Life In 19x19

We might see a Japanese pro trained in Taiwan.

Did they start this system in just the last few months?

And the guardian picked it up as well. I am impressed that so many western newspapers report on it.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/ ... ofessional

John Fairbairn wrote:I think Yang Dingxin can safely be called the "youngest ever" 1-dan. He became pro 1d at 9 years 9 months on 2008-07-24. His career since then has been surprisingly modest after such a stellar start, though he has notched up a few titles and is, of course, still only 20.

He is doing well recently, got through to the final of the LG cup and will play Shi Yue in the final in February so has a decent chance to get his first international title, He's currently on a 9-game win streak (since November) and just got into the goratings top 10.

Some interesting discussion on Iyama's s12 peep, a common move from humans in this new joseki before sacrificing the 3 stones, which some versions of LeelaZero don't like over on facebook.

Here's my attempts at figuring out why LeelaZero #198 doesn't like it. First its suggested line for both (move 1 with 35k playouts, 10k at end). Some comments:
- 2 is one choice, cut is another but -3% now
- 4 is a nice tesuji, white is reluctant to atari at m18 because then after defending at L16 n13 works*
- 6 after making white make an ugly connection of 5 black's got some stones in sente which will be useful in making a mess on the top side later (compare to game where Iyama got m18 and made a big territory there)
- 7 gets good value out of losing the 3 stones, white can grow the middle later if that becomes big
White starts and ends this sequence with 59% (white then approaches at q5, in mainline white makes a group there, black then makes a group on top side, using k18 sente to help).

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc Dia 1
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . 4 1 X . X . O X O . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , 5 O 2 . X X O O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 3 9 O 0 O X X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 O 6 O O X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 7 X X . X X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

* this is why n15 doesn't work without black tricking white into making black get a stone at n17:


If white peeps, the idea is white is going to sacrifice the 3 stones and then it's a good exchange as that one white stone could be helpful later in doing things on the right side (and it's not sente once 3 stones captured). However LZ 198 says it loses 10%, let's see what happens next.
- LZ says for 2 black won't n16 now (-7%) but will l16 crosscut instead
- white 3 at o16 is also good, but makes comparison harder to ignore that choice for now
- with 4 black trades, sacrificing the top for a ponnuki and sente
- the question is, is the marked exchange now good or bad?
White starts and ends this sequence with 49%.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc Dia 2
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 5 9 . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . 1 8 3 X . O X O . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , 2 O 4 7 X X O O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . O . O X X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O O X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X X . X X B . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . W . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

Black could have chosen the crosscut if white didn't peep, but LZ thinks that's not so good. 2 lost 3%, so white ends this with 62%. The only difference between this diagram and the one above is the s12 s13 exchange.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc Dia 3
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 5 9 . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . 1 8 3 X . O X O . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , 2 O 4 7 X X O O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . O . O X X a |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O O X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X X . X X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

Is it really so bad? What's the difference?
- If the right side becomes black territory white lost 2 points vs playing endgame hane at a
- If white invades right side later then maybe she would peep at s12 anyway, but maybe not. You'd rather not pre-lose the points.
- Adds more liberties to q13 stones. It's kinda unlikely as terrible inside for outside exchanges, but say white wedged at p13 to create 2 cutting points, s12 actually means black can more easily answer on the outside with 4 and safely answer 5 at 6 as white can't s13 cut to capture the s14 stones (but white gets endgame squeeze, so black might actually atari under anyawy, depends on what's down the side, I'm just focusing on the local connectivity), without s12 maybe 4 would be at q11 and then there's a cutting point at o12 (probably used to peep as part of a reduction rather than to cut).

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc Dia 4
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . O X O X . O X O . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , X . X O X X O O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . X . O . O X X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O 3 O O X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X X 1 X X X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5 . O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . 6 . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

LZ 198 says yes, its -13% bad exchange, quite significant. You can even make the s12 exchange after the crosscut and ponnuki trade variation and see the same winrate drop. I guess it's mostly the chance of it ending up as mochikomi that causes the dislike. I like how LZ changed its answer to white l17 hane to turn s12 into a bad move instead of a good move, a common technique seen in high level probing play.

