thirdfogie wrote:
In the first two cases, Leela often suggests sequences that I would never be able to play, and nor would an SDK opponent. But equally often it suggests an obviously better move that is within my Go vocabulary, but which I just didn't think of at the time. That is helpful.
That is interesting! In my case (1-2d) it is different.
I would say that LZ's suggestions are remarkably often moves that are in my vocab and much less often the kind of "ear reddening moves" I would expect AI to come up with. Most of my "blind spots" are not moves I'm unable to see but moves I dismiss because I misread what's underneath it or because I have "learned" they are bad (the early 3-3 is the prime example of that, for all of us, and has made it back into our repertoire).
The most instructive lessons from LZ is its relentless quest for sente, playing elsewhere asap and leaving stones or groups in a less stable state than we have been taught, like without a base. As said elsewhere, I have also learnt that attacking should either bring immediate profit in the form of territory, or build a framework with an existing group at the other side.
On a more general level, I'm trying to acquire LZ's language and "see sequences" from frequent analyses. While practicing this, I have realized I see many candidate moves but tend to evaluate those at face value or even convince myself my first choice is the right one, instead of seeing the sequence behind it.
) and, likewise, that many on this forum are also computer competent. I am not: I open the Lizzie read-me and I don't understand what to do with 'example of compiling Leela Zero'. I do not know what config.h is or how to open it in order to compile the CPU-only version of Leela Zero. I read on an old r/cbaduk post that one must be comfortable with cmake/make. I do not know what these things are.