :)


I classify Cho Chikun's elementary problems set as easy. It is, I can solve them all (a couple though still get my brain blood flowing.) It's essentially shape-sense at this point "huh, I know this shape, I have read it already 6 times." But I'm finding it makes a deeper mark on my brain *not* having checked the solutions for them. In some cases I have been wrong 5 times, and I've found later (either by my own reading or because the problem appeared in an NGA assignment) and then, realising my folly, the impression I got from my own stupidity was stronger than just failing the problem, even if it was 5 or 6 times in a row, checking the solution afterwards.


True. :) Unfortunately, early errors, particularly if they persist for some time, tend to become permanent. Not that they are not corrected, but they are not forgotten. They are repressed. Thus, they can resurface in times of stress or inattention. (The return of the repressed, as Freudians say. ;))

I was fortunate in that in my first year of play my weakest opponent was 5 kyu (approximately 4 kyu AGA today, I guess). That means that I did not pick up a lot of bad habits, and most of my errors were quickly punished. In addition, many of them were pointed out in postmortems. Better to avoid folly in the first place. :)

Author:  Bill Spight [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:37 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove it's wor

RBerenguel wrote:
You can only go "that fast" when using paper-bound tsumego, and if you go too fast in digital tsumego, you are very likely to fall prey of shape-clicking. This is why I have problems in Anki: I can't click on them, nor can I see the solution.


Important point. If you go so fast that you are relying upon recognizing shapes, you can get the right answer, but to the wrong shape. Oh, it's a shape that is part of the problem, all right, but it leaves out key features. Then, in a real game you may think that you know the right play, but you don't.

Author:  RBerenguel [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:49 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove it's wor

Bill Spight wrote:
RBerenguel wrote:
Bill Spight wrote:
IMO, easy problems -- and I may define them differently from you -- are not reading problems. With reading problems arguably the journey is more important than the destination. But with easy problems it is the solution that is important. So why not look? :)


I classify Cho Chikun's elementary problems set as easy. It is, I can solve them all (a couple though still get my brain blood flowing.) It's essentially shape-sense at this point "huh, I know this shape, I have read it already 6 times." But I'm finding it makes a deeper mark on my brain *not* having checked the solutions for them. In some cases I have been wrong 5 times, and I've found later (either by my own reading or because the problem appeared in an NGA assignment) and then, realising my folly, the impression I got from my own stupidity was stronger than just failing the problem, even if it was 5 or 6 times in a row, checking the solution afterwards.


True. :) Unfortunately, early errors, particularly if they persist for some time, tend to become permanent. Not that they are not corrected, but they are not forgotten. They are repressed. Thus, they can resurface in times of stress or inattention. (The return of the repressed, as Freudians say. ;))

I was fortunate in that in my first year of play my weakest opponent was 5 kyu (approximately 4 kyu AGA today, I guess). That means that I did not pick up a lot of bad habits, and most of my errors were quickly punished. In addition, many of them were pointed out in postmortems. Better to avoid folly in the first place. :)


Well, I guess I have the advantage of having played "a lot" and done "a lot" of tsumego. So, what I'm learning now (even if it is used to clean up the basics) is not first instinct any more, so they are not early errors any more, but systematic errors. It's like hitting your finger each time with the hammer :D

Author:  schawipp [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:34 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove it's wor

Elom wrote:
Yes :) for that reason, I personally prefer looking at the answers. When I say easy problems, what I mean are easy given average amount of time, in other words, if medium means 50% one minute time limit, and easy means 90% with the same time limit for each problem, lower the easy problem time limit so much that you only have 50% hit-rate, getting through the problems as fast, and quickly as you can possibly muster.


Hm... I'm not sure if I can follow. ;-) Solving problems with very short time constraints and with "50% hit rate" sounds like you are mainly training for blitz games. Even there, I would recommend to strive rather for a 90%+ hit rate. I'm currently trying a mixture of medium grade tsumego (e. g. "1001 life & death problems") combined with easy ones for the subconscious - e. g. "sandbagging" on http://www.goproblems.com by deleting all cookies (=> starting over at 30k and advancing towards sdk or dan as quickly as possible...) ;-).

Well - even for apparently easy problems it maybe a good idea to look at the answers after being sure to have found the solution. If the answer was different it is important not to click further to the next problem but to analyze why the own answer fails (it's similar with lost games, analyzing one's own mistakes may feel annoying but it seems to help).