Edit: to further isolate the mochikomi aspect of the s12 s13 exchange I added some outside exchanges to make it more likely that right area will become a black territory so that the white peep won't be useful in a future invasion there (note this part of analysis is with <1k playouts). Starting from diagram 3 (black crosccuts for ponnuki, white hasn't peeped) it is black's move and he is at 38%. If I pass for black and allow white to reduce at 1 and have black answer at 2 and then pass for white to make it black to move again we now have black at 30%. So LZ thinks this is a good exchange for white (I thought it probably would be as black's answer seems soft, but I wasn't sure before checking with LZ as there is a downside of solidifying black). Note that neither of these moves are the best if they had a free choice, LZ 198 says approach (for 1) or enclose (for 2) at q5 is best. The purpose is to create a somewhat realistic whole board position in which LZ will think the right side is black territory (and also means p13 no longer creates 2 cutting points). o11 to q8 is a bad shape so I add another reducing exchange of 3-4 that's also slightly helping white: black is now down to 27-28% (LZ thinks black's best next move is either q5: very normal, or interestingly n5: weird shape to be 5th line, n4 is what I would expect if trying to be more ambitious than solid shimari). Then to try to get black's winrate back up closer to the 38% original I make the peep-connect exchange of 5-6 in reverse, in hypothetical play probably peep of 6 would come before defending with 4, though really if black attempted to peep there first LZ says white should just ignore and q5 approach. This makes white heavier and gets black an outside stone so now his winrate is up to 31% (with suggested next move at q5 again).

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc Dia 5
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . O X O X . O X O . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , X . X O X X O O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . X . O . O X X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O O X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X X . X X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . 2 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , 6 5 . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . 4 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

So with the setting prepared, what difference to winrate does it make if we make the s12 s13 exchange? Answer: black is up to 53% (again q5 next move), so 22% mistake now instead of 13% when it's more even likely to be mochikomi. Having said that, LZ as white still wants to tease black's right side: after q5 enclose it wants to r7 invade and then just leave it for aji.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc Dia 6 Black's move and ends at 53%
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . O X O X . O X O . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , X . X O X X O O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . X . O . O X X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O O X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X X . X X 2 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . O . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , X O . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . O . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

For completeness, what if white makes the endgame exchange? This is premature (losing a ko threat and the peep aji if an invasion did still happen) so loses some winrate for white, but isn't as bad as giving black 2 points and black ends at 42%, so white lost 11%. (Black's next move either q5 or n4 or n5 or m6 or m5 (#1 after a few k playouts)).

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc Dia 7 Black's move and ends at 42%
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . O X O X . O X O . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , X . X O X X O O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . X . O . O X X 1 |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O O X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X X . X X 2 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . O . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , X O . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . O . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

This analysis was so good. Very profesional mix of LZ opinion + human rationale. Please keep them coming.

kyulearner wrote:Below are the part of the article siting her training in South Korea.
プロ棋士の仲邑信也九段（４５）と、囲碁の元インストラクターの幸（みゆき）さん（３８）のひとりっ子。幸さんの手ほどきで３歳で碁を覚え、７歳から一家３人で韓国・ソウルに渡って修業。日本での義務教育履修のため日韓の往復生活を続けた。幸さんによると、菫さんはすぐに韓国語を覚え、両親の通訳にもなっているという。一昨年、現地の小学生低学年のチャンピオンに。昨年、韓国棋院のプロ候補生である研究生になった。
　韓国で“囲碁漬け”の日々を送ってきた。平日は名門「韓鐘振（ハンジョンジン）囲碁道場」で、週末は韓国棋院で対局を重ねてきた。現地のプロ志望の子どもたちは朝、学校に顔を出すとすぐに道場に向かい、夕方まで囲碁の勉強をする子が多い。
　「子どもたちの囲碁環境が日本と全く違う。あれを見て、菫が世界を狙うには韓国で勉強させなければと思った」と、父の信也九段が言う。根っからの負けず嫌いで、負けると大泣きする。その勝負魂が道場で高く評価されている。
　道場を主宰する韓鐘振九段は「菫の才能は、現在の女流世界一である韓国の崔精（チェジョン）九段（２２）に劣らない。むしろ上達のスピードは崔より速い。このままいけば女流の世界チャンピオンになるのはもちろん、男性のトップ棋士とも対等に戦えると思う」と話す。

Google translation of the relevant passage is below. Indeed, she is trained in Korea. I hope more young promising Japanese Go players will also take the same path by studying in Korea or China. This will undoubtedly help Japanese Go immensely.

