Post your ladders!

[Shaddy]

I can read ladders out, but a lot of times my reading will just do a brain-fart and it'll look good no matter how many times I check it, but then I trace over the board and it breaks. It's just for those rare (but possible) cases where that happens and no matter how much reading practice I get, it won't go away. I'm just prone to stupid mistakes like that. I figure there's no reason to throw away a game over a silly misread I can avoid so easily, so I really don't see a reason not to make sure (other than the fact that it might disturb my opponent, and even pros are known to fiddle with the stones on the board, so..)

[gaius]

Everybody's prone to silly mistakes. That's why you should re-read

But finger-tracing is just as annoying as hovering a stone over the board to see how it would look in that spot... I might be wrong, but I would not be surprised if common tournament rules actually disallow this kind of thing, just like checking out sequences on your PDA is not allowed. If not, then surely the unwritten laws of tournament etiquette disallow it, no?

[Horibe]

I can read ladders out, but a lot of times my reading will just do a brain-fart and it'll look good no matter how many times I check it, but then I trace over the board and it breaks. It's just for those rare (but possible) cases where that happens and no matter how much reading practice I get, it won't go away. I'm just prone to stupid mistakes like that. I figure there's no reason to throw away a game over a silly misread I can avoid so easily, so I really don't see a reason not to make sure (other than the fact that it might disturb my opponent, and even pros are known to fiddle with the stones on the board, so..)

Why not make special gloves, one black and one white with same color gostones glued to your knuckles. Then you can put your hands on the board all the time and read out 10 moves ahead all day long.

I must say I applaud the sentiment here, there is no reason not to do this "other than the fact it might disturb my opponent"

To me - that would be the first reason not to do something...

[Phelan]

Depends on how the finger tracing is done, I'd say. I've seen an opponent finger trace from his place and only noticed it because his finger was waggling.

[Shaddy]

I do it somewhat above the board. Honestly.. I would rather be rude in this way and play a proper game than be polite, misread a ladder, and be forced to resign. I feel it's rude even to make a mistake like that, since I am disrespecting my opponent by not playing as well as I can.

[Horibe]

I do it somewhat above the board. Honestly.. I would rather be rude in this way and play a proper game than be polite, misread a ladder, and be forced to resign. I feel it's rude even to make a mistake like that, since I am disrespecting my opponent by not playing as well as I can.

While I agree that it is rude not to do your best, your best is what you can do, without a book, without playing out variations, without running your finger across the board.

I have never seen a dan player do this in a tournament. In fact I have never seen anyone do it. Plenty of people angle their head and stare down the zigzag of lines - but they keep their fingers to themselves.

The AGA rules (or perhaps the Tournament regulations) are clear that you cannot obscure your opponent's view of the board for anything other than the relatively decisive placement of the stone.

You make these mistakes because you rely on this crutch. This is like KGS players who do not fill the dame. In a tournament, something dies - if they got into the practice of filling the dame they would be better about seeing shortage of liberties.

Skills are only gained if you practice them. And your version of "not being rude" by making a mistake is only a hair away from "It would ruin this game if I mess up this joseki - its clearly the right joseki and way we both want this game to develop - I am going to go to the bathroom and look it up on my phone"

It might be a thick, healthy hair, full of body, but it follows the same logic.

[Horibe]

Supplement - AGA Tournament Regulations

V. Player Conduct and Etiquette.

Go is a game steeped in tradition, courtesy and respect for one's opponent. During tournament play, a player shall generally conduct him/herself with a minimum of behavior that is disruptive or irritating to other players.

F. Access. A player may not prevent his/her opponent's access to, or sight of the board, the stones on the board, the clock, and the prisoners...under any circumstances.

VI B. 2. A stone must be placed on an intersection with a minimum of adjustment and a minimum of time being touched by the player. Players are specifically enjoined to remember the spirit of V. F. when playing a stone.

