Good go books by amateurs

jlt · Post by **jlt** » Fri May 12, 2023 12:36 am

Yes I did consider the shape you mentioned and quickly concluded that this kills Black. I didn't post all my thoughts, just wanted to say that we don't use brute-force reading but use shortcuts.

That said I'm not excluding that I misread something, I do that all the time.

RobertJasiek · Post by **RobertJasiek** » Fri May 12, 2023 1:06 am

In almost all cases, brute-force is wrong because there are shortcuts and pure techniques application is wrong as insufficient. Tacticsl reading lies in between. Your mistake is refusal to apply it to confirm or refute your quick and dirty analysis.

jlt · Post by **jlt** » Fri May 12, 2023 2:03 am

As I said I did consider variations but didn't post everything.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$. . . . . . . . . . . $$. . . . . O O O O . . $$. . O O O X 3 X X O . $$. . O X O X . X . O . $$. O . X X X X X . O . $$. O 6 . 7 1 5 . 4 O . $$. . . X X 2 X X . O . $$. O . . O O O O O . . $$. . O . . . . . . . . $$ . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

1) As said in my first post, if White doesn't play at

then Black lives with two eyes.
2) If Black doesn't play at

then White will play there at move 3. Black can make one eye in 1 move at one place but needs two moves to make a second eye at each of two different places, so Black is dead.
3) If White doesn't play at

then

will be played there and whatever the move

was, White can't prevent the capture of

which makes a second eye so Black lives with two eyes.
4) If Black doesn't play

there or at

then White can reduce eyespace and Black is dead.
5) If White doesn't play at

then Black will play move 6 there and make two eyes.

So my conclusion is that White can make a seki in gote and not better than that.
I did check each step 1-5 above. However the fact that I check carefully doesn't mean I don't get lost in the tree and miss a variation.

John Fairbairn · Post by **John Fairbairn** » Fri May 12, 2023 3:25 am

In almost all cases, brute-force is wrong because there are shortcuts and pure techniques application is wrong as insufficient. Tacticsl reading lies in between. Your mistake is refusal to apply it to confirm or refute your quick and dirty analysis.

My interpretation of this is that you have, at last, come round to something like the position that most other people have already held. I have not read your books so I can't be sure you haven't stated the above already yourself, but previously, on this forum, you have a given a strong impression to me that you believe in an almost total primacy of tactics and not just something in-between. Similarly, you have misrepresented the views of other people by inserting the word "pure". I don't recall anyone recommending that you only use patterns, shapes or proverbs to solve problems. Indeed, we all know the classic case highlighted by James Davies. The quasi-proverb "the L shape is dead" is fantastically useful, yet many kyu players know that but still can't actually kill the group. They need more practice with reading. Furthermore, James himself points up the fact that the quasi-proverb is just a starting point that needs follow-up examination, because it may have legs, liberties or hanes. That's extra work but it's a helluva lot less than starting by making a list of all possible starting moves and examining each line of the tree branches in turn, i.e. "pure" brute-force.

By adding other inappropriate words you are further misrepresenting the other side's view of techniques, proversb or whatever you want to call them. "Quick and dirty analysis?" "The L-shape is dead" is certainly quick, but dirty? My choice of extra adjective was "fantastically useful." I'll leave it others to decide for themselves which end of the spectrum is more accurate

I also find you are lax in the use of the word "patterns," oddly enough by being too strict in trying to pin the word down. Less mathematically minded people are happy with loose definitions, and, when they need to be more precise, they add extra words. For example, we may get "pattern recognition," and in that particular some people may even add extra words to show what sort of "recognition" they mean. You may remember Bill Spight doing precisely that.

I personally like to think of "pattern understanding" but I don't try to push the phrase because it doesn't seem quite satisfactory even to me. I have tried previously to explain some of my thinking by simply talking about recognising people's faces. However, here. as a discussion point I will elaborate a little on that purely in terms of the position you contributed.

In that position, at first glance, I did not see any significant static "shapes" beyond a vague element of symmetry. But the dynamic "patterns" that I did not so much "see" or "recognise" but "understood" instantly were three, not directly visible but implicit in the "flow" of the stones (i.e. in the suji). They were (1) the long line of points that I knew were potentially long enough to allow a seki, (2) what I and some others call "three eyes" - others may detect the same ideas under the heading of miai, and (3) what I call the bent elbow.

