Politeness of certain strategies

[topazg]

My opinion is that politeness here is in the eye of the player.

If you think "hehe, this is a crap strategy, but it's annoying as hell - maybe I can win because my opponent gets so riled he messes up" I think it's clearly rude.

If you think "hmmm, not tried this before, I wonder if it might work" it's not rude.

Quite a few professionals have played 20 or so moves into a game as complete mirror go, relying on their judgement of when to break the mirror or how to exploit their opponent's break of the mirror. I don't recall any more than mild grumbles about it from other professionals.

I think it's no more rude than any hamete (which I happen to think are somewhat rude - playing a deliberately sub-optimal play in the hope your opponent doesn't know it as well as you do).

[hyperpape]

I think it's a bit pointless to be upset over how your opponent plays and whether a strategy is "polite".

Sure, but I think that this comment is then meta-pointless, and now my comment...

[illluck]

I think it's a bit pointless to be upset over how your opponent plays and whether a strategy is "polite".

Sure, but I think that this comment is then meta-pointless, and now my comment...

Touche.

[Tami]

You will probably agree that objectivity is one of the crucial skills in playing go or any other pure skill game.

Opening in a sub-optimal way might seem rude because it`s a direct challenge to the opponent`s ability to maintain objectivity. All things being equal, they should win if they can stay rational. That, however, is a big "if". Is it really ideal that a go game be decided only by reason, knowledge and judgement? Or should we allow for human factors like pride and emotion? There are strongish computer programs now, and they certainly do not bring emotions to the table, but how many of you prefer playing with machines? Is it not true that pyschology adds an indispensible spice to games?

If you play a hamete then you are not being rude. You are making a calculated gamble: if the opponent answers correctly, you have to accept the situation that arises (and it's not true that all hamete are inferior if met properly); if the opponent answers incorrectly, you get an advantage. If the opponent feels insulted and answers incorrectly, then it shows that he or she has unjustified pride in their ability!

So it is with strange fuseki: stronger players are more confident in their ability, and so they are less likely to be shaken by offbeat openings. I`m probably not wrong to suspect that the weaker people are, the more they moan about surprises. It`s certainly been one of my own ugly shortcomings over the years.

Also, there is also the point that what seems weird today may become orthodox in time. Nobody is offended when you open with a 4-4 point, but 200 years ago it might have seen daring and challenging.

[Loons]

I'm with topazg on the hamete-being-kind-of-rude front (think, 20 point trick play), though perilous joseki (two space high avalanche, mad taishas)that don't have a clear refutation I'd say is great (or fine).

[Laman]

Quite a few professionals have played 20 or so moves into a game as complete mirror go, relying on their judgement of when to break the mirror or how to exploit their opponent's break of the mirror. I don't recall any more than mild grumbles about it from other professionals.

senseis says:

... Fujisawa [Hosai] was notorious for often using mirror go, and was disdained for it by many of his contemporaries. ...

but that aside, i tried manego two times in tournament games and my opponents didn't complain. once it was for sheer fun, the second time i didn't want to play against my opponent's special two takamokus opening and his superior knowledge of relevant josekis

overall, i am a fan of unorthodox but not provably wrong play, making the game a contest of pure skill rather than any specific knowledge

[ez4u]

I've recently discovered Battousai's lecture series, and I'm having a blast with them. I really like his open Q&A teaching style, and feel like I'm learning a lot at my current level (kgs 6k).

I just watched this video by him:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1HJcmn3V-E

In it, an amateur player plays against a pro, and tries to pull off the interesting strategy of playing tengen and then invading every single corner, then going ahead and doing his best to live in the center.

I found it an extremely interesting game to watch, and I must admit I fell a little in love with the idea behind that particular strategy.

However, Bat's comments were along the line of how annoying that strategy was, how little he would like to play against it, and how he didn't enforce to use it.

My understanding of Go is still very small. I remember when I didn't consider rejecting handicap and playing lost games to the end breaches of etiquette. Only through playing I got to appreciate how those, plus things like prospective invasions, are bad things to do. However, I'm having a hard time to see how the strategy showcased in this particular video should be considered unpolite or breaching etiquette. Granted, it relies heavily on the opponent making mistakes, but that on itself shouldn't be a problem per se, shouldn't it? If I were to face a strategy like this and realize my opponent shows a style of play in which I'm being pressured and tested, in a form of psychological warfare, I wouldn't get annoyed by that player, but accept the challenge.

Maybe I am missing something? Is it really unpolite to play like this? Are Bat's comments like "many players would resign after move three and just go and play another game" correct? I would like to play this strategy some day, if only to see what I can learn from it, but not if it's a blatant breach of etiquette.

Thanks in advance for your insight.

Although I have enjoyed many of Bat's videos, I think he is far off base here. He reports (but seems to see no significance in the fact) that the pro and amateur in question played nine games in a row! It does not seem that the pro was offended, regardless of how Bat's sensibilities were damaged. I say if you want to try an interesting (to you) strategy, strap on those Nikes and "Just do it!"