----------------------------------------------------------------

The regulations properly ask us to respect our opponent, not by making no mistakes, but by not doing things that annoy them. The rules above prohibit tracing ladders out with your finger. I find it hard to believe logic will allow much disagreement here. If you can do ladders, then you can place your fingers on the board reading EVERY situation. It is extremely distracting, annoying. It is a crutch and very close to a cheat.

[Shaddy]

I do it somewhat above the board. Honestly.. I would rather be rude in this way and play a proper game than be polite, misread a ladder, and be forced to resign. I feel it's rude even to make a mistake like that, since I am disrespecting my opponent by not playing as well as I can.

While I agree that it is rude not to do your best, your best is what you can do, without a book, without playing out variations, without running your finger across the board.

Suppose I am about to place a stone, and as I'm about to lay it down I notice a variation that I did not notice before I had picked it up. If I do not play the stone where I was about to play it, have I cheated?

I have never seen a dan player do this in a tournament. In fact I have never seen anyone do it. Plenty of people angle their head and stare down the zigzag of lines - but they keep their fingers to themselves.

The AGA rules (or perhaps the Tournament regulations) are clear that you cannot obscure your opponent's view of the board for anything other than the relatively decisive placement of the stone.

You make these mistakes because you rely on this crutch. This is like KGS players who do not fill the dame. In a tournament, something dies - if they got into the practice of filling the dame they would be better about seeing shortage of liberties.

It's not as if I don't read ladders out before I do this. I do it several times, and then I do this to be absolutely certain. I've been burned by missing ladders quite a few times and it never sinks in- so while it does, I will do this.

Skills are only gained if you practice them. And your version of "not being rude" by making a mistake is only a hair away from "It would ruin this game if I mess up this joseki - its clearly the right joseki and way we both want this game to develop - I am going to go to the bathroom and look it up on my phone"

It might be a thick, healthy hair, full of body, but it follows the same logic.

There's quite a difference between a joseki and a ladder. A joseki is a higher-level construct- it takes a lot of reading and good judgment to find the right path, and for many of us, if we did not memorise joseki from a book or learn them from someone else, would not know how to play most of our joseki. A ladder is completely rote, there's almost no thought involved in reading it out. I do practice reading them- however, making small, silly mistakes like this is an unfortunate habit of mine, and it happens no matter what I'm doing or how much I practice it (like arithmetic, which I've done continuously since I was six or whatever- often I'll do some little calculation like adding or multiplying wrong and it'll send everything to hell) so it's a crap choice: either I can rely on my reading and take loss after loss due to a 25k error, or I can be rude and rid of the uncertainty.

edit:
It is alright, then, if I do not put my fingers on the board, but use them to trace the ladder from my point of view? This is not against the rules, but is it still close to a cheat?

[Horibe]

Suppose I am about to place a stone, and as I'm about to lay it down I notice a variation that I did not notice before I had picked it up. If I do not play the stone where I was about to play it, have I cheated?

There's quite a difference between a joseki and a ladder. A joseki is a higher-level construct- it takes a lot of reading and good judgment to find the right path, and for many of us, if we did not memorise joseki from a book or learn them from someone else, would not know how to play most of our joseki. A ladder is completely rote, there's almost no thought involved in reading it out.

I would have let this drop, but you ask a question.

The answer is no, you have not cheated, if I understand the question. On one occaision, you begin to place a stone, but before it touches the board, you change your mind. That is not ideal, but it is absolutely fine, and happens all the time.

If the stone touches the board, and you then decide to change, you have a problem. This is a violation, I would not say cheating, but a violation. Many players would call a TD and you would be instructed not to do it again, and your game would be monitored. If your hand leaves the stone, it is played.

I am going to drop it, since we seem to be the only ones who care strongly about this. I am pretty confident that the silent are on my side, but you never know. I have no idea how many face to face tournaments you have played in, but if you did this to someone, and they did not complain, then your opponent was a better person than me.

"There is no thought in reading it out" I suggest you try some Nakayama ladder problems if you think this is so. But limber up your finger before you do.