I won't try too hard to explain the bent elbow here because I did that in "Carefree and Innocent Pastime," my translation if the Xuanxuan Qijing, but in jlt's diagram below it would mean imagining a black move at a or d, and if White then gets a move below a or d, a shape can potentially arise where White can create a false eye with a throw-in at b or c. It doesn't work here, which I can decide by simple inspection rather than reading. I tend to think of bent elbows high up in the order of my first thoughts simply because they were so common in the approx. 750 problems of XXQJ, and that the frequency of that (dynamic) pattern has been massively vindicated, for me, in looking at problems elsewhere.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$. . . . . . . . . . . $$. . . . . O O O O . . $$. . O O O X e X X O . $$. . O X O X . X . O . $$. O . X X X X X . O . $$. O a b . 2 . c d O . $$. . . X X . X X . O . $$. O . . O O O O O . . $$. . O . . . . . . . . $$ . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

I think you will also see from those three first guesses what I mean by (three) final shapes, which is rather different from the sort of final shape you cited - a shape that would never, ever occur to me.

Even with those potential final shapes we still have to do "in-between" reading, and in may case I start with "play in the centre of symmetry" and then see if that can be made to tie in with the possible final shapes I have predicted, i.e. trying to link the two ends.

In that process, I did not, in my own mind, ever use the word "tesuji" though I would argue that it is implicit in both "play in the centre of symmetry" and "bent elbow." I may use it, however, if I have to give a final description of the solution, and so for both reasons I would argue strongly against the view that there is no tesuji in this position.

The key component of tesuji is suji, which conveys a sense of flow - here, of course, the flow of the stones. The flow can either have already happened and so formed interesting shapes, just as molten lava has solidified into real rocks, or it can be an existing flow, like molten lava, and the interesting thing is predicting where the flow might lead.

Here, I would argue, we have mainly the former type of solidified flow and there is just a tiny bit of soft, sticky lava left lapping round the edges. In other positions, there can be rivulets of lava, either gushing or trickling hither and yon. But in each case we can detect a flow. I think it was Kajiwara who had another good way of looking at this: the stones go walking.

So we are left with the te (= hand) bit. This word is added to a small number of words in Japanese, mostly common adjectives but also verbs and nouns, to convey an extra nuance of meaning. Some examples are tebaru, tegatai, tebiroi, teatsui, tedori, tebikaeru. Teatsui is very common in go, and tebiroi (from hiroi = wide) also has a noticeable presence. The nuance added is not precise but is in the realms of care, precision, meticulousness or clarity. We actually have almost exactly the same thing in English. When you see a sign in a shop that says "hand-made fudge" you are assumed not to think of something made with dirty fingernails or widely variable quantities, but something made with tender loving care.

So, a tesuji is the part of the flow made with extra meticulousness or care or thought. That explains why it is often explained as the move at the vital point (White 1 here) or a brilliant move, or even something that stands out and so is worthy of a name. That's all OK but really only covers the te bit - you can't forget the suji. My impression is that some people here are forgetting the suji bit. And since good flow is meant to be implicit in every move (at least in a pro game), it is obvious that the frequency of tesujis must be rather high. And since tesujis can often be identified because of the te bit, it follows that are also lots of types - and also that they are learnable and studiable and so recognisable (but not necessarily memorisable as "shapes").

RobertJasiek · Post by **RobertJasiek** » Fri May 12, 2023 3:55 am

John Fairbairn wrote:you have a given a strong impression to me that you believe in an almost total primacy of tactics

Hardly anything could be farther from the truth. You do know that my primacy is generally applicable correct knowledge, especially such that is fast. Where more specific knowledge is inapplicable, effortful skills (endgame calculation, positional judgement, tactical reading etc.) are needed. For local problems, the related skill is tactical reading and incorporates often applicable general shortcuts. For specific cases, specific knowledge can sometimes accelerate much. Of course, nakade knowledge and semeai knowledge have this potential but also...

"the L shape is dead"

...shape knowledge when applicable correctly.

it's a helluva lot less than starting by making a list of all possible starting moves and examining each line of the tree branches in turn, i.e. "pure" brute-force.

