Random Ramblings

[Elom]

The elderly might be more likely to take up go.

Using a up-down approach might work. Many may be lonely and more than happy to take up the game.

Hmm, I realise I often do far more harm than good.

[Elom]

More on rambling on things I'm uninitiated in. This time it's about the classes mentioned in post one. It's the ramble-essay I mentioned before... And I subvert the Uberdude's law of the internet by using European go as an example, but things should be similar in many parts of the world. I may have forgotten a few things rushing in this text in two days. Take it with a bowl of salt (it's really thinking out loud).

Shindou
Atoms make molecules that make cells that make tissues that make organs that make organ systems that make organisms. And so it is with knowledge, perhaps— take a simple process, and combine various simple processes to make a complex process. Master the complex process so that it becomes second nature, a simple process. Combine it with other complex processes converted into simple processes to make a second level complex process. Repeat. A third level complex process.

Part one: A capping play

Part one: A capping play

Code: Select all

————————|
|A <|> T|<----Cap
| ^   ^ |
————————|
| v   v |<----Base
|K <|>I | 
———————— <^Stable to unstable
^
|
Lamborghini lower left hand corner

So I was wondering if any activity may be considered a Base, with a set of knowledge and intuition defining it. A thought experiment: football (all shapes welcome) can be described as the knowledge of how to move one's self and organise many selves to put a ball past the line according to the rules of football. Against another team. In order to keep and use this knowledge efficiently, the mind converts it into it's high-power form: intuition. Having greater intuition might allow one to understand and then pick up ideas from professional football matches, increasing knowledge at a faster rate.

In order to play, athleticism in both the mind and the body are required; a minimum amount each of physical and mental ability different and depending on the sport (in this case, football). It may be difficult to improve if one threw in the towel at the slightest set back, or transitioned to chimp mode every loss and disappointment. Improving the control of one's emotions and temperament seems useful.

One's overall athletic abilities and temperament control are the same, moving this cap from base to base. It is true that different traits of athleticism and temperaments do best for different activities, but at least at the lower levels of each, improvement optimal for one is helpful for all or most of others. Except perhaps improvement in competitive sleeping. Actually, even that.

I think sometimes people enjoy a sport at first for the cap as much as anything else about it. If through go kids can find a way to improve their mental and physical* in athleticism and to better manage ups and downs, finding a talented individual who can benefit from a base focus is good karma, a matter of course for helping the community. *Myousu English 2, pg 48

Part two: Promoting

Part two: Promoting
Go population pyramid. Along with the healthiest numbers.

0.16% Class P: Pursuant, (often 5 dan) exPert (often 6 dan) and Pro (often 7+ dan)
^20% v80%
0.64% Class A: Advanced (often 1 dan to 4 dan)
^20% v80%
3.20% Class B: hoBby, anyone who wants to improve (often Single Digit Kyu)
^20% v80%
16.0% Class C: Casual, 13x13, anyone who just plays for fun (often Double Digit kyu)
^20% v80%
80.0% Class D: introDuctory, 9x9, anyone who knows the game and rules (often Twenty plus kyu)

The number of people in each class is four times more than of all the classes above them combined. I think this balance is more sustainable than one where class B is biggest. Maybe one could put go events, promotion and activities into three types:

Types 1: Casual, Cap— Classes D, C and B.
Social and fun.

I think it would be good to try to normalise go in the popular culture. Rather than focusing on go's difficulty, it would make sense to show it most appropriate for many people.

To this end, I wonder about whether teaching beginners the opening is good. Beginning game theory changes over time, and is best understood when one has gotten a feel for the game and the consequences of different plays. It's an advanced concept. Endgame theory is more defined. Anyone can understand it, as it refers to concrete terms: the points at the end of the game. Maybe beginners should learn endgame theory first, before even being told that it is best to play in the corners. telling beginners to play this or that in the opening may stifle their creativity. The goal at the beginning isn't to get them to be good, it's to get them to think, and to get them to feel, to focus on the cap.

Tell beginners they can play wherever they want, but to look at pro games and figure out what the best moves are. This has two benefits. They will already have an adventure to figure out, even if they have zero interest in go, they will want to see if they can be the on to figure out the best move. This is better than dictating to them where to play, which might discourage them from learning as it's like going to class. Saying they can be free to play wherever they want in the opening is also a great encouragement. Many might also like a stimulating mental challenge especially parentys for for their kids as an alternative to video games and the elderly as social addition to the likes of Sudoku and wordsearch (sorry that I may be stereotyping here). Health benefits of go.This is the upper left hand corner.

Kids have two options to learn.

1. Rather than dictating to them what to play, get kids to talk about why they play each move. not only is it good for a child to get into the good life habit habit of reviewing her mistakes (introspection), but writing up a review should be seen as a normal task after playing a go game which would be a great way to improve her language skill.

