Life In 19x19

Just to add one data point: a Japanese 6 dan I played a few times in the London International teams tournament was pretty evenly matched with me (European 3 dan at the time, maybe going on 4). His play deteriorated less with speed than mine though. There's another Japanese gentleman with a 5d diploma who plays as BGA 2d but I get the impression that his 5d is generous even by Japanese standards (unlike the 6d).

Cassandra wrote: I would like to assume that your judgement is just the wrong way round.

As I have written already, compared with other Japanese Tsume-Go books (and I own a lot of these), Maeda's books are NOT related to the typical Japanese rank vs. strength relationship that is known nowadays !!!

If Japanese 10 to 4 Kyu would be comparable to KGS 5 to 2 Kyu, as you stated, Japanese ranks would be STRONGER than Western ones (or at least had been at the time, Maeda wrote his books) !!!

Cassandra, you're right, thanks, it was a bit confusing. Disclaimer: what I wanted to add is that the ranks in Maeda books are even stronger than kgs ranks, according more or less to the rank conversion that I wrote above.

gowan wrote: I agree that at the time Maeda wrote these books Japanese amateur ranks were significantly stronger than Western ranks. The idea that Japanese amateur ranks are currently uniformly weaker than Western ranks is simply not true. I will just note that some stronger Japanese dan level players do well playing in US or European tournaments at their Japanese rank, and the Japanese representatives to the WAGC generally place higher than all the Western representatives. I don't know why there is the perception that Japanese ranks are currently weaker except there are several complicating factors regarding Japanese ranks. In effect there are different kinds of Japanese amateur rank for example: 1) those won through play in organized Nihon Ki-in sanctioned tournaments, 2) those won through paying to play a pro in a game, 3) club ranks earned through play at a particular gokaisho (go club). There could be other ways. It used to be the case that a rank could be earned through mailing in solutions to problems from the magazines Kidou and Igo Kurabu. My impression is that ranks of type 1) tend to be consistent with Western ranks. In any case there can be differences between the three types of rank for the same person.

As of the japanese ranks issue, it gets clearer when you're in Japan, not playing in really competitive tournaments like the ones you mention (in which upranking you is useless and even harmful to the pairings). In random japanese clubs, I had to said that I was 3d or 4d in order to get even games. In an amateur casual tournament at the Nihon Ki in, it was the same thing.

Yeah, the box is really tight. I solved it by always having one book near my nightstand to read. I figure if I'm putting Maeda away, I'm doing something wrong anyway...

salerno wrote:They are indeed great books. I bought them in Japan last year and studied the first two volumes a few times each.

Cassandra wrote: According to the respective notes in the book for each problem,

-- Volume One is designed for 10 Kyu to 4 Kyu,
-- Volume Two is designed for 5 Kyu to 1 Kyu, and
-- Volume Three is designed for 3 Kyu to Dan level.

I'd like to add that these notes in the book are in japanese amateur ranks, which are much weakers than ours.
I'd say, in KGS ranks: Volume One for 5kyu to 2kyu; Volume Two for 3kyu to 1dan, and Volume Three for 2dan to 3dan, or something around that.

When the books came out, Japanese ranks were at least 2 stones stronger than today.

Edit: To be redundant. Segoe once wrote that an amateur shodan would take 4 stones from a pro. When I was in Japan in the late 1960s an amateur shodan took 7 stones from a pro in a teaching game (which means that 7 stones would have not been enough in a serious game). So in a few decades Japanese amateur ranks had inflated by at least 3 stones, and that was over 4 decades ago.

Bill Spight wrote:Segoe once wrote that an amateur shodan would take 4 stones from a pro.

In that case what was the highest amateur dan rank? I had assumed it was at least 6, is this wrong? Or were ranks not one handicap stone apart?

Uberdude wrote:

Bill Spight wrote:Segoe once wrote that an amateur shodan would take 4 stones from a pro.

In that case what was the highest amateur dan rank? I had assumed it was at least 6, is this wrong? Or were ranks not one handicap stone apart?

