Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:33 pm
Bill Spight wrote:It seems to me that if you can finally avoid kyu level mistakes, you are approaching amateur 4 or 5 dan.
Life In 19x19
Life in 19x19. Go, Weiqi, Baduk... Thats the life.
https://lifein19x19.com/
Necessary moves & improvement
Page 2 of 2
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:41 pm
You mean statements like "An empty triangle is always an inefficient shape, wherever you play it"topazg wrote:and less "authoritative definitives". I think false certainty is one of the biggest obstacles in SDK Go.
when there exist empty triangles and other dumpling moves that are considered beautiful and brilliant tesujis?
Re: Necessary moves & improvement
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2011 8:15 am
daal wrote:My understanding of good shape is that it puts you (your stones) in a better position than they were before. This can mean that they have better eyeshape, that they are thicker, or that they are just harder to attack. In some cases, these tasks can be performed rather simply by making a "good shape," such as the mouth shape. The relationship between stones in these typical "good shapes" is often advantageous. While playing the shape move may increase the probability of a local advantage, it is really more of a starting point - the first move to consider. But, as koosh points out, good shape is only good if it gets the job done, i.e., it's not enough for it to look good, it's effectiveness also has to be backed up by reading.
Almost any local move puts your stones in a better position. The thing is to find the best local move.
Re:
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2011 1:51 pm
EdLee wrote:topazg wrote:and less "authoritative definitives". I think false certainty is one of the biggest obstacles in SDK Go.
You mean statements like "An empty triangle is always an inefficient shape, wherever you play it"
Touche, but I think I actually have a different definition of efficient to you. I see efficient as covering either the most space or opening the most possibilities in the fewest moves. An empty triangle, I would argue, can never do that on principle because it can never move fast, and it's never a flexible move. Therefore I see an "efficient empty triangle" as a literal contradiction in terms.
However, you also alluded to efficient being it's ability to achieve a desired goal - in that looser sense any move that works is efficient, it's just a broader definition for the word than I use
Re: Necessary moves & improvement
Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2011 9:26 am
Never flexible? From GoGoD's New in Go,
a and b are miai.
a and b are miai.
Re: Necessary moves & improvement
Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2011 10:06 am
I don't consider that move flexible. I consider it very solid, strong, and effective there. Flexible and / or efficient would not be terms I would use. To me, its goal is "win the liberty race one side or the other by increasing liberties and restricting opponent's liberties". Strong? Yes. Tesuji? Yes. Even dual purpose (aiming at miai) makes sense. But flexible? Not for me
Re: Necessary moves & improvement
Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2011 1:51 pm
Regarding the last example that Shaddy posted,
can one really look at a complicated corner fighting position and classify it as good or bad shape?
Which makes more sense?
1.) Given each move, each consequent Joseki move is considered "good shape".
2.) Good shape is only a term that can be coined to groups of stone that have been laid out on the board and must prove themselves in the coming battle.
In that last example, I don't think one can say that white's empty triangle at the end is good shape, even though it is effective and probably one of the few possible moves in that position.
Who wants to step up to the board and call that move good shape in front of a group of professionals? Maybe one of them would agree with you...
can one really look at a complicated corner fighting position and classify it as good or bad shape?
Which makes more sense?
1.) Given each move, each consequent Joseki move is considered "good shape".
2.) Good shape is only a term that can be coined to groups of stone that have been laid out on the board and must prove themselves in the coming battle.
In that last example, I don't think one can say that white's empty triangle at the end is good shape, even though it is effective and probably one of the few possible moves in that position.
Who wants to step up to the board and call that move good shape in front of a group of professionals? Maybe one of them would agree with you...
Re: Re:
Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 9:00 pm
Bill Spight wrote:EdLee wrote:I don't think so.Koosh wrote:Step 4 Here, we can finally approach the level of professionals
Everyone makes mistakes, even pros -- only theirs are pro-level mistakes.
When we stop making mistakes of a certain level, we are ready to graduate from that level --
when we can finally avoid kyu level mistakes, we're approaching, well, amateur 1-dan, not pro. Not by a long shot.
A mindblogging gap separates Step 3 from 4.
Hmmm. It seems to me that if you can finally avoid kyu level mistakes, you are approaching amateur 4 or 5 dan.
It reminds me of one of Rob van Zeijst's articles:
"Sakata told me that to become a top player, it was only necessary to avoid mistakes and play an occasional brilliant move. In other words, it was not necessary to play brilliant moves throughout a game."
I also think Steinitz's theory of chess also applies to go a bit. We sometimes spend so much time learning fancy strategies and techniques that we lose track of the humble state of mind required to consistently avoid obvious silliness. I still stuggle with this. If I win, it is often because I have kept in mind that I don't have to outrun the bear, I just have to outrun my opponent.