You are doing it again: you just can't refrain from painting the brute-force threat as typically demanding a list of all possible starting moves and examining each line of the tree branches in turn, can you? Such is the rare exception. As a start, almost all variations lead to basic shapes, such as nakade, that do not require reading to the ends.

"Quick and dirty analysis?"

Learners must sometimes be awaken by clear, appropriate words.

"The L-shape is dead" is certainly quick, but dirty?

What is the relevance? (I have said nothing of the kind for the L-shape.)

I also find you are lax in the use of the word "patterns," [...]

You are strong at meta-discussion, but is it faster than just doing tactical reading?

John Fairbairn · Post by **John Fairbairn** » Fri May 12, 2023 5:23 am

You are doing it again: you just can't refrain from painting the brute-force threat as typically demanding a list of all possible starting moves and examining each line of the tree branches in turn, can you?

The first few examples that came up when I googled:

1. Brute Force Algorithms are exactly what they sound like – straightforward methods of solving a problem that rely on sheer computing power ...

2. In computer science, brute-force search or exhaustive search, also known as generate and test, is a very general problem-solving technique and algorithmic ...

3. Brute-force search is a general problem-solving technique and algorithmic paradigm that involves generating a list of all the possible candidates

4. A brute force approach is an approach that finds all the possible solutions to find a satisfactory solution to a given problem.

5. A brute force algorithm solves a problem through exhaustion: it goes through all possible choices until a solution is found.

6. The brute force approach is a guaranteed way to find the correct solution by listing all the possible candidate solutions for the problem.

Are we on the same planet?

jlt · Post by **jlt** » Fri May 12, 2023 5:35 am

My impression is that your disagreement is purely semantic, but your methods of problem solving are not so different.

RobertJasiek · Post by **RobertJasiek** » Fri May 12, 2023 6:12 am

Brute-force is not defined by language dictionaries but is the method of informatics on graphs that inspects each possible move / edge in a graph / tree walk. In other data storage domains, the term can have an analogue meaning so that dictionaries feel obliged to confuse us by most-generic definitions. In general, we might say that brute-force is complete exploration.

Javaness2 · Post by **Javaness2** » Fri May 12, 2023 6:14 am

Should we go back on topic? No? Oh please let's go back on topic. I spent some time translating the Romanian text GO-ul in Competitii by Radu Baciu. I found it quite interesting to read, but recognize that is far from perfect. It goes rather too deeply into certain variations, the instruction it offers is probably from a 1960s point of view, and the 'japanese-terminology' is certainly broken. The publishers butchered some of the diagrams, which of course was a crime.

In French language, I think Noguchi Motoki and Dai Junfu have written some very good books. (Le langue des pierres & chuban) see http://praxeo-fr.blogspot.com/p/le-jeu-de-go.html

Javaness2 · Post by **Javaness2** » Fri May 12, 2023 6:17 am

RobertJasiek wrote:Brute-force is not defined by language dictionaries but is the method of informatics on graphs that inspects each possible move / edge in a graph / tree walk. In other data storage domains, the term can have an analogue meaning so that dictionaries feel obliged to confuse us by most-generic definitions. In general, we might say that brute-force is complete exploration.

Perhaps we could say that brute force is uncultured thinking. You haven't learnt such a solution before, nor how to solve it, so you have to start from scratch without and rules to guide you. I don't think that many of us use that approach.

Cassandra · Post by **Cassandra** » Fri May 12, 2023 7:17 am

John Fairbairn wrote:In that position, at first glance, I did not see any significant static "shapes" beyond a vague element of symmetry. But the dynamic "patterns" that I did not so much "see" or "recognise" but "understood" instantly were three, not directly visible but implicit in the "flow" of the stones (i.e. in the suji). They were (1) the long line of points that I knew were potentially long enough to allow a seki, (2) what I and some others call "three eyes" - others may detect the same ideas under the heading of miai, and (3) what I call the bent elbow.

...

$$W
$$. . . . . . . . . . .
$$. . . . . O O O O . .
$$. . O O O X e X X O .
$$. . O X O X . X . O .
$$. O . X X X X X . O .
$$. O a b . 2 . c d O .
$$. . . X X . X X . O .
$$. O . . O O O O O . .
$$. . O . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . .
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$W $$. . . . . . . . . . . $$. . . . . O O O O . . $$. . O O O X e X X O . $$. . O X O X . X . O . $$. O . X X X X X . O . $$. O a b . 2 . c d O . $$. . . X X . X X . O . $$. O . . O O O O O . . $$. . O . . . . . . . . $$ . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Dear John, it is an interesting perspective of yours to see (or focus on) "dynamic" patterns rather than "static" shapes.