[Twitchy Go]

Although I have enjoyed many of Bat's videos, I think he is far off base here. He reports (but seems to see no significance in the fact) that the pro and amateur in question played nine games in a row! It does not seem that the pro was offended, regardless of how Bat's sensibilities were damaged. I say if you want to try an interesting (to you) strategy, strap on those Nikes and "Just do it!"

Most of Bat's comments are directed towards how much he and likely other amateur players would hate to play this fellow. He actually addresses the pro's willingness to play so many matches pretty clearly. Both players at the time were 7dan and the pro is working towards a 9dan account(done by getting x many wins on tygem), it follows then that he doesn't really care who he plays to get his games and rank up.

[Falcord]

I have a hard time understanding all the fuss about the politeness of play. I come from cultures where that is kind of meaningless. If it wins, it is legit. There ARE games of Magic is just quit, granted, but at that point we're talking decks with cards that just screw with the very basic rules of the game in a major way such that nothing makes any bloody sense anymore, not just some offbeat strategy that attacks with the usual rules but at an unusual angle. In other words, stuff that is frankly impossible in Go.

If you guys don't mind me derailing the thread for a moment, I'm curious about what decks you are talking about. Combo decks often get annoying, but the ones that mess with the game integrity too much often get hit with the banhammer in their respective formats. I remember when you could play recursive Shahrazads...

[topazg]

If you play a hamete then you are not being rude...

If I play one, I would consider it rude of me

There are two goals I have in a given go game:

1) To win due to playing as well as I can and outplaying my opponent
2) To learn from my experiences

As soon as I play a well rehearsed trick play, not only do I fail in 1) as I'm already making a knowingly sub-optimal move, but if I win primarily due to it, I damage the chances for 2) as well. If I suddenly gain a 30 point rip-off in an otherwise even game, the space left for learning over the rest of the game diminishes greatly.

I can't see any benefit in hametes unless your approach is designed to maximise chances of winning the game simply to be the winner. I suppose I just find myself without a great deal of respect for that approach to Go.

[Falcord]

Correctly spotting hamete is another science on itself however. I mean, I hope stronger players don't consider me mean or impolite when I play obvious (to them) hamete, because to me it might seem like a valid move. Maybe I'm not seeing the obvious answer, maybe I think the resulting position after the correct answer is somehow beneficial to me.

Hamete, to me, sounds like a subjective term. I understand playing hamete as playing something that YOU know the answer for, knowing that after such answer you'd be worse off than if you hadn't played it to. However, this happens entirely in one's mind and your opponent may never know whether you're playing suboptimally on purpose or not. Therefore, any assumptions about politeness concerning hamete are flawed, I think.

[topazg]

Correctly spotting hamete is another science on itself however. I mean, I hope stronger players don't consider me mean or impolite when I play obvious (to them) hamete, because to me it might seem like a valid move. Maybe I'm not seeing the obvious answer, maybe I think the resulting position after the correct answer is somehow beneficial to me.

Hamete, to me, sounds like a subjective term. I understand playing hamete as playing something that YOU know the answer for, knowing that after such answer you'd be worse off than if you hadn't played it to. However, this happens entirely in one's mind and your opponent may never know whether you're playing suboptimally on purpose or not. Therefore, any assumptions about politeness concerning hamete are flawed, I think.

If you play a hamete thinking it's a good move, it's not really hamete (or not, at least, in the spirit of hamete). I have no problem with my opponents playing hamete or downright bad moves if they are honestly considering what they feel is the best move in a given situation.

However, playing something obviously bad in the hope your opponent messes up just feels disingenuous.

[illluck]

<- plays trickplays all the time (especially in handi games) :p

I don't consider it rude - if they know it they'll punish me for it, if they don't then I've shown them something new.

As for improvement... That's the player's own choice - I play mostly to have fun, improvement is a nice extra (which can also add to enjoyment) but not the main reason I play.

[SpongeBob]

This thread reminds me of that guy complaining about the opponent he just lost against who 'didn't even know how to play joseki'.

[Phelan]

I have a hard time understanding all the fuss about the politeness of play. I come from cultures where that is kind of meaningless. If it wins, it is legit. There ARE games of Magic is just quit, granted, but at that point we're talking decks with cards that just screw with the very basic rules of the game in a major way such that nothing makes any bloody sense anymore, not just some offbeat strategy that attacks with the usual rules but at an unusual angle. In other words, stuff that is frankly impossible in Go.

If you guys don't mind me derailing the thread for a moment, I'm curious about what decks you are talking about. Combo decks often get annoying, but the ones that mess with the game integrity too much often get hit with the banhammer in their respective formats. I remember when you could play recursive Shahrazads...

Start a new thread about it in Off Topic. There's been a lively discussion on Starcraft there before, so I don't think it would be out of place. I'm not really a MTG player, but I'd be interested in the game mechanics involved.
Edit: just found out there's a MTG topic there.