That's how it should work in theory ... :mrgreen: :oops:

Author:  Bill Spight [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove it's wor

Bill Spight wrote:
IMO, easy problems -- and I may define them differently from you -- are not reading problems. With reading problems arguably the journey is more important than the destination. But with easy problems it is the solution that is important. So why not look? :)


RBerenguel wrote:
I classify Cho Chikun's elementary problems set as easy. It is, I can solve them all (a couple though still get my brain blood flowing.) It's essentially shape-sense at this point "huh, I know this shape, I have read it already 6 times." But I'm finding it makes a deeper mark on my brain *not* having checked the solutions for them. In some cases I have been wrong 5 times, and I've found later (either by my own reading or because the problem appeared in an NGA assignment) and then, realising my folly, the impression I got from my own stupidity was stronger than just failing the problem, even if it was 5 or 6 times in a row, checking the solution afterwards.


Bill Spight wrote:
True. :) Unfortunately, early errors, particularly if they persist for some time, tend to become permanent. Not that they are not corrected, but they are not forgotten. They are repressed. Thus, they can resurface in times of stress or inattention. (The return of the repressed, as Freudians say. ;))

I was fortunate in that in my first year of play my weakest opponent was 5 kyu (approximately 4 kyu AGA today, I guess). That means that I did not pick up a lot of bad habits, and most of my errors were quickly punished. In addition, many of them were pointed out in postmortems. Better to avoid folly in the first place. :)


RBerenguel wrote:
Well, I guess I have the advantage of having played "a lot" and done "a lot" of tsumego. So, what I'm learning now (even if it is used to clean up the basics) is not first instinct any more, so they are not early errors any more, but systematic errors. It's like hitting your finger each time with the hammer :D


I have thought about this a little more, and, while there is no hard and fast distinction between easy and hard problems, I think it is important how often plays come up in games. For instance, if the problem is not too deep and everything is obvious but an eye stealing tesuji, which is the point of the problem, then looking is good. OTOH, if the problem is a one lane road 23 moves deep, the point is reading. Looking spoils the point.

Author:  Bill Spight [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove it's wor

schawipp wrote:
Elom wrote:
Yes :) for that reason, I personally prefer looking at the answers. When I say easy problems, what I mean are easy given average amount of time, in other words, if medium means 50% one minute time limit, and easy means 90% with the same time limit for each problem, lower the easy problem time limit so much that you only have 50% hit-rate, getting through the problems as fast, and quickly as you can possibly muster.


Hm... I'm not sure if I can follow. ;-) Solving problems with very short time constraints and with "50% hit rate" sounds like you are mainly training for blitz games.


I interpret things differently. There is a well known principle of learning and training that, as a task becomes easier, it is good to make the task more intrinsically difficult, to maintain the level of difficulty. (And a level of difficulty of 50% is a good one.) Reducing the time limit is one way of making a problem more difficult.

I remember the talk where I first heard that idea. The example given was learning to fly a helicopter. The first task was to keep the copter over a 1 acre field. When the student could do that, the next task was to keep the copter over the field while chewing gum. ;)

Author:  RBerenguel [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove it's wor

Bill Spight wrote:
schawipp wrote:
Elom wrote:
Yes :) for that reason, I personally prefer looking at the answers. When I say easy problems, what I mean are easy given average amount of time, in other words, if medium means 50% one minute time limit, and easy means 90% with the same time limit for each problem, lower the easy problem time limit so much that you only have 50% hit-rate, getting through the problems as fast, and quickly as you can possibly muster.


Hm... I'm not sure if I can follow. ;-) Solving problems with very short time constraints and with "50% hit rate" sounds like you are mainly training for blitz games.


I interpret things differently. There is a well known principle of learning and training that, as a task becomes easier, it is good to make the task more intrinsically difficult, to maintain the level of difficulty. (And a level of difficulty of 50% is a good one.) Reducing the time limit is one way of making a problem more difficult.

I remember the talk where I first heard that idea. The example given was learning to fly a helicopter. The first task was to keep the copter over a 1 acre field. When the student could do that, the next task was to keep the copter over the field while chewing gum. ;)


Yup, I remember whee you introduced this. Loading, isn't it?

Author:  Mef [ Wed Nov 12, 2014 4:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove it's wor

Elom wrote:

Continuing From earlier, If we assume that KGS Ranks are approximately two stones weaker the EGF ranks, KGS 7 Dan is the only way to go for me.


I suppose you may as well set your sights high. After a glance at the profiles of the current KGS 7ds ( at least the ones that have English) it looks like you're trying to join the ranks of Pavol Lisy (EGF 1p) & Singapore's WSMG/WAGC representative. Looking at those who barely miss the cut, the strongest identifiable KGS 6d appears to also be a French 6d.