I think they are the two sides of the same coin that can ONLY be considered TOGETHER, because "pattern" = "shape" + "moves", isn't it?
(( My "moves" may be the same as your "flow of the stones". ))

In my understanding of the "static" shapes, we can identify (among others, expecially your "bent elbows" aka "potential false eyes") ...

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$. . . . . . . . . . . $$. . . . . O O O O . . $$. . O O O X . X X O . $$. . O X O X C X . O . $$. O . X X X X X . O . $$. O . C C . C C . O . $$. . . X X . X X . O . $$. O . . O O O O O . . $$. . O . . . . . . . . $$ . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

... three (potential) eyes and ...

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$. . . . . . . . . . . $$. . . . . O O O O . . $$. . O O O X . X X O . $$. . O X O X . X . O . $$. O . X X X X X . O . $$. O . . M M M . . O . $$. . . X X . X X . O . $$. O . . O O O O O . . $$. . O . . . . . . . . $$ . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

... a (potential) three-point nakade.

One (for me) important aspect, which I assume Robert's rejection of is based on its poor graspability / objectifiability, is already existing knowledge as well as already solved (especially simpler) problems as a decisive basis of the current reading.

Probably you have already solved problems of the following types:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$ Black to move $$. . . . . . . . . . . $$. . O O O O O O O O . $$. . O X O X . X . O . $$. O . X X X X X . O . $$. O . . . W . . . O . $$. . . X X X X X . O . $$. O . . O O O O O . . $$. . O . . . . . . . . $$ . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

==> Black has only one eye, so he can only hope on expanding his eye space.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$ White to move $$. . . . . . . . . . . $$. . O O O O O O O O . $$. . O X O X . X . O . $$. O . X X X X X M O . $$. O . . . X . M . O . $$. . . X X O 3 3 M O . $$. O . . O O O O O . . $$. . O . . . . . . . . $$ . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

==> Black's two-stone group in the lower right has only three liberties, so Black's group will fall prey to a false eye at the right.

After having solved a sufficient amount of easier problems (i.e. "reduced" versions of the problem in question), you KNOW these "shapes" / "patterns" instinctively. There is no longer any need to solve them all over again.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$. . . . . . . . . . . $$. . . . . O O O O . . $$. . O O O X X X X O . $$. . O X O X . X . O . $$. O . X X X X X . O . $$. O . . . 3 . . . O . $$. . . X X 1 X X . O . $$. O . . O O O O O . . $$. . O . . . . . . . . $$ . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Nor is it necessary to "prove" that White can kill Black's group here with two moves in a row.

John Fairbairn · Post by **John Fairbairn** » Fri May 12, 2023 9:45 am

Dear John, it is an interesting perspective of yours to see (or focus on) "dynamic" patterns rather than "static" shapes.

Insofar as it is interesting, I can't take any credit for it. I am just trying to convey the ideas behind the Japanese terms. I have harped on this over the years, and if I have it to put all in a single sentence, I usually sum it up as "katachi - static, suji is dynamic; katachi + suji = haengma."

It took a VERY long time before I got traction with the suggestion that thickness wasn't really what most western players though it was (i.e. influence) and I honestly don't think I've made any noticeable headway with suji.

One of my abiding interests has always been "how other people think." I don't study this in any scientific way - partly because I haven't got the scientific background to make sense of the literature. But I do dabble often, as a dilettante, and my bedtime reading at the moment is book on how the combination of neuroscience and big data explains how and why plots and characterisations work in novels. There have been surprises: many old theories have been shot down, whereas Christopher Booker's theory of 7 plot types has been vindicated.

