Why do some people never reach shodan

[Pio2001]

For my part, I blame fatigue. Playing properly requires time and work. I'm too tired to work so much.
I'm 41, and playing like I was 21 requires twice the work, now.

[Bill Spight]

You say study everything and don't look for shortcuts? I say virtually nobody does that - but some of them reach dan level and some never do.

Well, I studied pretty much everything, though my favorite study is pro games. (Which have everything, BTW. ) When I was 12 I was ill for several weeks. I checked out Goren's Contract Bridge Complete from the local library and devoured it. I also studied Sheinwold's Winning Bridge in 30 Days (IIRC). When I was 4 kyu I got two series of books aimed at kyu players, Sakata's Killer of Go series and Takagawa's Go Reader; I also bought all of the Nihon Kiin's small books on basics. Later on I got most of the "Dictionary" set published in the 1970s and Sakata's six volume set aimed at dan players, the Sakata no Go series.

As for shortcuts, why not?

[daal]

You say study everything and don't look for shortcuts? I say virtually nobody does that - but some of them reach dan level and some never do.

Well, I studied pretty much everything,

The exception proves the rule (FWIW, I've also studied everything on Krama's list, though I haven't exhaustively studied anything.)

[Pio2001]

- Joseki : I think I'm correct. As soon as I play 2 or 3 stones handicap games with white, I'm usually able to punish one or two joseki mistakes from my opponents.
- Fuseki : I was strong when I was 9 kyu. Maybe it's time for me to reread Opening Theory Made Easy and In the Beginning.
- Life & Death problems : I started only recently. I need very easy problems. I'm currently in Graded Go Problems for Beginners 2.
- Tesuji problems : I hate that... but there are some in GGPFB, and also a few in 100 Tips for Amateurs. But usually, I find as many tesuji as my opponents during my games.
- Good shapes : I think I'm not bad. Just right for my level. I can sometimes see bad shapes in my opponent's moves.
- Deep reading (long ladder problems) : arg ! I can't read complicated ladders. All I can do is taking advantage of breakers, or shift a ladder. I can't make a ladder change direction, for example.
- General strategy (fundementals, how to attack for profit etc.) : I love attacking. As soon as my opponent has the slightest weakness, I unleash the flames of hell on his stones ! But I must restrain myself from trying to kill and just be happy with an advantage in the game.
- Positional judgement : During middle game, I can estimate the balance with an accuracy of 15 points, I'd say.
- Counting : I always count endgame moves.
- Endgame : I'm usually better than my opponents. I can't believe the mistakes they do.
- Study pro games : oops ! What is that ? I don't even watch commentaries of pro games ...except the 5 games of AlphaGo. I watched commentaries from Michael Redmond, Motoki Noguchi and Haylee.
- Play fast games : for years, my win/loss rate at 10 minutes games on kgs, against opponents the same rank as me (I play 25 min games usually), was 1/9. Oddly enough, I have become better at that. Now it's the opposite. I'm better at 10 min games than at 25 !
- Play slow games : I miss really slow games (1 hour / player). I only play 2 of them per month, at the club.
- Review your own games : I do that. But I should submit more of my games to be reviewed by stronger players. The last time must have been 2 months ago.
- Kibitzing other amateurs : what's kibitzing ?

[Krama]

Open KGS or tygem and just watch the most popular game there. Talk with people, ask questions and so on while the 2 players play. Maybe you find something interesting and pull up a board and check a variation someone missed.

Kibitzing = watching other games but live.

[gowan]

Reason why you won't reach x rank is because you are looking for shortcuts.

Doesn't everybody look for shortcuts?

In order to not get stuck until you reach your limit is to study everything.

In other words, if you do everything you can, you will get as strong as you can get. Obviously. That's not the issue though. The issue is why do some people not find a way, despite doing what they see as their best, to reach a level where you are considered by the go world to be competent. You say study everything and don't look for shortcuts? I say virtually nobody does that - but some of them reach dan level and some never do.

The words I put in bold above strike me as interesting, in particular that you want to be considered competent by the go world. Bill Spight said in comments on your game that you are competent now and Bill is a strong player as well as a good judge. The average go rank in the AGA is in the SDK range. Does the problem lie in the meaning of competence or looking for exterior validation? As has been mentioned, "shodan" has different meanings depending on which go community you consider. An American shodan might be 2k in Europe for example. An amateur shodan in Japan might be 4k in the USA, depending on how the shodan earned the rank. Some European shodans would not rank that high in Korea or China. So ... what does competence mean to you? Can you define it without equating it to rank?

[RobertJasiek]

Positional judgement [...] I've got Robert Jasiek's first book about it, but it is mostly about the right way of counting, rather than about global strategy.

If you expect strategy in positional judgement,

1) static territories have little strategy in them but you find more strategy in the various dynamic aspects of positional judgement (including the aspect of dynamic changes to territories),

2) you should realise that positional judgement and strategy are mostly different major parts of go theory (other major parts are reading, psychology and time management). Strategy should presume and rely on already made positional judgement (and, of course, on reading as far as feasible). In other words, positional judgement can enable good strategic planning. (A subset of strategy also helps making good positional judgement when related move sequences must be constructed, so PJ and strategy are not entirely complementary.)

[daal]

Kibitzing = watching other games but live.

I understand that this is what you meant when you said it, but that's not what kibitzing means. Kibitzing means chatting, but also watching someone else do something and offering unwelcome advice, as in "b should play T1" or "w should resign."

[Tryss]

And kibitzing is not really helpfull to our go (even if it can be fun...)

[daal]

Reason why you won't reach x rank is because you are looking for shortcuts.