Author:  RBerenguel [ Thu Nov 13, 2014 12:52 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove it's wor

Mef wrote:
Elom wrote:

Continuing From earlier, If we assume that KGS Ranks are approximately two stones weaker the EGF ranks, KGS 7 Dan is the only way to go for me.


I suppose you may as well set your sights high. After a glance at the profiles of the current KGS 7ds ( at least the ones that have English) it looks like you're trying to join the ranks of Pavol Lisy (EGF 1p) & Singapore's WSMG/WAGC representative. Looking at those who barely miss the cut, the strongest identifiable KGS 6d appears to also be a French 6d.


Antti is 7d KGS (or was last time I checked) 7d EGF, miao is (IIRC) 6d KGS and I guess he just got stable 6d EGF, Namii, even if just blitzing on KGS hovers from 6d KGS to 7-8, 6d EGF. Sample from people I see enough online to remember both EGF and KGS ranks

Author:  Elom [ Thu Nov 27, 2014 1:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove it's wor

Quote:
A generalization by month is completely fine :) I turn 15 by late November. Surprisingly, it seems that 4kyu is a little strong for a 15 year old, but as I've been playing for 3 years (started Oct 2011) my progress has been slow.


Just to clarify, 4 kyu is strong for a 15 year old in the _UK_ (which is something I'm unhappy about. Think about it-- if an 11y old making snailpace progress for about 3 years is enough to make you one of the top 10 Juniour Tennis players in the UK, it would make the future of tennis look... so-so :-| )

Okay, I just want to show:

"...Later I saw him replaying a pro game from a record at blitz speed: learning by osmosis/patterns rather than conscious thought..."

"...So in the morning I would do life and death problems and replay games. They way they replay games is not like the European way, where we replay from books very slowly, reading the commentaries. They would replay the game really fast. Sometimes it would take them only fifteen minutes to replay a game. So sometimes I replayed ten or fifteen games a day..."

Now, I am not saying that deliberating for a long time over a masterpiece doesn't have its place. All I'm saying is that we should take a leaf or two, three, four or maybe more from Korea and China, considering they are the best Baduk/WeiQi playing nations (something which I intend to elaborate on further in the future.)

Why do we replay through pro games? Why is it that replaying pro games is the main form of study by so many pros? We have to ask ourselves these questions before jumping to conclusions, it is the most dangerous exercise.

After much contemplation, thought, deliberation-- well, okay, you should probably take this with a catious pinch if salt, but it's safe to say that I have a few "pro game pointers":

--It is widely believed that pro games only become more useful the stronger you get. But one thing I notice is that people say that you should only do this when you are x-rank, as if replaying pro games is one, single activity. Look, there was a time when we tbought that the ATOM was indivisible, even though the evidence did not completely support this claim-- it was just the thinking of the time.

One thing I wish I did more of as a beginner 3 years ago was to replay through lots of pro games at "level 1". I found many of my old games last month! Yes! Err, when you see them, you would understand what I mean. At the same time, I managed to get to 10th kyu like that, and it was about that time (Jan 2013) I started replaying through more pro games more quickly. A year later, my play was unrecognisable. Yet my rank did not change but two ranks. But now I understand. I used to think it was a wasted year in terms of Go-improvement for me. But now, I realise how important it was, so that I can fight against 1-dans on IGS, and almost beat 3 kyus on WBaduk yet another year after.

Author:  oren [ Thu Nov 27, 2014 2:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove it's wor

Elom wrote:
Why do we replay through pro games? Why is it that replaying pro games is the main form of study by so many pros? We have to ask ourselves these questions before jumping to conclusions, it is the most dangerous exercise.


The main forms of studying from pros I've seen in order...

play and review
tsumego
reviewing professional games

Author:  Elom [ Fri Nov 28, 2014 1:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: My recent approach to study (I'm going to prove its wort

oren wrote:
Elom wrote:
Why do we replay through pro games? Why is it that replaying pro games is the main form of study by so many pros? We have to ask ourselves these questions before jumping to conclusions, it is the most dangerous exercise.


The main forms of studying from pros I've seen in order...

play and review
tsumego
reviewing professional games


There are many pros who study by reviewing professional games more than anything else, but of course, not necessarily when they where an insei. And of course, there are also many other pros who mainly do L&D problems. It depends largely on the pro. But what does reviewing pro games do for them? Is it the same for us amateurs? That is the question...

Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/