Now, because of my fascination with how others think, I have often puzzled over what I regard as a western go phenomenon, namely why so many people reject what Japanese pros say about studying and improving. Robert is famous for declaring someone was "just a Japanese 9-dan", but actually he's just one of a long line of people who treat the Japanese pros with contumely. I know this because I've heard it from the Japanese side and I've observed it myself. I have run through various possible explanations. One, in the early days when I started go, was possible prejudice because of the war. I came across this a lot as a young journalist when I had to interview British people given medals in connection with their war service in the Far East. I had never before come across such lingering, intense hate and it made a chilling impression on me. It was understandable, mind you. I had to talk to one woman who lost her fiance in a Japanese POW camp when he was injected with worms. Unit 731, no doubt. But a lot of time has passed since then and such strong feelings are now rare.

Another possible explanation at the time was the dearth of go literature in English, but again a lot of water has since passed under the bridge, and I can't see that as the main problem, though the lingering effects of things like yose = endgame do still plague us, in my view.

I pondered much on the possibility that educational systems have changed and I'm adrift. I do actually think that's true to some degree, but one of my daughters works in a school and has convinced me that I'm on the wrong track there.

The latest conclusion I have reached (very tentatively, though) is that very many (I'd be more honest of I said too many

) western players are of a mathematical or scientific background, and they are used to challenging theories. Which is fine if you've got something else to replace them, but we haven't in western go, have we? Allied to that way of thinking, I believe is the old "Sword and Chrysanthemum" theory. This result from highly practical research by the Americans to help them in the Pacific War. They wanted to know if there were differences between Japanese and American thinking. The conclusion was that the Japanese were synthesists and so were good at copying and making things work. Americans were analysts and so were good at producing science PhDs and pulling the legs off spiders. Most things exist on a carousel and after a while this theory was given an early version of the "cancel" treatment ("we are all humans so we are all the same"), but it seems to be making a bit of a comeback at the moment. And I happen to think (again, tentatively) that it explains more than few things in western go. And that includes ignoring advice from Japanese pros.

I think they are the two sides of the same coin that can ONLY be considered TOGETHER, because "pattern" = "shape" + "moves", isn't it?
(( My "moves" may be the same as your "flow of the stones". ))

I'd say yes so long as you mean "making moves". To dilate on that, I think it is important to understand that an empty triangle is always bad shape, but it can be good suji. And if you don't understand that, you haven't studied go enough. By that I mean you haven't thought about it, as opposed to just reading about it. If you think about an empty triangle as bad shape, all your really think about are the three stones. But of you think about it as bad suji, you have to think about all the other stones. Once you do that, you are in the realms of dynamic patterns. Which in turn means it's not about the stones, it's about the connections between them - the flow. So it's not the stone shapes you are trying to get into your brain, it's the flows.

In a sense, therefore, we are talking about muscle memory (misnamed though that is). Take a look at this page: https://www.scottish-country-dancing-di ... /reel.html for a move which is taught to Scottish country dance beginners and which they pick up in less then ten seconds. There's no fancy footwork. It's just walking in a figure of 8 and all you have to learn is to whether to go left or right (that's actually quite hard: "No, no, the other left...). I can barely imagine how anyone could ever dream of trying to learn a reel from that page. But, more than that, it is totally beyond me to imagine why anyone would want to write a page like that. That's an inadequacy on my part, of course, because there are lots and lots of similar pages and they must appeal to somebody.

But to whom? And I think we have a similar situation in western go, whichis why I feel at a loss.

In my understanding of the "static" shapes, we can identify (among others, expecially your "bent elbows" aka "potential false eyes") ...

Not really. That's part of it, of course, but bent elbow is a label for a dynamic sequence (very short but still dynamic - two moves). It it is that dynamic element that makes it different from all other "potential false eye" situations. The tombstone tesuji is not a bent elbow.

RobertJasiek · Post by **RobertJasiek** » Fri May 12, 2023 10:42 am

John, you mention my name in the same paragraph as war prejudice. Do the Terms of Service allow me to disclaim no such connection?

You doubt that Eastern go theory can be replaced be Western go theory because, as you have stated indirectly by what you have not read or understood carefully, you have not read the related Western texts having (mostly, in parts fully) replaced or far surpassed the former (unless universally applicable knowledge persists in both, such as nakade).

