Takemiya's Cosmic Go?

[enjolras19]

Hello guys, Lately i have been interested in the path of Takemiya Masaki's Cosmic Go. However i can't seem to find anything on his specific style of play i would like to look at. I tried analyzing Pro games of his but i currently don't have the experience to analyze any closer. If i can have some materials that would help me understand his style of play better that would be great. thanks!

[Uberdude]

Yuan Zhou has written a series of books focusing on the styles of different players and has one on Takemiya:

[sl=MasterPlayTheStyleOfTakemiya]Master Play The Style of Takemiya[/sl].

If you can read French there is a translation of a book by Takemiya himself where he analyses his own games:

[sl=LeGoCosmique]Le Go Cosmique[/sl]

[Splatted]

I wish I could stop playing cosmic go. I always seem to end up playing a moyo game no matter what I do. I've tried setting myself extra rules to control it (e.g. no 4th line moves until move X), but they just seem to grow out of nowhere.

[illluck]

Hehe, I play double sansan and still often end up with centre :p

[tchan001]

"Imagination of a Go Master" by Takemiya Masaki

[Buri]

Greetings,
surprised no one mentions the book Cosmic Go, which explains in detail in English. I got my copy from Slate and Shell I seem to remember. It is in print and not expensive,
Regards,
Buri

[tchan001]

Greetings,
surprised no one mentions the book Cosmic Go, which explains in detail in English. I got my copy from Slate and Shell I seem to remember. It is in print and not expensive,
Regards,
Buri

Is this book specifically about Takemiya Masaki's cosmic go style or is it about someone else's cosmic go style?

[MMaestro]

When I was was participating in the summer go school hosted by the nihon kiin, Kobayashi Chizu-sensei said that the most important thing to understand in Takemiya's play style was to try to connect "lines" between your stones and separate "lines" in your opponent's stones. Takemiya, if i recall correctly, said that his play style was trying to bring the whole board together. But that one shouldn't aspire to copy him, but should try to find one's own style.

[RobertJasiek]

In Japanese books by Takemiya, he explains
- cap from the center no matter what even if it is on the 6th line as White
- consider center moyos as endgame boundary objects already early during the game
- rely boundary plays on reading (although he publicly pretended the maxim "don't read"; if necessary, make exchanges during the late middle game / early endgame)

Of course, he does not always go for the center.

Besides studying his games, you can study also games of other players with similar styles, such as mine as Black 2005-2010.

[lovelove]

Besides studying his games, you can study also games of other players with similar styles, such as mine as Black 2005-2010.

Why would anyone study a game from a player that needs at least four handicaps to play with a pro?

[RobertJasiek]

Why would anyone study a game from a player that needs at least four handicaps to play with a pro?

At least 4 stones: nonsense.

Why? Because the principle developments of center strategy are very similar. The related drawbacks in my play (reading and endgame accuracy) can easily be ignored and studied in pro games (any pro games, not just Takemiya; preferably the classics because nowadays the time restrictions let pros also make (fewer) reading and endgame mistakes). For the other aspects of center strategy, my games are as good as Takemiyas; I could hardly notice another difference (except for a somewhat different playing style related to center moyos). If you think that there are differences that I overlook, please point them out! (But how can you when you don't study my games?;) )

Center moyo strategy is so infrequent in pro play that I had difficulties to find suitable examples for Joseki 1. My own games were a much more exhaustive source. Only somebody wishing to restrict his sources dramatically would reject amateur games entirely. It is your choice to keep a narrow mind;)

[tchan001]

To be fair, the starter of the thread is "interested in the path of Takemiya Masaki's Cosmic Go" not "the path of RJ's cosmic go". Not saying that RJ's games might not be useful to him, but that is not his focus.

[RobertJasiek]

Studying a player's style is good - studying it in a broader context of similar styles is better. In particular, this eases recognition of what exactly is Takemiya's cosmic style in contrast to other cosmic styles: greater frequency of 4 hoshis and related josekis, large scale center connections (extensions) and center caps; starting center moyo development relatively early during a game, trying to get a center moyo suitable for winning as frequently as possible (although IIRC Takemiya had periods during which he tried it less frequently).

[Uberdude]

Greetings,
surprised no one mentions the book Cosmic Go, which explains in detail in English. I got my copy from Slate and Shell I seem to remember. It is in print and not expensive,
Regards,
Buri

Is this book specifically about Takemiya Masaki's cosmic go style or is it about someone else's cosmic go style?

Neither, it is about 4 stone handicap games.

[RobertJasiek]

it is about 4 stone handicap games.

Oh, so you think that the OP asked about books rather than about style? Possible:)

Do you mean these books when speaking of H4 games? Le Go cosmique

http://bibliographie.jeudego.org/le_go_ ... masaki.php

(I do not recall whether these were such books with H4 games rather than even games of Takemiya himself. But I recall that Japanese books by him about cosmic go were much better addressing that topic. Unfortunately, I cannot dig out them quickly.)