[Laman]

i wouldn't see so big issue in tracing the ladder by a finger. first, it is not cheating (as compared to checking josekis), because your opponent see what you do - and as was already said, it is against the rules, so if he feels harmed by your practice, he can complain and should win the dispute.

besides that, unless someone would do it all the time, it would probably cheer me up, seeing that my opponent can't even read a simple ladder

to add something also to the original topic of the thread, at my last tournament i happened to see this ladder (sorry, the picture is little too big to be attached with the img tag). both players SDKs, i was playing at the board #7

EDIT: original link broken, i uploaded the photo here

[odnihs]

I don't see anything wrong with reading out a ladder with your finger...as long as you're just doing it in front of you and not physically hovering an inch above the board zigzagging your finger to read the ladder. I usually either do a big zigzag with my head, or hold my finger out in front of me to draw a zigzag in the air.

As for comparing ladders to josekis, going to the bathroom to look up a joseki is Completely different from reading out a ladder on the board, since in the ladder case, the player is simply visualizing the stones on the board with his finger, while in the joseki case the player is actually looking up a sequence that he or she wouldn't have known otherwise.

In any case, I see no shame in having to use a visualization to read out ladders, as long as it isn't disturbing the opponent much.

[jts]

Kageyama says something snarky about people who read out ladders with their fingers (=me) that struck a chord with me. What I took away from it is that tracing out ladders with your finger is on the same plane as "solving" tsumego online by randomly clicking away until you find something that works. In both cases you'll find the answer eventually, but your reading will remain weak.

I still occasionally brute-force GoChild problems, but I'm trying to do it mentally.

For reference:

Ladders

Still on ladders? Ridiculous! Even looking at this page is beneath me.

Yes, but even if you feel you are being cheated, read on a little further. Don't forget fundamentals. Our study begins with ladders.

[Dia. 1] The outcome of this game hangs on whether or not Black can capture that white stone in the ladder that starts with . Many amateurs, sometimes even dan-ranked amateurs, are apt to become impatient when confronted with long ladders like this and resort to stooping down and sighting diagonally or running their fingers zig-zag across the board, or in extreme cases to arguing their opponents into submission verbally. All this I find a bit silly.

When the ladder becomes slightly difficult like this, there is a widespread tendency to give up, and wonder if there is not something like a triangle theorem, some mechanism one can apply to get the answer instantly. If you want to create such a thing it is not much trouble to do so, but having it will only prove destructive to your game. Ladders should be the school that teaches you to read patiently, move by move - black, white, black, white, black, white - which is the only way.

Some will say, "Phooey, that much I know already; it's just that it's too much bother to actually do it." Others will say, "Look, I'm still weak at the game; I can't do anything difficult like reading." So much for these lazy students, let them do as they please. They are not going to get anywhere. They need to be grabbed by the scruff of the neck and have some sense knocked into them.

And more:

Read it again. Anyone whose eyes start to prickle or who gets a headache has a bad case of astigmatism and should see an optometrist at once.

[pepi]

$$
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . X X X . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X O O X O X . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O X O O X . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . O O . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . O O . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X X . X . O . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . O , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O B X . . . , . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . X X X O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . X X X . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X O O X O X . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O X O O X . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . O O . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . O O . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X X . X . O . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . O , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O B X . . . , . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . X X X O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

I think that's the coolest ladder that appeared in all my games so far. Nothing too fancy, still the feeling was awesome

[xed_over]

I think that's the coolest ladder that appeared in all my games so far. Nothing too fancy, still the feeling was awesome

for you? or the other guy?

[pepi]

For me, my opponent played the marked black stone and got captured. The feeling is great because one (or at least I) seldom get to see an actual ladder being played out in a game of mine - that usually means someone has made a reading mistake and the game is about to end soon.

It's like realizing "OK, so those things ladders that I keep thinking about and watching for really do exist - you're looking at one right now".