Amateur ranks were one handicap stone apart. I do not know about when Segoe wrote that, but in the late 1960s go magazines usually featured articles with some 5 dan taking 3 stones from a top pro. Amateur 6 dans had a wide range of skill, which overlapped that of pros. There were some amateur 7 dans, but my impression is that that was an honorary rank. One time at the Nihon Kiin when I was a 2 kyu I played an elderly gentleman who had me take 8 stones and dispatched me easily.

Oh, the actual quote from Segoe was a passing remark, something like, "An amateur can be satisfied to reach shodan, because then he would take 4 stones from a pro." (I know, it doesn't make a lot of sense. ) Since at the time I read that, shodans took at least 7 stones from pros, I assumed that Segoe originally wrote that before WWII.

Segoe once wrote that an amateur shodan would take 4 stones from a pro

Bill, I think you may have misremembered slightly. What Segoe said was:

専門棋士に4子で打てれば、ｱﾏﾁｭｱの有段者だからです。

In other words, you are a player of any dan. The "because" is a follow-on from his explanation that what is distinctive about 4-stone games, rather than 5 and upwards, is that the course is now determined by an ability to create and nurture power (力) more effectively. He also speaks of this as marking a threshold - you "graduate" from 5 stones. Presumably he's implying that the pro can no longer expect the amateur just to roll over when the tactics start, but can now fight back with some degree of success and even take the initiative in attacking quite often.

He said this in the preface to his Strategy Dictionary, written in 1973. From that date it is clear he is talking about modern amateur dan grades rather than the pre-war one where amateurs normally only were given a 1-dan diploma but were then often able to play a pro on 3 stones or less.

Of course he says "can play" against a pro rather than "can win" because the tenor of his section on handicap go is that it is a means of improvement (and an "indispensable" one at that). He adds that in his experience White can win at 2 or 3 stones by playing correctly and not unreasonably, relying mainly on the strategic concept of kurai (位).

At 4 stones and upwards, White has to try from the very beginning to avoid falling behind on overall balance, by which he means trying to do in three or four moves what Black would spend five or six moves on. He has to ally this to making things obscure. Finally he has to rely on exploiting thinness (ｳｽ味) in Black's positions.

Jujube wrote:

CnP wrote:

Hushfield wrote: ... I'm interested in hearing if others that have this series experience similar problems with the cardboard box.

I bought this set too - survived shipping to the UK fine. The cardboard box set wrapper was a real pain to get them out of and didn't survive their extraction I think..(the box rather than the books), though I bought them back in 2009 so I can't remember exactly what happened to it - I think after a couple of times taking them in and out it got ruined. The books are lovely and although I don't read any Japanese I haven't had a problem with them - at least not caused by the language barrier. It would be interesting to read the commentaries though but well worth owning.

My strategy when they arrive is to push the books up using the bottom of the box, then push the two outer books back down into the box, using the centre book's spine to keep it in place, and simultaneously using the quarter of a centimetre I have gained to extract the middle book from the box. Perhaps wedging the box between my feet for leverage.

Maybe it will work.

The box is a snug fit. My technique is to lightly squeeze the top and the bottom and wiggle the box until the books partly slide out. Then I pull the books out from there.

I've had a couple of books like that over the years. My preferred technique has been to throw away the boxes. It works great!

John Fairbairn wrote:

Segoe once wrote that an amateur shodan would take 4 stones from a pro

Bill, I think you may have misremembered slightly. What Segoe said was:

専門棋士に4子で打てれば、ｱﾏﾁｭｱの有段者だからです。

In other words, you are a player of any dan.

Thanks for tracking down the quote, John. I see that I drew the incorrect inference, long ago, that he was talking about being a shodan. That is not what he said, OC, but it is a normal inference from the fact that he said 4 stones instead of 5 or any other number. Like when somebody says that they have 2 children you infer that they do not have 4, although logically they might. In this case, as you indicate, Segoe had other reasons for specifying 4 stones.

ez4u wrote:I've had a couple of books like that over the years. My preferred technique has been to throw away the boxes. It works great!