2. Multiplication and other math techniques from calculating the endgame, or estimating the score during the game.

Given kids a choice of what they prefer is already a way to encourage them to learn. This should be a parents heaven. This is the upper right hand corner of the Cap-Base model. Keep everything as neat and fun as possible and there should be little to lose.

In reviews, only note the major points of the beginning and focus on the endgame. Once they first learn the consequences of the moves they played earlier on, it would be easier to teach them the middle game, and then the beginning game. On that same note, casual players should focus on middle game techniques. I've heard commented game videos are best for this, so live streams of go matches could focus making go appealing to those with only a casual interest in the game.

From what I can tell, teaching the basics of the endgame is best on a 9x9 board, as it comes up early and is simpler. Likewise, teaching double digit kyu players the basics of middle game is best on a 13x13 board. And proper opening study can start single digit kyu on the 19x19 board. I jokingly think of the 9x9 as a duel board, because it makes sense to promote it bit like the TCG's, complete with beautiful designs (someone versed in design will know if this is true, but from what I've seen, simple is best). And the 13x13 board as a 'family' board because it's simple enough to play as if it were a family board game. The 19x19 board can be left alone as normal. These may be cringeworthy suggestions, but maybe go has a special power over any other classical board game, in that the three different board sizes can be promoted as three different games (in a way they are).

By putting simpler alternatives in the popular imagination, and focusing on free expression in the opening, people may see go less as a difficult game that is no fun and see it as a cultural phenomenon of east Asia. The reaction should be, 'thank goodness this game was invented'. So, 'A few simple rules, limitless possibilities ...'

Type 1, east Asian phenomenon.

Type 2, Hobby, Cap and Base— Classes C, B and A:
Normal tournaments.

I think most of the active go population fall into class B, so maybe this is as simple as thinking of general improvements to tournaments. Someone who already plays go as a casual player may the be encouraged to improve by learning about the depth and complexity of the game. it would be another interpretation of 'A few simple rules, limitless possibilities ...'

Type 2, the deepest art.

Type 3, Advanced, Base— Classes B, A and P:
Major tournaments.

This is the advanced training camps, sending European players to asia, and other high-level events.
Type 3, play with Asian pros.

Maybe it makes sense to put an equal amount of resources into each type of event.
An event like the EGC is a combination of all three types of event.

Part three: Matrix

Part three: Matrix

Getting parents engaged first is good. After that, try to encourage children.
Get lonely millennials and older people to interact with each other through go. I think this will provide many benefits!

Code: Select all

|Class D  |Class C  |Class B  |Class A  |Class P  |
|—————————|—————————|—————————|—————————|—————————|
|U20&30-49|         |         |         |         |
|—————————|—————————|—————————|—————————|—————————|
|20-29&50+|         |         |         |         |
|—————————|—————————|—————————|—————————|—————————|

It might be long and not clear because I'm poor at writing and rushed this.

[Elom]

I've read that Chess is best learned backwards, too.

It's a shame that a game as deep and complex as go is shunned by some for being so (a sign of our times?). I've realised that maybe some the text above describes applying trainer wheels to the timid to get them to give go a try.

[Elom]

Couldn't the amount of time each player has left be a rough score-chart for go? The less time you've used, the more likely it is that you're winning. If only online go servers developed a way to accurately show the time left for each player in professional relays...

[emeraldemon]

Couldn't the amount of time each player has left be a rough score-chart for go? The less time you've used, the more likely it is that you're winning. If only online go servers developed a way to accurately show the time left for each player in professional relays...

I think in general if players are losing they take more time to think, but not always. Sometimes one player just plays slower. And sometimes I am winning on the board but then I lose on time

[Elom]

I think in general if players are losing they take more time to think, but not always. Sometimes one player just plays slower. And sometimes I am winning on the board but then I lose on time

Ouch...

It is quite a rough marker, I guess .

I don't know if there is less variation in time usage amongst stronger players. It might then be more accurate for professionals than kyu players .

[Elom]

Has anyone noticed that Go seems a bit like a jigsaw puzzle?

[Elom]

Hmm...

I think the Japanese phrase 'Onegai-Shimasu' seems to translate well into 'go ahead' when said before a game of some sort.

While some keep the more literal translation of please, in the context of starting a game it seems more like a polite way of telling black to play the first move, with black saying likewise as a convention.

Would anyone know if i'm missing something here...?

[Elom]

Rough population ratios;

China:Japan:S.Korea:Taiwan = 60:5:2:1

If all of these countires were equally strong, this should be the distribution in the top 68. Okay, It's a simplification, as different countries might have the sam strength but a different distribution of it.

Maybe one could do something similar for female professionals.

