Modern games, ancient games, or what's in-between?

[Solomon]

Do you enjoy studying games from a particular era? I think the majority prefer studying modern games of Gu Li, Lee Sedol, Park Junghwan, Kang Dongyun, etc., but I do know a handful of Go players who enjoy studying games from the 70s-80s when Cho Hunhyun, Nie Weiping, Ma Xiaochun, Cho Chikun, Kobayashi Koichi, etc. were the dominant players in the day. And of course there's the group of players who study the older games of Shusaku, Dosaku, Shuwa, etc., and those that enjoy the pioneering games of Seigen, Kitani, Hosai, etc. who played between the time periods of the two.

As for myself, I'm a fan of the modern games because it's very interesting to me when I see commentary compare and contrast moves played today versus moves played long ago. There also tends to be more content available for study regarding the modern games as well.

It's worth noting that I don't prefer the modern games because I sense anything *different* from the way modern players play than the way players from a certain era played; I think a good majority of those who claim they can sense the difference between a 2010 player's way of play and an 1930 player's way of play is BSing; later I'll do an experiment on this remark to see whether my claim holds ground or not.

[Kirby]

I like studying games by particular people more than by particular areas. However, many of the pros that I'm a fan of are still alive, so this results in me studying mostly modern games. I also like reading pro games that are in commentated in go magazines, so this also results in modern game study. I sometimes use the random feature on SmartGo Pro, which results in my looking at games from other eras, as well, but mostly I look at modern games, probably.

[pasky]

It never occured to me to focus only on a single era when studying games. The first games I have studied were my favorite games from Hikaru no Go - these are mostly from the 70s, 80s, 90s I think - this seemed obvious to me, I have enjoyed watching them in HnG and wanted to understand them more. I memorized my first game when I was something like 12k KGS but I think it's great idea to do at least one or two at that point already since it's great way to remember various shapes.

Then, I had a thing for ancient Chinese games (the _very_ ancient ones), studying them at the day-break in front of a pretty Go set had some very special feeling of sharing something with the original players across (literally) millenia by replaying their moves.

Then, I started replaying games of Go Seigen and I still think that collection is something absolutely unique by its quality, complexity _and_ sheer quantity of games - I think most serious students will end up going through these games in detail several times, as it has been noted often.

Then, I switched to Lee Sedol games to level up my fighting strategy skills, and also admittedly get some modern fuseki ideas. But I think for non-top-level amateurs, the age of joseki does not matter in the slightest - the strategic ideas and shapes stay the same.

Before I stopped having time for replaying games altogether, I was in the process of replaying the games of Shusaku, mainly because of the excellent and detailed commentaries in the Invincible (and because I have that book in paper form). But also, I find the games and strategic ideas within truly beautiful (and usually much easier to grasp than in the case of Go Seigen).

Overally, I think the age of the games does not matter (at least for most amateurs) - be it the game for gold-petalled bowls or latest Fujitsu cup showdowns, it can always be inspiring and educational. Choose the games to study that inspire you, that you enjoy replaying and that match your goals for studying them.

[Solomon]

Then, I switched to Lee Sedol games to level up my fighting strategy skills...

I think studying Lee Sedol games can cause the reverse effect . Recently, after his return, his games seem somewhat tame but in his earlier games, some of those fights are just incomprehensible...even with commentary, at times I felt like an 8-year-old trying to understand quantum physics.

[IAmNotWhoYouThinkIAm]

I don't like games from the last 30 years. They don't match my style (I learned to play a long time ago) and I don't really study any more so if I play through a game it is for enjoyment and, naturally, I get greater enjoyment from games which have a style I am comfortable with. I enjoy playing through Edo games but mostly prefer games from the middle of the 20th century.

[schultz]

I really haven't studied enough pro games to follow any specific era. I've memorized a couple of games (Go Seigen - game of the century, and Shusaku - ear reddening game), but mostly because those really interested me, not based on the era. I've also been really tempted to by Invincible so I guess that would put me into that era, but again mostly just interested because of all the good things I've heard about that book and Shusaku's style, rather than when it's from.

I also don't really follow any current pros, so haven't been focused on this new era much.

[palapiku]

I assume that modern Go is better (closer to perfect play) than ancient Go, and so better to study. Humanity's Go strength evolves through elimination of classes of mistakes from professional play.

[Solomon]

I assume that modern Go is better (closer to perfect play) than ancient Go, and so better to study. Humanity's Go strength evolves through elimination of classes of mistakes from professional play.

The thing is, for us amateurs I don't think the difference is so meaningful. A lot of research that's been done over the past hundred years has only been to find moves that accommodate for the change in komi and to find new and revised fuseki/joseki where the difference is only a very small amount of points.

[Andreas]

I usually only look at games from go news pages or for reviewing openings and joseki that I encounter in my own games, so Id prefer to study modern or at least post-shinfuseki games. But its also a question of available Material. It would be a crime not to read commented Go Seigen or Shusaku games if You have them...

[k1ndofblue]

I study players more then I do an era.

I have played mostly through tons of Lee Chang Ho, Shuko and GO Seigen games.

[Harleqin]

I look through some current games, but for deep study, I usually choose the well-commented games from Invincible, and by Go Seigen.

I think that modern top games suffer greatly from the short time controls.

[Bill Spight]

These days I mostly play over ancient games. It started with Jowa, because he was a great fighter. And then who but Dosaku has been called 13 dan? Then some years ago I ran across a web site where the owner aimed to post all the Castle games, with some commentary. I found them fascinating. Those games have a certain strangeness that I find appealing. The site has vanished, but now I play over games at http://mignon.ddo.jp/assembly/mignon/go.html .

[Rafa]

I study players more then I do an era.

I have played mostly through tons of Lee Chang Ho, Shuko and GO Seigen games.

You're like me, i tend to focus more on the play style than on the era.

[jeremy_p]

I would be interested in the earliest recorded games. Bill Spight's link is interesting, though mostly illegible for me, but I was unable to find board images. Has anyone stumbled upon a good rescource for these ancient .sgf's?