Cho Chikun's 'Secret' Discovery of How to Win

[logan]

Around 1995 to '96 Cho Chikun apparently made a great go discovery, which he dubbed 'the secret of how to win'. He outlines his secret in the following passage and I always found it a bit interesting. What do you think?

Kido: Black 21 was also praised as a thick move. (see below)

Cho: As a result of studying [Kobayashi] Satoru's strong points, I have discovered the secret of how to win.

K: Really? How?

C: Well, that's classified information. But since I won the Kisei title back, I might as well reveal it. If you have territory and thickness, then you win. The sequence from Black 1 here is a perfect example of that.

K: Exactly what do you mean?

C: I'll be more specific. When you attack a group, you will win by either killing it or not killing it. Likewise, when you have a weak group, you win by either saving or not saving it. To win by either means is ideal. I am telling you the truth (laughs). I thought this was a great discovery. Then I lost two games in a row (laughs).

[skydyr]

That sounds an awful lot like "you win because you're ahead". I assume it was meant as a joke?

[Polama]

That sounds an awful lot like "you win because you're ahead". I assume it was meant as a joke?

It's certainly presented flippantly, but I don't think it's just a joke. I read it as arguing for a balanced game. If you play very territorially, there often comes a point where you need to stake everything on an invasion of your opponents thickness. If you play very thickly, you risk falling far enough behind on points that your opponent can get away with simple reductions being enough. I've seen at least one commented pro game where a player uses thickness to form a moyo and then rather than securing or expanding it, starts making territory elsewhere. The commentary suggests the idea is to reduce the territory deficit enough that the opponent feels compelled to take risks inside the moyo.

[RobertJasiek]

To win due to a favourable combination of territory balance and influence / thickness balance (Cho) is not always correct because there are other factors, such as weaknesses.

[wineandgolover]

To win due to a favourable combination of territory balance and influence / thickness balance (Cho) is not always correct because there are other factors, such as weaknesses.

If only Cho knew what Robert knows he'd have had a good career.

[oren]

That sounds an awful lot like "you win because you're ahead". I assume it was meant as a joke?

That's the way I read it. The equivalent being the best way to win in sports is to have the best offense and the best defense. Cho likes to joke around a bit.

[skydyr]

To win due to a favourable combination of territory balance and influence / thickness balance (Cho) is not always correct because there are other factors, such as weaknesses.

It's always been my assumption that thickness was defined at least in part by a lack of weaknesses. I have no idea what the nuances behind the original statement in Japanese were, though.

[Polama]

That sounds an awful lot like "you win because you're ahead". I assume it was meant as a joke?

That's the way I read it. The equivalent being the best way to win in sports is to have the best offense and the best defense. Cho likes to joke around a bit.

But he doesn't say "have more territory and thickness than your opponent", just "have territory and thickness". I think it's less of a tautology than it appears: I wouldn't say the same applies to a 9x9 board.

[skydyr]

That sounds an awful lot like "you win because you're ahead". I assume it was meant as a joke?

That's the way I read it. The equivalent being the best way to win in sports is to have the best offense and the best defense. Cho likes to joke around a bit.

But he doesn't say "have more territory and thickness than your opponent", just "have territory and thickness". I think it's less of a tautology than it appears: I wouldn't say the same applies to a 9x9 board.

What if your opponent also has territory and thickness, then, and potentially more of each?

[Polama]

What if your opponent also has territory and thickness, then, and potentially more of each?

Clearly you both win =)

[RobertJasiek]

It's always been my assumption that thickness was defined at least in part by a lack of weaknesses.

That a player has thickness in some parts of the board does not mean that he would have no weaknesses. In particular, he might have more thickness (somewhere) and more (or the more severe) weaknesses (elsewhere) than the opponent. Quite like one can have territory in some parts of the board and active thickness in other parts.

EDITED

[RBerenguel]

That sounds an awful lot like "you win because you're ahead". I assume it was meant as a joke?

That's the way I read it. The equivalent being the best way to win in sports is to have the best offense and the best defense. Cho likes to joke around a bit.

But he doesn't say "have more territory and thickness than your opponent", just "have territory and thickness". I think it's less of a tautology than it appears: I wouldn't say the same applies to a 9x9 board.

Actually, thickness in 9x9 is incredibly effective early on

[Polama]

To win due to a favourable combination of territory balance and influence / thickness balance (Cho) is not always correct because there are other factors, such as weaknesses.

Interestingly, Cho was known for his handling of weak groups. And from the Sensei's Library page on him:

"I try to match strength with strength, lightness with lightness. My ideal is to play in such a way that no one can tell who the player was." Furthermore, "Broadly speaking, my go perhaps belongs to the profit-oriented school, but there are various elements in my game and it is somewhat chaotic. I have no special preference in the fuseki and if possible I would like to master every style."

From his later comments in the quote about "being able to win if a group lives or dies", I think he is advocating that a weak groups is less important than having a balance of thickness and territory, which provide multiple options about how to handle that weak group.

Obviously, the idea that it "just" takes territory and thickness to win is facetious. Bad weakness will lose a game, and none of us here have Cho's ability to profitably settle his weak groups. Cho has played all out territory games, and has wins and losses in all sorts of games. It's certainly not intended as a universal rule that will lead to the right move in every situation. But it seems clear to me that he did strive to achieve an at least partially balanced style, and saw special value in that sort of flexible approach.

[oren]

He's not saying anything about balance between territory and thickness. He's saying if you get more than your opponent of both, you will win.

[Abyssinica]

I like the think of the quote in terms of positional judgment.