I beat breakfast!!!!

[badukJr]

Wow, you beat 3p!! Amazing!
Do you consider to study in Korea?

[Bill Spight]

Congratulations!

[lemmata]

Wow, that was awesome. Congratulations.

Aside: Uberdude is EGF 3 dan. He just beat a pro player in an even game. Breakfast isn't the strongest pro, but he has beaten 9 dan pros in the past in real games. What does this say about the go knowledge gap between pros and strong amateurs? As Uberdude mentioned in another thread, he would not be an even match for Breakfast in a non-correspondence game (as evidenced by the difference in their EGF ratings). However, after mostly eliminating the difference in reading ability by having 1 day or more per move, Uberdude was a close match for Breakfast and even beat him. We have a sample size of one, but Uberdude and Breakfast just performed one of the most interesting natural experiments related to one of the persistent questions of the go world.

[Kirby]

Congratulations, Uberdude.

Maybe now you can make your move in your Malkovich against MW.
(Just kidding... (kind of...))

[daal]

Congratulations Überdude, and thanks for such detailed commentary!

[BobC]

damn... that will teach me to masquerade as Breakfast..........


Seriously well done......

[Uberdude]

Aside: Uberdude is EGF 3 dan. He just beat a pro player in an even game. Breakfast isn't the strongest pro, but he has beaten 9 dan pros in the past in real games. What does this say about the go knowledge gap between pros and strong amateurs? As Uberdude mentioned in another thread, he would not be an even match for Breakfast in a non-correspondence game (as evidenced by the difference in their EGF ratings). However, after mostly eliminating the difference in reading ability by having 1 day or more per move, Uberdude was a close match for Breakfast and even beat him. We have a sample size of one, but Uberdude and Breakfast just performed one of the most interesting natural experiments related to one of the persistent questions of the go world.

Yes, this was a very interesting experiment, with a better outcome than I expected . With a few more good tournaments without me suiciding in byo-yomi I hope to get to EGF 4 dan (I recently got promoted to British 4 dan which is a bit weaker: starts at 2322 GoR and I am 2325), but that is far from breakfast's 7d and 2703 GoR. As for the reading ability eliminated, there are several facets to reading. One is the depth, how many moves you can read into the future whilst retaining the position in your head. This is indeed effectively eliminated by being able to play out moves using the Analyse Board feature (or an sgf editor). Another is the breadth, how many different moves you consider (at different levels of the tree) based on your brain's move-generating abilities. This is helped by being able to play offline, but still there will be particular moves I don't even consider so this aspect of reading skill still remains somewhat. And then there is the judgement of the resulting position, which is not helped at all by being able to play offline, unless of course you can do some deeper reading to help you.

[darthmage]

Congratulations and thanks for the commented game

[Toru]

I didn't read the comments, but here are two things I thought of pointing out, just possibilities.

Firstly, I do not believe the peep you thought you should have done on the right would have been good, it's a thank-you move. Also, in the bottom left when discussing endgames, I don't think your cut for more Ko threat possibilities was good. Instead, you could turn at C3, then b2 and you can atari at B3 and make a Ko in there. When white plays the variation that prevents the Ko due to him having one extra liberty, you can finish by just playing Hane from the outside and reduce a bit.

This is just what I think, I never believe I can say these things in Go with 100% certainty

Toru

[quantumf]

Instead, you could turn at C3

C3 was the 4th move of the game, so I'm guessing this is a typing error?

[Toru]

Oh sorry, c2!

Toru

[Uberdude]

@Toru:

Ah yes, nice find! That does look to be the best endgame, 2 points better than what I played (assuming white doesn't fight the very heavy ko). When I played the b7 turn I saw it wasn't sente for that ko shape due to the extra liberty, but overlooked that even if the ko doesn't work it can still give me endgame profit. That would've given breakfast a taste of his own medicine after all those shenanigans he pulled off inside my territory at the top right .

[topazg]

:bow: Wow, that was awesome. Congratulations.

Aside: Uberdude is EGF 3 dan. He just beat a pro player in an even game. Breakfast isn't the strongest pro, but he has beaten 9 dan pros in the past in real games. What does this say about the go knowledge gap between pros and strong amateurs? As Uberdude mentioned in another thread, he would not be an even match for Breakfast in a non-correspondence game (as evidenced by the difference in their EGF ratings). However, after mostly eliminating the difference in reading ability by having 1 day or more per move, Uberdude was a close match for Breakfast and even beat him. We have a sample size of one, but Uberdude and Breakfast just performed one of the most interesting natural experiments related to one of the persistent questions of the go world.

I don't think it says anything like this, and for a number of reasons. An even match against breakfast doesn't mean you are playing a robot that performs consistently at GoR strength. I've had days where my Go play would embarrass a 2k, and I've had days where I play great. This is accentuated by correspondence play (read some of Uberdude's self comments in other games of this - "Probably overplay, but I'd just come back from the pub and was feeling confident" - badly parahprased, but yeah), where you play across a number of days, including days where you just don't feel like playing Go but feel obliged to move anyway. My OGS rating goes up when I'm in the Go mood (recently had about a 25 game winning streak, and am now steadily and systematically throwing away my games one by one).

You really can't treat an OGS game like two players at the peak of their strength playing their best Go within their abilities - it's just an assumption too far.

Get them to rematch and put five thousand Euros / Pounds / Dollars on it and see if the result is the same. At the very least, the "I'm not in the mood but I'll play anyway" and "I don't really care about this game today" factors will mostly disappear.

Not that I'm taking anything away from the result, a great job Uberdude

PS I actually suspect it doesn't represent an EGF 3 dan's play, I suspect with almost unlimited thinking time like this, my experience with Uberdude leads to a guess that he could happily hold EGF 5d (whether he wants to agree with it or not )

[lemmata]

I don't think it says anything like this, and for a number of reasons.

I agree with all of your points. However, I also think that a pro has pride in his profession. Breakfast even named the game "My road to #1 OGS rank". My conjecture is that he played amateurs on OGS to promote his teaching business. Losing to an amateur in an even game, even if it is casual, presumably does not benefit business even if the game does not mean anything (I applaud him for not minding such risks). Breakfast is also not new to correspondence go; he has played on DGS. Breakfast also did not have a dozen games going at once on OGS. This might have been one of two or three. All of this makes me think that Breakfast wasn't playing moves on a whim. My experience is that pros only lose to amateurs when they are testing them.

In a rematch, I would put my money on Breakfast. Breakfast is clearly the stronger player. However, I still feel confident in the conjecture that the gap in non-reading go knowledge (or non-reading go wisdom or whatever we might call it) between the two players is a lot smaller than what most people might believe it to be. Pro-only magical insight, a theory that most of us subscribe to, might turn out to be 85% phlogiston (because I like pulling numbers out of my rear end). Uberdude and Breakfast might be Lavoisier in that context. Okay, maybe I took that analogy too far.

[Magicwand]

hum....
i am sorry about below comment Uberdude.
my personal opinion on playing stronger players.

i think breakfast has better chance of winning on two stone than losing even game.
reason why i can say that is because i have played many many strong players who are willing to give me 4 stone handy for big money which i refuse because of my pride.

3 stone i do have advantage in the beginning but somehow they find the way to win. (about 50% win lose)

i believe Uberdude can be stronger than my strength but not by much.
when i read his comments there are some that i disagree and i am sure that my point of view is better choice. my viewpoint might be wrong but i will not admit it.