Life In 19x19

ez4u wrote:

Bantari wrote:

Joelnelsonb wrote:I've come from a Chess background where every player has an absolute right to play on until checkmated, regardless of the position.

There is a difference between "absolute right" and "politeness" - and this might touch a little on the underlying cultural differences between chess and Go. Although in chess as well, I run into players who were shunned in a club because they consistently played on long before the game was done...

Still, from my observation and experience, in social setting, chess puts more emphasis on the result rather than on how you get there. In Go, personal culture and general politeness plays a much larger role. Part of this is because the game came to the West from Japan, and part because there are historically much fewer Go players than chess players, so annoying people is potentially much more costly. Thus, you try to be polite rather than just racking wins by hook and crook.

I agree with Bantari on the "absolute right" versus "politeness". However, it is a little more direct than that. I come from a chess background as well. I learned chess in the sixties and Go in the seventies - well before the internet. Yes everyone had the absolute right to play chess until checkmated and everyone had the absolute right to play Go until the end of the game. BUT everyone had the absolute right to refuse to play another game with you. Opponents were in short supply and everyone knew everyone else. You either became well "socialized" regarding your "absolute rights" or you took up another hobby that you could do alone, bird watching maybe. The difference today is that you can get away with behavior on the internet (or sitting alone with your computer) that was impossible back in the 'good old days'.

Yes absoutely this. At chess, I'm very indulgent of low level players who want to play out to checkmate....the fact that they WANT to means either they don't realise how bad their position is (in which case, they need to play out that tyoe of position), or they want to learn how to 'win a won game' (so they should play it out), or they are hanging on for grim life desperately hoping that I'll make a slip and let them stalemate or something (in which case I take it as a challenge/practice to win as cleanly as I can while admiring their (rather mis-placed fortitude. I know that many people here have the same patience and willingness to help players to improve because I see it every time I log in here (or at DGS).

If you really enjoy the GAME and don't just want to chalk up the result, it doesn't really matter if a correspondence game drags on. Plans, calculations and combinations played in a dead won position as just as beautiful as in a tight struggle. I think this is much mre annoying in real-time or over-the-board games where you have to wait and 'waste' time that could better be spent elsewhere...

Shako wrote: If you really enjoy the GAME and don't just want to chalk up the result, it doesn't really matter if a correspondence game drags on. Plans, calculations and combinations played in a dead won position as just as beautiful as in a tight struggle. I think this is much mre annoying in real-time or over-the-board games where you have to wait and 'waste' time that could better be spent elsewhere...

It's more fun for both usually to play a rematch than continue a dead game for 100 moves for your opponent though and if you're past the raw beginner stage it's not a bad way of cultivating regular opponents. Even in the online world such relationships are nice to have! Each to their own though.

Boidhre wrote:

Shako wrote: If you really enjoy the GAME and don't just want to chalk up the result, it doesn't really matter if a correspondence game drags on. Plans, calculations and combinations played in a dead won position as just as beautiful as in a tight struggle. I think this is much mre annoying in real-time or over-the-board games where you have to wait and 'waste' time that could better be spent elsewhere...

It's more fun for both usually to play a rematch than continue a dead game for 100 moves for your opponent though and if you're past the raw beginner stage it's not a bad way of cultivating regular opponents. Even in the online world such relationships are nice to have! Each to their own though.

Oh yes, I certainly agree, I was still thinking of chess I guess. You can try for tricky positions right up to the end in certain types of endgames...I don't see how that could be the case in Go.

And playing on in hopeless positions ISN'T actaully all that much fun

Shako wrote:Oh yes, I certainly agree, I was still thinking of chess I guess. You can try for tricky positions right up to the end in certain types of endgames...I don't see how that could be the case in Go.

And playing on in hopeless positions ISN'T actaully all that much fun

Oh, definitely agree with Chess! The difference I think is the instant win condition. It's over when the king falls not every dame filled.

Shako wrote:Oh yes, I certainly agree, I was still thinking of chess I guess. You can try for tricky positions right up to the end in certain types of endgames...I don't see how that could be the case in Go.

Oh, tricky positions can easily occur at the very end in go, when shortages of liberties arise.

I had a game last night an was behind only about a handful of stones. I started an Invasion at move 279 https://online-go.com/game/5453615 and knew it would only work if my opponent would respond in a specific way. He did as i hoped and i won the game. Is this considered rude vor inappropriate cause i depend on my opponent to blunder?

Jnkstry wrote:I had a game last night an was behind only about a handful of stones. I started an Invasion at move 279 https://online-go.com/game/5453615 and knew it would only work if my opponent would respond in a specific way. He did as i hoped and i won the game. Is this considered rude vor inappropriate cause i depend on my opponent to blunder?

I don't think it is inappropriate. Last week, I lost a game that way. I hold no resentment towards my opponent, just frustration with my own time management and reading skills.

Not rude, IMHO, perhaps rather a clever Tesuji? As your opponent there also acknowledged: Well played!