I am learning go at the age of 3 at the hands of Mr. Sachi, and from the age of 7 studying overseas to Korea · 3 people. I continued the round-trip living in Japan and Korea for the purpose of taking compulsory education in Japan. According to Mr. Susumu, Mr. Susumu immediately learned Korean and became an interpreter for parents. Two years ago, champion of local elementary school student low grade. Last year, I became a research student who is a pro candidate of a Korean shogun.
I have sent "days of pickling" days in Korea. Weekday is the prestigious "Hanjongjin Game Go Dojo" and on weekends she has played in the Korean shogunate. Children who wish to be a local professional go to the dojo as soon as they face the school in the morning, and many children study Go for the evening.
"Children's go environment is completely different from Japan, I thought if Sumire wanted to study the world, I thought I had to study in Korea," Father Shinya Kuzu says. I do not like to lose, I cry a lot when I lose. That battle spirit is highly appreciated at the dojo.
Hanbao Kuroda, presiding the dojo, said, "Sumire's talent is not less than Korean Choi Jeong (22) who is the world's most female current female, rather the speed of progress is faster than Choi, I think I can fight equally with men's top players, not to mention becoming champions.

macelee wrote:There were other 9-year old professionals, such as Chang Hao (born 1976-11-07, becoming pro in 1986 - not sure the exact date, but Chinese promotion event were almost always held in summer).

I hope this information is incorrect, since Chang Hao was the Chinese representative at the World Amateur Go Championship (which he won) in 1990, when he was 14. Pros are not allowed to play in this event.

Typically, Chinese representatives who win the WAGC are promoted to pro as a result, or at least that used to be the case. One can recognize many other Chinese pro names as past winners of the WAGC: https://senseis.xmp.net/?WorldAmateurGoChampionship

The Chinese player, Lu Liyan, at the KPMC (which is also supposed to be an amateur event) this year had recently passed the pro test, though I don't know if he was officially 1p yet. Here is he beating up Ilya Shikshin in the prelims of the Bailing Cup: https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f ... 01#p234201.

sorin wrote:I hope this information is incorrect, since Chang Hao was the Chinese representative at the World Amateur Go Championship (which he won) in 1990, when he was 14. Pros are not allowed to play in this event.

Maybe an explanation on the Chinese Wikipedia page on WAGC https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/世界业余围棋锦标赛

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/世界业余围棋锦标赛 wrote:中国棋手成绩最好的主要原因之一，是因为在1991年之前，中国围棋尚未职业化，参赛的选手实际上都是以业余身份参赛的专业棋手（共9人次）

Google Translates this as

"One of the main reasons for the best scores of Chinese players is that before 1991, Chinese Go was not professionalized, and the participating players were actually professional players who participated in amateur status (9 in total)."

But then, what was the definition of "professional player" in China before 1991?

Nice though this story is, I can't help but note that it seems rather scary to have, at the tender age of ten, your future defined for you in this way.

Regarding professionals in amateur tournaments, the organisers validate who plays. I am sure they know about the qualifications of the 'top' entrants. Not much scope for scandal there.

jlt wrote:"One of the main reasons for the best scores of Chinese players is that before 1991, Chinese Go was not professionalized, and the participating players were actually professional players who participated in amateur status (9 in total)."

But then, what was the definition of "professional player" in China before 1991?

I remember I heard about the distinction between "local pro" and "national pro", as something specific to China. This had to do with whether one's pro status was granted by some local (province-wide maybe, or even narrower) Go body, or the national body.

Maybe Chang Hao became "local pro" at 10, and "national pro" at 14-15, only after winning WAGC in 1990?

There is now an official Nihon Ki-in Youtube video of her game with Iyama Yuta: https://youtu.be/SbrxGo6Wi9E

sorin wrote:There is now an official Nihon Ki-in Youtube video of her game with Iyama Yuta: https://youtu.be/SbrxGo6Wi9E

That is so impressive.

She can just sit in that chair concentrating for so long. I teach 10 year olds. They can't sit still for 5 minutes

I think it's amazing kids like these exist. It's like reading through Invincible and then suddenly being reminded: these first games are played by a 13 year old. One who didn't have the patience to play with slow-playing opponents, even, and got up to move around a bit. One who played quite fast himself. Yet the moves are so mature and well-read-out. It's so impressive.

This girl would beat me to a pulp giving me 9 stones. To think about that is ... odd

sorin wrote:There is now an official Nihon Ki-in Youtube video of her game with Iyama Yuta: https://youtu.be/SbrxGo6Wi9E

Computer analysis with GRP and last Leela Zero network #200.
See attachments for original and analyze.

mb76 wrote:

sorin wrote:There is now an official Nihon Ki-in Youtube video of her game with Iyama Yuta: https://youtu.be/SbrxGo6Wi9E

Computer analysis with GRP and last Leela Zero network #200.
See attachments for original and analyze.

Thank you! Long live the GRP!