"why so many people reject what Japanese pros say about studying and improving"

You continue to write about me, and the implication might be that I would reject what they say entirely. I do not. I think I am the one with the most frequent statements of their important recommendations to study life+death and endgame calculation as keys to improving. When they study a particular example by tactical reading, they are usually correct and demostrate their superior reading skill. I accept the good and reject the bad. When many of them teach by example, this method of teaching is bad for me so I reject it. When they urge to practice life+death problem by tactical reading, there were times when I was too lazy to abide but their advice was good and now I do better by following it. When they teach overcome traditional go theory, I reject or ignore it because it is very inferior to what I use and have often developed myself. If, however, they reveal some theory I have been missing and overlooked, I welcome the (albeit rare) input.

Go theory of the past is to be rejected and some Koreans and Chinese have also recognised limitations of some Japanese theory as hopelessly outdated. It is not just a Western thing.

Cassandra · Post by **Cassandra** » Fri May 12, 2023 12:02 pm

John Fairbairn wrote:To dilate on that, I think it is important to understand that an empty triangle is always bad shape, but it can be good suji. And if you don't understand that, you haven't studied go enough. By that I mean you haven't thought about it, as opposed to just reading about it. If you think about an empty triangle as bad shape, all your really think about are the three stones. But of you think about it as bad suji, you have to think about all the other stones. Once you do that, you are in the realms of dynamic patterns. Which in turn means it's not about the stones, it's about the connections between them - the flow. So it's not the stone shapes you are trying to get into your brain, it's the flows.

Thank you, John, for your detailed and interesting reply.

For interest's sake, I took a look at what is written about "guzumi" in the Go Encyclopaedia 囲碁百科辞典 of 1983.

The first diagram (always showing the type of move) ...

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$B $$ ----------------+ $$ . . . . . . . . | $$ . . . . . . . . | $$ . . . . X X . . | $$ . . . . , O . . | $$ . . . X X O . . | $$ . . 1 O O . . . | $$ . . . 2 . . . . | $$ . . . . X . . . | $$ . . . . . . . . | $$ . . . . , . . . |[/go]

... contains a typical example of a guzumi.

This is followed by two more example diagrams with guzumi ...

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$B $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . X . . O . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . O X 1 . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$B $$ | . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . , . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . $$ | . . X . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . $$ | . . O . . . . . $$ | . . . O . . . . $$ | . O 1 X . . . . $$ | . . X . . X . . $$ | . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . $$ +-----------------[/go]

... (B1).

The final sentence of the explanation is

いかにも感じが出ていることばといえる。

the AI-translation of which reads "It can be said that this is a word with a lot of feeling."

I am sure that there is a lot of additional Japanese written between these words.
Do you have an idea what the hidden meaning could be?
Perhaps "feeling" refers to the particular effect of the move (poor, brilliant, brilliant)?

John Fairbairn · Post by **John Fairbairn** » Fri May 12, 2023 12:19 pm

John, you mention my name in the same paragraph as war prejudice. Do the Terms of Service allow me to disclaim no such connection?

Oh, you don't have to do that because I absolve you entirely of any connection. I don't think any such connection was implied, but, if it was, it was inadvertent and I apologise.

You are right that I haven't read most of the western texts, but I feel able to judge them to some degree by their lack of widespread effect and from comments from people who have read them.

But by a similar token, you (like many other western writers) have not read most of the Japanese texts, and so I don't feel you are wise to make such unequivocal and far-reaching statements about rejecting what you dislike in them. I can accept that their method of teaching may be bad for you personally, but that doesn't make it bad for everyone - including the very many thousands of people who have learnt very good go in Japan over the centuries.

You are also right to say that Korean and Chinese pros have said negative things about Japanese go, but I think you'll find most of it is to do with how go is organised or taught (at the top (level), and any criticisms of their style of play is more to do with the psychological approach rather than pure theory (e.g. too cautious an approach, too much emphasis on the fuseki). And Koreans have sometimes criticised Chinese go, and vice versa.

Life In 19x19

Good go books by amateurs

Re: Good go books by amateurs

Re: Good go books by amateurs

Re: Good go books by amateurs

Re: Good go books by amateurs

Re: Good go books by amateurs

Re: Good go books by amateurs

Re: Good go books by amateurs

Re: Good go books by amateurs

Re: Good go books by amateurs

Re: Good go books by amateurs

Re: Good go books by amateurs

Re: Good go books by amateurs

Re: Good go books by amateurs

Re: Good go books by amateurs

Re: Good go books by amateurs