Why I quit watching sandbagger series on youtube

[Knotwilg]

/rant on

I think Uberdude was the first to point out that sandbagging seems to be popular on youtube so he allowed himself to sandbag for 1 or 2 vids and explore his Leela Opening Gospel, be it still somewhat awkwardly. I was very forgiving at the time for any sandbagging for educational purposes but I've grown rather critical of it, whether it's to rehearse "basics", or "ranking up" or "overexplaining", for 3 reasons.

1) The first and still the biggest problem I have with this type of content creation is that there's a 3rd party involved, besides teacher and students: the innocent opponent, who is investing time and energy into what they believe is an honest game of go, only to be used as cannon fodder for the video. Everyone, including the youtube teachers, is hoping the opponent doesn't use AI. The net effect of sandbagging on the opponent is exactly the same: the protagonist is much stronger than the guise he's wearing. Doesn't matter if it's pure human skill or boosted by AI. The poor antagonist never got a chance to win this game, at their level, in the first place.

The argument for not informing the opponent seems to be a) it will be even more difficult to find an opponent (which confirms the factor of deceit) b) they will not use their usual game at their level (say 2k) but take the 6d force into account (well, it was never a normal 2k game to start with, so this argument is also voided).

2) The next party to be deceived is the viewer. They are watching (often selected) victories of a 6d against players of their own lower level, identifying with the stronger player (while they're akin to the weaker), enjoying the bullying and victimizing that's going on. The identification makes them think it could just as easily have been them bantering their way to an easy win, if only they adhered to basic principles, or otherwise magically possessed 6d powers. The worst message they get fed subliminally is that all of this can be achieved without reading, because not much reading seems to be involved or it is even explicitly denounced. The contrary is true: every good go game deserves a good deal of reading, not all the time but definitely at key moments. If 6 dans don't appear to need reading to beat a 2k, it's because their intuition and overall knowledge is far superior. They can prune variations early, they know the joseki by heart, they can judge when a weakish group can be left behind and when to sacrifice or not, when under effective attack.

6 dans became 6 dan by studying, reading and playing honest games against opponents of equal strength. Not by sandbagging.

3) Last but not least, I want to absolve the sandbagging 6 dan youtubers: it's us, the viewers, who deceive them into thinking this is the content we need. The Youtube algorithm tells them this kind of content attracts more views, so they make more of it, instead of the educational gold they could and have been providing outside the sandbagging series.

So let's just stop watching these unethical, deceptive and overall not very valuable content.

/rant off

[Javaness2]

I wonder, if they looked for opponents in an honest and open manner, would they (the content creators) find them just as easily? Or would they simply end up being sandbagged by somebody who felt that it might be fun to make a joke on them.

[Boidhre]

I found Haylee's series very helpful long ago. Mainly because she used the extra time to talk that she would have against a weaker opponent to explain the reasoning behind her moves better and give feedback on her opponents moves. She was also playing "honestly" rather than in some contrived way. The sandbagging series will allow for a lot of time for the stronger player and allow them to choose paths for pedagogical reasons, this can be good. They can also just beat up the weaker opponent in a way where the take home message is "If you're playing weaker opponents evenly you can simply outplay them, who'd a thunk it!" without much transferable knowledge being discussed.

[Knotwilg]

I found Haylee's series very helpful long ago. Mainly because she used the extra time to talk that she would have against a weaker opponent to explain the reasoning behind her moves better and give feedback on her opponents moves. She was also playing "honestly" rather than in some contrived way. The sandbagging series will allow for a lot of time for the stronger player and allow them to choose paths for pedagogical reasons, this can be good. They can also just beat up the weaker opponent in a way where the take home message is "If you're playing weaker opponents evenly you can simply outplay them, who'd a thunk it!" without much transferable knowledge being discussed.

I think all authors of sandbagging series are intentionally honest and want to transfer an educational message. I just have my doubts about the narrative and their ability to "unthink" the knowledge and capability built up so far to emulate the average 2k or whatever the target rank is.

An alternative which I'd like to see is Player 1 - willingly and knowingly opponent, vs Player 2 - 2k with enhanced brain of teacher, who will remind the educational message in focus, and then see how much benefit P2 gets out of that.

[Boidhre]

I think all authors of sandbagging series are intentionally honest and want to transfer an educational message. I just have my doubts about the narrative and their ability to "unthink" the knowledge and capability built up so far to emulate the average 2k or whatever the target rank is.

An alternative which I'd like to see is Player 1 - willingly and knowingly opponent, vs Player 2 - 2k with enhanced brain of teacher, who will remind the educational message in focus, and then see how much benefit P2 gets out of that.

I don't think there's any dishonesty or anything like that more the end result can vary substantially between different creators. If a 6d is playing a 2k I suspect it's more difficult to find good "teachable moments" than if the 6d is playing a 3d as the solutions found against the 2k may not be that useful for someone that level as they presume too much reading/judgement which is a difficult thing to correct for. Against 3d or 4d the solutions should be closer to what's intelligible at that level naturally.