Doesn't everybody look for shortcuts?

In order to not get stuck until you reach your limit is to study everything.

In other words, if you do everything you can, you will get as strong as you can get. Obviously. That's not the issue though. The issue is why do some people not find a way, despite doing what they see as their best, to reach a level where you are considered by the go world to be competent. You say study everything and don't look for shortcuts? I say virtually nobody does that - but some of them reach dan level and some never do.

The words I put in bold above strike me as interesting, in particular that you want to be considered competent by the go world. Bill Spight said in comments on your game that you are competent now and Bill is a strong player as well as a good judge. The average go rank in the AGA is in the SDK range. Does the problem lie in the meaning of competence or looking for exterior validation? As has been mentioned, "shodan" has different meanings depending on which go community you consider. An American shodan might be 2k in Europe for example. An amateur shodan in Japan might be 4k in the USA, depending on how the shodan earned the rank. Some European shodans would not rank that high in Korea or China. So ... what does competence mean to you? Can you define it without equating it to rank?

To me competence means being able to do something well. When speaking of go, that corresponds in my mind to the word shodan. I don't think I'm alone in this judgement. While I appreciate that a person I respect calls my play competent, I don't think that this is reflected in the way most go players view kyu ranks. My main question is this: Why is it that a fairly intelligent and dedicated go player is not capable of being able to play at a level that go players would generally view as good? Either there is something wrong with us weaker player or with the standard of competence or both. Of course, it could also be a matter of my perception, but I doubt that I am alone. I won't deny that it is also as you suggest a matter of validation. I've read dozens of books about go, spent countless hours thinking about, writing about, teaching and playing go, and yet I remain a bumbler (in my own eyes, because these are the eyes of a go player), and yes, that irks me. It's not that I deny in any way that the gaps in my ability and the depth of my knowledge place me fairly at a certain rank, it's just that every time I hear someone say "anyone can reach shodan" it feels like a slap in the face, and while I love many things about the game, this is not one of them.

[Knotwilg]

Daal, it seems like the encouraging responses haven't been able to stimulate you. I don't think reaching shodan will be easy for you but I'm sure it is possible. Yes you have read dozens of go books and spent countless hours thinking about the game. I believe your level of understanding is about shodan. I saw this in your comments on my game. Now it is a matter of bringing your playing level up to the same leven as your current understanding. I gave you a first program.

Of course you can indulge in the question governing this discussion. You already answered it too: you started fairly late. Okay, that will prevent fast progress. Neverthelees, progress is still possible. All it takes is doing the right thing. Right now, I believe it is a maatter of concentration.

[Shaddy]

Reading this thread, I wanted to take a look at some of the games I played on the way to 1d and see if I could figure out if there's anything important missing here. When I looked at the games on the KGS archives (starting from 6k) they were nonsense, just nonstop fighting from beginning to end. This makes sense, since I didn't read books or go over pro games at all, I just played games and did tsumego. You can get away with murder at lower ranks, and book knowledge doesn't help you at all if you can't fight. If anyone else is interested, the account name is Aoirinban (expired account, so tick that option on the archives).

[Bill Spight]

To me competence means being able to do something well. When speaking of go, that corresponds in my mind to the word shodan.

Having observed rank inflation for some time, and the fact that amateur shodan is something of a moving target, I kind of wish that it meant being in the top 5% of club players, which pretty much means players on the internet these days. Then most people would realize that they have no hope of becoming shodan, and would not worry about it.

My main question is this: Why is it that a fairly intelligent and dedicated go player is not capable of being able to play at a level that go players would generally view as good?

Your question answers itself. Just about everyone who participates in this forum is intelligent and dedicated. Being considered a good player is relative, and means that you are better than the average intelligent and dedicated player, less than half of intelligent and dedicated players are good by that standard. Let's face it. People judge competence in fields like go relatively.

Either there is something wrong with us weaker player or with the standard of competence or both.

OC, we all have specific weaknesses, but in general there is nothing wrong with a weaker play other than not being a stronger player.

It's not that I deny in any way that the gaps in my ability and the depth of my knowledge place me fairly at a certain rank, it's just that every time I hear someone say "anyone can reach shodan" it feels like a slap in the face, and while I love many things about the game, this is not one of them.

Oh, I think that most everyone who is interested in go and has a good teacher at age 7 can become a strong amateur in 10 years. But anyone can become shodan is bullshit.

[Bill Spight]

Kibitzing = watching other games but live.

I understand that this is what you meant when you said it, but that's not what kibitzing means. Kibitzing means chatting, but also watching someone else do something and offering unwelcome advice, as in "b should play T1" or "w should resign."

You are right according to the dictionary definitions, but certainly kibitzing at bridge, which is where I first heard the term, merely refers to watching. A kibitzer who opened his mouth would be ejected from the playing area. Traditional go boards with legs have a large notch carved in the bottom, which I suppose helps prevent the wood from cracking. But I was told that it was there to hold the head of anyone who watched a go game and made comments during the game.

[Kirby]

My main question is this: Why is it that a fairly intelligent and dedicated go player is not capable of being able to play at a level that go players would generally view as good?

I'll be straightforward: I think you're a good go player. When I started getting into go, my rival was 8k. He was a god to me, and could give me 9 stones. I don't know your precise rank, but I'm pretty sure you could beat him. The rank comparison chart on senseis library puts KGS 5k at about the 50th percentile. So if you're around 5k, you're better than half of the players out there.

I've improved since I first started playing go, but that doesn't change the fact that you're a good go player. I understand your concern over the binary classification of dan vs. kyu. But it's a very vague classification, which changes, as others have noted.

Anyway, you already are a good go player.