And in the end, I think, there only exist “mistakes”/“blunders” in Go (OK I know this is an extreme exaggeration ), therefore inviting the opponent to make a “mistake”, a “bad” move, is totally within the rules of etiquette. There will probably be some red lines, but TBH I don't exactly know where they are. Maybe such a way of playing is only rude when it fails

For myself, I don't believe I’ll ever stop making mistakes, but I strive to make better mistakes than I did before, and better mistakes than my opponent

Jnkstry wrote:I had a game last night an was behind only about a handful of stones. I started an Invasion at move 279 https://online-go.com/game/5453615 and knew it would only work if my opponent would respond in a specific way. He did as i hoped and i won the game. Is this considered rude vor inappropriate cause i depend on my opponent to blunder?

Tartakower wrote: The winner is the one who makes the next to last blunder.

Joelnelsonb wrote:I hear different opinions on "Go etiquette". Does anyone find it rude for someone to play on in a completely hopeless position? What about invasions that can't live without a blatant mistake but if successful, win the game? Are there any other so-called rude things that you've seen people do?

I think there is no straight answer, there are too many things (strength of players, remaining aji in the position, tournament vs. leisure game etc.) to consider. At least I would say that I find it even much more rude to tell the opponent that he should resign in a given position .

Jnkstry wrote:I had a game last night an was behind only about a handful of stones. I started an Invasion at move 279 https://online-go.com/game/5453615 and knew it would only work if my opponent would respond in a specific way. He did as i hoped and i won the game. Is this considered rude vor inappropriate cause i depend on my opponent to blunder?

In my opinion, the only inappropriate thing you did was to say "congrats" beforehand. The game's not over until it's over, as you found out.

dfan wrote:

Jnkstry wrote:I had a game last night an was behind only about a handful of stones. I started an Invasion at move 279 https://online-go.com/game/5453615 and knew it would only work if my opponent would respond in a specific way. He did as i hoped and i won the game. Is this considered rude vor inappropriate cause i depend on my opponent to blunder?

In my opinion, the only inappropriate thing you did was to say "congrats" beforehand. The game's not over until it's over, as you found out.

yeah that is true. and i did feel kind of stupid bout that. won't do that again if i am not instantly resigning...
can i excuse myself with the fact that it was 6:00 am in the morning? no, seriously this was dumb.

While we’re all here, I’d like to mention something that really puts me off when it happens, namely when my opponent (IMNVHO big-mouthedly) says “Good luck!”

Why? Because — in my perception — it assumes that …

1. I will need luck to win (i.e. assuming that they are stronger anyway), and that …
2. I will need luck to win (i.e. assuming that my brains are not enough to win the game).

Compared to this, IMO, “good game” is SO much friendlier because “good” is open for subjective interpretation, it can mean so much … it can mean “let’s both learn as much as we can”, “let’s both have an enjoyable/thrilling game”, etc.

<edit>
I guess the best I can do then is to reply “same to you ”


</edit>

Bonobo wrote:While we’re all here, I’d like to mention something that really puts me off when it happens, namely when my opponent (IMNVHO big-mouthedly) says “Good luck!”

Why? Because — in my perception — it assumes that …

1. I will need luck to win (i.e. assuming that they are stronger anyway), and that …
2. I will need luck to win (i.e. assuming that my brains are not enough to win the game).

Compared to this, IMO, “good game” is SO much friendlier because “good” is open for subjective interpretation, it can mean so much … it can mean “let’s both learn as much as we can”, “let’s both have an enjoyable/thrilling game”, etc.

I am a huge fan of Bonobo - but I disagree here. I do not currently wish my opponents' "good luck" online, but I have in the past. And I meant it - not in the sense of you will need it to beat me, but rather that, to play your best, I am hoping your phone does not ring, your internet not lag and your dog not demand to be walked.

Right now, I use two greetings. If the game is fast - usually 20 seconds or less byo yomi, or 25 stones in 3 or less, I say "Have fun". If the game is longer, I say "Play well"

If it the game is in between, like 25 in 4 minutes, I have occasionally said "Have well".

Note that I have been severely chastised for greeting a player on KGS with "Play well" being told I should not be telling people what to do.

Personally, when folks reach out, I think we should assume they are being nice, the ones that are not identify themselves pretty quickly. Any greeting this side of "you will die" is appreciated by me, and I am not upset too much by silence - in fact I am not a big fan of chatting during the game.

A chat afterward is nice. I always type "Thank you for the game" at minimum and I take no offence at "thx" though somehow I cannot get around to having my heart warmed by "th" or "t"

However - I receive no politeness or gratitude from your "thx" if you are gone before you can see my "Thank you for the game"

HKA wrote:[..]

Personally, when folks reach out, I think we should assume they are being nice [..]

I totally agree with you here, and in the case mentioned above, just because of this, I try not to show how much I feel taken aback; my mind knows this.

It’s just that I think that we often are not aware of how ambiguously we are communicating, how differently the messages that we send out can actually be interpreted.

Oh, and I have a text snippet that I usually use as greeting in a new game:

trohde: Hello [opponent’s nickname], this is Tom in Germany Good game!