I don't know though, I do agree mostly with what you're saying. I've found high dan vs kyu games to be deeply uninteresting usually.

[bernds]

I think the attitude on display also matters. I rather enjoy Daniel Naroditsky's current series on the chess side of things, since that's a genuinely strong player trying to make educational content, and speaking well of his opponents. I'm less fond of certain Go streamers who aren't all that strong and talk trash about the people they are destroying.
Having tried streaming Go myself I understand the temptation to sandbag - you do lose a few stones when you focus on talking instead of only on playing.

[Knotwilg]

I wonder, if they looked for opponents in an honest and open manner, would they (the content creators) find them just as easily? Or would they simply end up being sandbagged by somebody who felt that it might be fun to make a joke on them.

No, they need to hide behind changing nick names and openly fear their identity and purpose might be revealed, since that would ruin their objective. They are not so concerned with ruining the experience for the opponent.

[mhlepore]

Hmmmm a lot of food for thought here.

I don't have a good rebuttal for the notion that the weaker player is a victim. However, in the grand scale of injustices, this one does seem low on the list.
[*] It isn't an official tournament game.
[*] It is only one game, and thus unlikely to impact your server rank.
[*] If you play enough online, you will lose lots of games for lots of reasons, and thus won't have your week ruined by one particular game.

I admit this is one of my favorite ways to consumer Go content. And I don't feel mislead into thinking that reading is unimportant, although pure brute force reading is probably where I am weakest, so maybe I have a blind spot here.

But Knotwilg's post now has me wanting a less deceptive way to obtain the same content.

[gennan]

I think videos of teaching games where a youtuber plays a subscriber are more educational than videos of them sandbagging.
Some youtubers do this and I'd like to encourage them to keep doing this.

But educational videos are probably not as entertaining, so they probably get less views and thus less income. That's just how it is for all the media, I guess. Entertainment will draw many more viewers than educational content.

[Javaness2]

But Knotwilg's post now has me wanting a less deceptive way to obtain the same content.

I would like them to have a try at producing the same content, but instead asking for volunteers to play against.

[Knotwilg]

[*] It is only one game, and thus unlikely to impact your server rank.

In the grand scheme of things and with only a few youtubers around doing sandbagger series, indeed what is one game. But the same is true for an opponent using AI: if someone does that to you, what's one game.

If something (only) becomes problematic if everybody does it, I think it's problematic in itself.

After reading the comments, I can agree that the first objection is the bigger one. I can't deny anyone to take some educational value out of a high dan destroying a kyu, if such a game is played in mutual acknowledgment.

[CDavis7M]

From what I have seem, sandbagging and teaching "basics" is just a farce. It is that player's dan-level reading and positional judgment that wins the games.

"Oh, the weaker player left one defect? I'm just going to read 20 moves ahead and kill this entire group using basics."

"See how you can win by simply playing suboptimal "basic" moves! But look past my advanced positional judgment that enables me to find the best area to play and my superior reading skills that let me know if an area is urgent or not."

Moreover, it's fraud. It doesn't matter if there is insignificant harm. Fraud is wrong and this is the case in every industry and every civilized country.

[hailthorn011]

Hmmmm a lot of food for thought here.

I don't have a good rebuttal for the notion that the weaker player is a victim. However, in the grand scale of injustices, this one does seem low on the list.
[*] It isn't an official tournament game.
[*] It is only one game, and thus unlikely to impact your server rank.
[*] If you play enough online, you will lose lots of games for lots of reasons, and thus won't have your week ruined by one particular game.

I admit this is one of my favorite ways to consumer Go content. And I don't feel mislead into thinking that reading is unimportant, although pure brute force reading is probably where I am weakest, so maybe I have a blind spot here.

But Knotwilg's post now has me wanting a less deceptive way to obtain the same content.

Depends. A game against a perceived rival can prove crushing if it ends up being lopsided. Especially if they're already on a losing streak. And that can certainly have emotional ramifications.

[Knotwilg]

From what I have seem, sandbagging and teaching "basics" is just a farce. It is that player's dan-level reading and positional judgment that wins the games.

"Oh, the weaker player left one defect? I'm just going to read 20 moves ahead and kill this entire group using basics."

"See how you can win by simply playing suboptimal "basic" moves! But look past my advanced positional judgment that enables me to find the best area to play and my superior reading skills that let me know if an area is urgent or not."

To be fair, I do think these tubers read less deeply than they would in even games. But deep reading is just one aspect. There's also move selection, early pruning and like you said positional judgment. And these are hard to unthink.

Basically agree that it's mostly a fraud, even if the educational message is intentionally honest and the provided fundamentals are sound.

[joachim]

In these kind of series I always thought it is not so much the "fault" of the streamers, but a "feature" of the servers they are playing on. The server only allow you to register at i.e. 3d and forces you to fight your way up to your real strength.

So pairings like this must be common on this servers.