Logical players, intuitive players ..

[Loons]

I was looking at some very-beginner materials for teaching go, and came across this (pandanet intro).

It is not very clear to me that this distinction can really exist, but I also have a sneaking suspicion that I'm an intuitive player and I have trouble believing logical players exist (or maybe the opposite).

I think this because people will talk about formulas for capturing races, I remember Bill Spight once mentioning something about ladders and symmetry (IIRC), and technical methods for analysing joseki results. I'm not consciously doing those things though I am of course reading, counting (as I can) and do evaluate results (in what I feel are obvious ways).


What do you see yourself as, and why?


Also, I invent all my proverbs post hoc

[topazg]

Considering some of the threads, I think RJ is definitely a logical player. I'm probably some combination of the two - I'm too lazy to be a logical player but I do try to be at times

[Alguien]

Intuitive.

I'll never go past the level where you absolutely must count every option and take a decision based on the count alone.

And when I kill is not just to win, it's to avoid

My enjoyment of a go game starts at 100 and loses about 0.5 enjoyment points per move.

-> -> ->

[shapenaji]

I wouldn't say that I'm illogical (at least as regards playing go), but intuition comes before calculation.... at least for me.

[SoDesuNe]

I'd say I'm an intuitive player.

The more I study Go and hence try to reason at each move the more maintime I'm idling and the more I fail because I either try to apply the wrong principle, apply the right principle badly or get overly concerned with whatever last thing I studied. If I stop studying and just play then suddenly everything over five to ten minutes maintime feels just sooo slow, I can't take it. I mainly play 1/5*20 these days and rated and most of all I play more than ever.

Of course I'd never have come this far without conscious effort to learn these basic things I now apply subconsciously, but still it tells me a lot about how I operate. If I try the logical approach, looking for several moves and pondering which of them is the best I - at least online - will waste a lot of time and I don't even get better results. (I blitz now with my second main account, which was 2k when I played 15/5*30 and is still 2k since starting to play 1/5*20 and now I blunder a lot due to blitzing ^^)

I experience the same with StarCraft 2 (yeah, I know, I'm way late to the party). Perfecting a build order takes so much conscious effort, it's almost painful since a lot of important stuff will just slip through because you concentrate so hard on building double gas at 35 supply. But as it sinks in, your view just broadens tremendously and it seems as everything else just comes natural.

[Boidhre]

Intuitive, to the point that I've a very bad habit of neglecting to read if I feel sure about a position.

[Alguien]

I've a very bad habit of neglecting to read if I feel sure about a position.

For all I know, I could have that bad habit. The chance to apply it doesn't present itself very often so...

[Boidhre]

I've a very bad habit of neglecting to read if I feel sure about a position.

For all I know, I could have that bad habit. The chance to apply it doesn't present itself very often so...

Yeah for a given 11k value of sure.

[Loons]

While I characterise myself as intuitive, I can't really agree that intuitive can mean not counting or reading.

Am I being particularly intuitive or logical in this example? (First hide is a fuseki (I lost), second is each of my really conscious thoughts/decisions in case you want to think about what you would think in my shoes before looking).

http://www.lifein19x19.com/forum/download/file.php?id=2003

4. In the mood to pincer here
6. Not feeling up to R14 modern joseki
11. Ah!
12. (Read the game line to 22, felt developing on both sides was good)
24. (Shape)
30. Saving my stones result looked painful
32. (Bad) wanted to get this stone to help cover K17 cut, <making black stronger/K17 cut a problem>; misread/evaluation.
36. Seemed like the place to play. Read K17 cut goes nowhere.
38. Before playing R7.
40. Seems these two stones are very safe
42. Trying to make up for top (but making an ugly/thin left side)

[Boidhre]

While I characterise myself as intuitive, I can't really agree that intuitive can mean not counting or reading.

I'm not saying that intuitive is not counting or reading. I'm saying that sometimes strong intuition about a position can cause one to neglect to read if one is not careful.

Edit: Maybe disciplined is a better word than careful there.

[Laman]

i go with intuition here. i can watch a review by a player three stones weaker than me and he always sounds so much cleverer than me, with so good reasoning behind every move, while i would just occasionaly say: "i don't know, doesn't this look better?"

my moves have their purpose, of course, but i don't really feel being logical or analytical when deciding which to play

[Phelan]

I think of myself as more intuitive. I also neglect reading a position if I feel very positive about it.

[singular]

I'm going to have to vote for Richard Nixon because my logic and intuition are both broken.

[RobertJasiek]

I wish I could ask the "intuitive" players how they learn, but, lacking logic, maybe they can't? I ask because I have also countless teaching by example books (with useless text if any) for intuitive players and want to learn more from them than I can so far. How? (Note: IMO, intuition does not exist. So advice of the kind "apply your intuition" won't work.)

[jts]

I wish I could ask the "intuitive" players how they learn, but, lacking logic, maybe they can't? I ask because I have also countless teaching by example books (with useless text if any) for intuitive players and want to learn more from them than I can so far. How? (Note: IMO, intuition does not exist. So advice of the kind "apply your intuition" won't work.)

What do you take "intuition" to mean? That is, what is the entity whose existence you deny?