Ooh, my heart...

logan wrote: The box is a snug fit. My technique is to lightly squeeze the top and the bottom and wiggle the box until the books partly slide out. Then I pull the books out from there.

I found that giving the box a single firm shake (like getting the sauce to the other end of a tomato ketchup bottle) works the best.

John Fairbairn wrote: 専門棋士に4子で打てれば、ｱﾏﾁｭｱの有段者だからです。

In other words, you are a player of any dan.

Dear John,

I am afraid that 有段 is NOT equivalent to "ANY Dan".

In several (mostly Tsume-Go-) series that I know, 有段 seems to be used in the meaning of "high(er) Dan", giving a clear distinction from 初段 (= shôdan) that seems to be used as a reference to the "low(er) Dan" stages.

Cassandra wrote:

John Fairbairn wrote: 専門棋士に4子で打てれば、ｱﾏﾁｭｱの有段者だからです。

In other words, you are a player of any dan.

Dear John,

I am afraid that 有段 is NOT equivalent to "ANY Dan".

In several (mostly Tsume-Go-) series that I know, 有段 seems to be used in the meaning of "high(er) Dan", giving a clear distinction from 初段 (= shôdan) that seems to be used as a reference to the "low(er) Dan" stages.

John is right. High(er) dan player is 高段者.

Perhaps you are seeing a partial revision as a result of rank inflation. Breakthrough to Shodan, for instance, has been renamed to Breakthrough to Three-dan. 有段者 could be unchanged, while 初段 has replaced a kyu rank or range in the original.

I am afraid that 有段 is NOT equivalent to "ANY Dan".

I assume you are trying to wind me up, which I would normally ignore, but as I'm trying to fill in a few moments before bedtime, I'll bite.

The short answer is piffle.

The longer answer might perhaps start with Kojien, a vade mecum that is familiar to most Japanese: "有段者：剣道・柔道・囲碁・将棋などで初段以上の人". (Dan holder: a person in kendo, judo, go, shogi etc who is 1-dan or higher).

That example is a reminder that the phrase is part of other recreations and of the normal language. To give examples specific to go, though:

The book 初心者から有段者への特急券 中山 典之 (Express ticket from beginner to dan, by our beloved Nakayama)

私は、今15級です。 囲碁の有段者・高段者に質問です。 囲碁の有段者になるには... (I am 15 kyu. This is a question for dans and high dans. How do I become a dan player in go?)

The next example is from the magazine "Igo" and refers to a survey that (in 2006) indicated the go population in Japan was between 4 and 5 million, of which around 500,000 had dan diplomas:
私見であるが、初段は有段者として認められたい、五段は高段者として認められたい、と言う事であろうか (It's only my opinion but I'd probably say I'd want to regard a 1-dan as a "dan" and a 5-dan as a "high dan". Gekkan Go World likewise presents problems in sections called 有段編 ([low] dan section and 高段編 (high dan section).

High dan grades are the ones often distinguished, and apart from 高段者 a common term is 県代表クラス (prefectural champion standard - in England we would say "county standard").

The Nihon Ki-in advertises a course for 級位者・有段者の集い (a kyu and dan group). It also has a "Happy Dan Club" which actually allows in players down to 3-kyu (the aspirational ones) and it lists separate entry requirements for grades from 1-dan to 6-dan.

It is not even true that tsumego books do it differently. They can of course go straight from 1~2 kyu to dan, but of they want to distinguish they do the sort of thing that Cho U did in his recent masterwork: he refers to (amateur) low dans (低段者), high dans (高段者)　and superdans (強豪 - which he defines as 6-dan and above).

For completeness I should mention an old fashioned usage from the days when amateur and pro diplomas were the same: 高段者 (high dan) was used virtually as a synonym for pro, i.e. above 4-dan. Since a low dan player in the pro ranks had to hand all his earnings over to his teacher, he was often not regarded as a pukka pro.