[Elom]

I wonder if anyone who is experienced in teaching new players can tell me if this strategy could work or not. I think you can make a distinction between newcomers and beginners .

For a new players first go experience, play capture go with her on a 4x4 board. Just tell her to be careful and then give her black. If she loses, it will likely be caused by her creating two groups or her playing in their own space. Tell her the *two special secrets* to success in go, and play again.

Also, what do you think of teaching in this type of order.

Newkyu 4x4 board
v
Teach capture go, rulesets and basic endgame principles on 7x7 board
v
Beginner 9x9 board
v
Teach basic joseki on 13x13 board
v
19x19 board

Sometimes I think of perception as yang(m?) shining on all the possible plays you can make and aiding creativity, and verification as ying(f?), the ability to read deep into variations and aiding competence. And sometimes I evaluate them separately in my games .

[Elom]

When I believe that losing from a blunder is fair and just reason to lose a game, I think I feel and play better. So if someoneone loses a game from such a slip, they should better unite the different elements of their play and look towards the future. Or play some atari-go. And maybe give atari-fives instead high-fives .

[EdLee]

Newkyu 4x4 board
v
Teach capture go, rulesets and basic endgame principles on 7x7 board
v
Beginner 9x9 board
v
Teach basic joseki on 13x13 board
v
19x19 board

It depends immensely on the individual.

Special cases:
- When Mr. Michael Redmond was a child, he would just quietly and patiently watch his father play Go with friends. Later, Michael got hold of some kind of Go book (say, a joseki dictionary or a life-and-death problem set) and in a relatively short time promptly memorized it.
- Another pro had no memory of anyone teaching her the rules; but only memory of watching adults play and figuring out the rules by herself from watching.
- We have a local member with a learning disability -- even after one year, still doesn't understand eyes. For example, even after one year of detailed, step-by-step instructions, repeatedly and in varying methods, still doesn't understand the status of for this shape:

$$
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . O O O O O O O O . .
$$ . . O X X X X X X O . .
$$ . . O X . . . . X O . .
$$ . . O X X X X X X O . .
$$ . . O O O O O O O O . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . O O O O O O O O . .
$$ . . O X X X X X X O . .
$$ . . O X . . . . X O . .
$$ . . O X X X X X X O . .
$$ . . O O O O O O O O . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$[/go]

This is a rare exceptional case, but it highlights why it depends so greatly on the individual.

Let's define a raw beginner as a random coffee shop patron who sees Go for the first time in their life; a beginner-2 as someone who returns a second time to the club, a beginner-3 a third time, etc.

I've had experience teaching raw beginners, beginner-2's, and beginner-3's from age 5 through age 70's for the past 15 years. Probably in the hundreds range, total.

In general, I'd say these are too early for beginners: complications of various rulesets, endgame principles, basic joseki. ( Of course, there are always exceptions. )

For the raw beginner: just the most basic rules ( no more than can fit in a normal font on one side of a business card ). Zero jargons: I avoid jargons as much as possible for the raw beginner; thus I don't say: liberty, eyes, ko, throw-in, etc. In general, I don't even mention the term atari to the raw beginner. I demonstrate the concepts of dame, atari, and captures visually and in normal everyday language, without jargons. I feel the concepts are important, not the jargons. It's my preference when teaching raw beginners. Maybe there are people who have greater affinity with jargons and can learn faster with jargons -- so YMMV here.

In general, for a raw beginner, even up to a beginner-3 (as always, exceptions apply):
- the most rudimentary rules ( zero jargons );
- the most fundamental capturing exercises ( capturing a single stone in the center, the side, and the corner; capturing the smallest group with 1 real eye; etc. )
- the most fundamental rescues: saving 1 single stone in atari, etc.
- capture-1 on 9x9 ( just a few iterations, to see their digest levels );

|
| (the down-arrow 'v' in the quoted text above)
v

This down-arrow 'v' depends immensely on the individual:
For many beginner-3's, they never made it past capture-1 to a full 9x9 game.

Sample: last night at the coffee shop, a recent university graduate showed up. He's currently applying to graduate schools in the U.K. but is in town for a few months. He had played some 9x9's with friends and against engines. He had only played two 19x19 games before last night. He played his third 19x19 game with our 10kyu member. He played his 4th 19x19 with me; 9-stone -- he was ready. So it depends greatly on the individual.

[jlt]

He had played some 9x9's with friends and against engines.

You didn't specify how good at 9x9 he was before starting 19x19.

[EdLee]

Hi jlt, because I have no idea. Sometimes, you just play.

[Elom]

Fascinating Edlee. Avoiding jargon until needed sounds great .

It seems that to stay safe, one must only introduce the basics of a concept the smallest size it properly appears, and advance depending on the person learning. Capture go should be at 4x4 in the sequence, although introducing a Chinese art of life and death makes go look like Kung Fu .