Life and death of go words

[daal]

Magicwand - naming moves isn't Robert's idea. As John wrote in the first post:

The task in the quiz is simply to give the Japanese name for all numbered moves shown. There is not always 100% agreement among pros, but these were deemed near enough universal by go writer Mihori Sho. Mihori's terms are given in the Show/Hide portion.

So apparently this is not one of Robert's quirks, but rather a long standing practice among Japanese go players - including professionals. I would be surprised if there were not similar names for the moves in Korean.

[Magicwand]

Magicwand - naming moves isn't Robert's idea. As John wrote in the first post:

The task in the quiz is simply to give the Japanese name for all numbered moves shown. There is not always 100% agreement among pros, but these were deemed near enough universal by go writer Mihori Sho. Mihori's terms are given in the Show/Hide portion.

So apparently this is not one of Robert's quirks, but rather a long standing practice among Japanese go players - including professionals. I would be surprised if there were not similar names for the moves in Korean.

but he is claiming that koreans do not have understanding of ko threats and many other terms.
and i am claiming that they dont have to write a paper on go term to have an understanding of simple terms like ko, influence, or thickness.

[Mef]

robert: Koreans dont really care to define each go terms as you do and they learn to play fine.
and i also think they have better understanding of each terms.

This is because they do not understand go, they just play it. This is perfectly fine. A shark don't need to have an intellectual understanding of hunting to catch its prey.

Pshh, next you'll try to suggest that a pitcher can throw a curveball prior to receiving formal instruction in fluid mechanics (=

[RobertJasiek]

Could you explain briefly what you mean by this?

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.game ... ode=source

[RobertJasiek]

he is claiming that koreans do not have understanding of ko threats and many other terms.
and i am claiming that they dont have to write a paper on go term to have an understanding of simple terms like ko, influence, or thickness.

Koreans (the professionals) are strong players for sure. This does not imply that they or all of them are also strong at understanding go terms. Helel got it right.

Naive approximations of ko, influence, or thickness are simple. Precise explanations are much more difficult. I am asking whether Koreans have better precise explanations than mine.

[Kirby]

he is claiming that koreans do not have understanding of ko threats and many other terms.
and i am claiming that they dont have to write a paper on go term to have an understanding of simple terms like ko, influence, or thickness.

Koreans (the professionals) are strong players for sure. This does not imply that they or all of them are also strong at understanding go terms. Helel got it right.

Naive approximations of ko, influence, or thickness are simple. Precise explanations are much more difficult. I am asking whether Koreans have better precise explanations than mine.

Perhaps Magicwand's argument is more along the lines that such precise explanations are not necessary for being strong at the game. That's the way I interpreted it, anyway.

Further, I think that it might be argued that, just because you don't precisely define something, it's not necessarily the case that you don't have a full understanding of it.

It's possible that pros know more about ko than you do, for example, even if you know how to define the terms more precisely.

[EdLee]

Koreans dont really care to define each go terms as you do and they learn to play fine.
and i also think they have better understanding of each terms.

This is because they do not understand go, they just play it.
A shark don't need to have an intellectual understanding of hunting to catch its prey.

next you'll try to suggest that a pitcher can throw a curveball prior to receiving formal instruction in fluid mechanics

One big problem here is people are lumping together, confusing, and mixing up three different meanings or levels of the word "understand":

- ACTION: e.g. top pro Go players; top pro players in any sports or field (Go, basketball, tennis, brain surgery, F-1 racing, piano; plumbing; sharks).
- TALK: people who talk but cannot themselves put it into action, i.e. beat the pros, which is 99% to 100% of us here on the forum.
- TEACH: people who help others get to top level, who may or may not themselves be top pros, and who may or may not be able to mathematically explain everything.
(e.g. coaches in any pro field, including Go, basketball, etc.)

I believe Fujisawa Hideyuki sensei was a top pro himself, was a great teacher who helped many others reach top level,
and I don't care if he ever read or wrote a mathematical Go article.

[RobertJasiek]

just because you don't precisely define something, it's not necessarily the case that you don't have a full understanding of it.

not necessarily but very likely

It's possible that pros know more about ko than you do

About ko strategy maybe. If so, they should share their knowledge.

[RobertJasiek]

I don't care if he ever read or wrote a mathematical Go article.

It is not only a matter of maths. Reasonably careful and detailed explanations can be given also on other levels of expression. I just see too few of them.

[Magicwand]

just because you don't precisely define something, it's not necessarily the case that you don't have a full understanding of it.

not necessarily but very likely

It's possible that pros know more about ko than you do

About ko strategy maybe. If so, they should share their knowledge.

let me sum what you are saying..
you have 100% understanding of what ko threat and influence and thickness
korean pros dont have full understanding because they can not define the terms as you do.
and you get your ass kicked by people who doesnt understand basic go terms.

you are some character.....

[hyperpape]

Robert doesn't understand what 'understand' means and he doesn't even use the word right either!

[RobertJasiek]

you have 100% understanding of what ko threat and influence and thickness

That is not what I am saying. I say that, from what I have seen so far, Koreans' understanding of ko threat as a term with its meaning is weak. My descriptions of influence and thickness as terms are so good now that I would be interested in seeing whether Koreans (or Japanese, Chinese) offer anything more (or equally) precise in meaning (not necessarily in annotation).

korean pros dont have full understanding because they can not define the terms as you do.

Although they might not be able to define (as carefully), they (or you) could at least explain their best less formal understanding.

[RobertJasiek]

Robert doesn't understand what 'understand' means and he doesn't even use the word right either!

Let us learn from you when you provide better explanations of "understanding"!

[iazzi]

Robert doesn't understand what 'understand' means and he doesn't even use the word right either!

Let us learn from you when you provide better explanations of "understanding"!

I am just a new comer to this forum, but from what I see (and if the same rules apply to you both) he can just keep claiming that his definition is the most precise and perfect without ever telling anyone what the definition is (unless they buy his book, of course)!

I jest, I jest...

But the question is real. Can you provide this definitions so that we can judge by ourselves? Given such serious results why don't you publish them in a journal? Or just on the arXiv?

[RobertJasiek]

Can you provide this definitions

Not sure if you mean me or hyperpape. My (first attempt of a) definition of "understanding" is here:

viewtopic.php?p=65279&sid=1f84d054964abf2b548a62deeabf381a#p65279