Life In 19x19

You are afraid opponents would use them against you in online games?

cyclops wrote:You are afraid opponents would use them against you in online games?

Yep. I don't mind if my opponent does joseki look ups, or has some tool to estimate the score. So long as a human opponent is choosing WHICH joseki, making direction of play choices and fighting the middle game. No doubt chess players have been through this. I don't know how they have resolved it (if they even have).

As a teacher i strongly suggest all my students to use joseki dictionaries while playing. Joseki is about memorizing a lot, and people with limited amount of time or energy (because after all,its pure effort) aren't going to do that in a systematic way. So learning josekis as situations arise is an extremely practical way to learn them.

Considerations like "joseki isn't important", or that "it won't help you during the game" can be discussed, but are not relevant to what i believe is the core of this dilemma: is using a dictionary cheating? You can believe using one is a mistake and in such case you wouldnt mind your opponent using one.

In my personal experience as a teacher, there is a direct correlation between lack of joseki knowledge and the feeling that using a joseki dictionary is cheating. The more people dislike it, the less likely they are to study them.

It think it just doesnt matter. I am not able to recall any strong player ever be angry at someone for using a joseki dictionary.
Even more, i feel very compassionate to people that take the game a lot lighter than i do, and are constantly tricked and get difficult and unfavorable games just because the opponent *might* have known a memorized sequence, something of very common ocurrence in online go.

No joseki dictionary knowledge can give you the upper hand in a game, it can only prevent you from making a mistake, one already well studied and whose solution is at hand, and as such its a worthwhile tool to increase the quality of the game, and the learning process of the player as he is more likely to retain better and proper local sequences by putting them in practice.

I have had this discussion in several countries already, and mostly i always find a good number of people that consider it cheating. I think european tournament rules ban books, which is basically banning joseki books as they are the only ones you could apply in a tournament.
I disagree with that rule.
That's like saying that you shouldnt consult any material after you graduate from a profession, because it would be an unfair competitive advantage to your colleagues/competitors. I dont know about you, but if a doctor is operating me and he is not sure about something, i rather he consults something instead of just guessing .

I plan to offer players in Kaya.gs a comfortable access to a joseki dictionary which i believe will have an immediate and powerful effect over the quality of the games of each user. Also by providing an accessible way for both players to use it and being a server-wide solution, it will get rid of the cheaty feeling which i find to be not only useless, but detrimental to the quality of the knowledge of the community.

Kaya.gs wrote:I plan to offer players in Kaya.gs a comfortable access to a joseki dictionary which i believe will have an immediate and powerful effect over the quality of the games of each user. Also by providing an accessible way for both players to use it and being a server-wide solution, it will get rid of the cheaty feeling which i find to be not only useless, but detrimental to the quality of the knowledge of the community.

I like this idea but may I add a refinement?

When setting up the game, both players can agree to disable Kaya online joseki-book access if they wish, so they can have the choice. A check box could look like this:

ロ: Allow access to Kaya joseki tool?

Of course, this can't stop people opening up their copy of Kogo with the kegs client, but at least it sets up a control for honest players.

As for playing on other servers, I think it's okay to use a joseki book, if you put a disclaimer in your notes to let your opponent know.

Long delay in responding to these questions, so my apologies

RobertJasiek wrote: How fast can you improve from that? How long did you need to learn the circa 500 most frequent josekis from your opponents? They also teach you fake josekis like

$$W fake joseki
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . 3 1 . . . . 7 .
$$ | . 2 X O O . 5 . .
$$ | . 4 O X X 6 . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . X . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W fake joseki
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . 3 1 . . . . 7 .
$$ | . 2 X O O . 5 . .
$$ | . 4 O X X 6 . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . X . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

To this day, I still make joseki "mistakes". I read most of them as I go, and don't make a habit of memorizing sequences.

I learned nearly all of my joseki in playing, I improved to 1 dan in a year, and to near where I am now roughly 2 years after that. Occasionally someone would show me a trick play, but my focus was on seeing how the trick worked, not on memorizing the exact trick. That way, I could apply the trick/answer to other positions.

I'd see joseki show up in games between stronger players at my club and online and I'd try them out. Sometimes with variations based on my understanding of the current whole board position: "What happens if I stretch further here, given that I have these other positions which will assist me if they invade?"

After having seen this from some opponent, how long did you need to understand that Black is better and which rank did you have then? What enabled you to understand this without referring to books?

When someone plays a "fake" joseki, the important part is to recognize that you got a bad result, not to know the pro-approved refutation. If you know you got a bad result, and you have the IDEA of joseki (that there should be an equal result there), that's enough to get you to look deeper.

$$W fake joseki follow-up
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . X . X 2 . .
$$ | . . X , 1 . . . .
$$ | . . X O . . . . .
$$ | . . O O . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . O . . . . . .

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W fake joseki follow-up
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . X . X 2 . .
$$ | . . X , 1 . . . .
$$ | . . X O . . . . .
$$ | . . O O . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . O . . . . . .[/go]

Same for the question why White is better.

this leaves poor aji for black, but it's not unplayable, I would look at this and say: "well, this attempts to stretch further, but leaves aji on the right because of the push and cut, this might be playable though if the right side is more solid"

That is what I tell my students to do, read, look for tesuji, evaluate the result in terms of the board position. Don't just say "this is wrong", which is my impression of a lot of Joseki books.

This is such a general statement that it requires different considerations:

1) Joseki dictionaries (or databases): At your or my current rank, this is more or less correct because we have already learned enough go theory knowledge to judge by ourselves. In case of tactically very complex josekis, I still occasionally look up some dictionary because I am not strong enough to reinvent quickly all surprising moves that all professionals together needed centuries to discover. Don't you need that, too? More importantly though, you are also implying that SDKs would not need dictionaries. They do not know have enough go theory knowledge. So why do you claim that they could reinvent and understand quickly all josekis?

2) Go theory books related to josekis: I am not sure whether you mean also them. So before wasting time arguing why they are necessary, please confirm whether indeed you think that they were not!

1) I don't usually go to dictionaries to double check, but if I see something unusual in professional or high-dan level play, I will put it on my own board and grind it. The reading, tesuji, and whole-board-judgement practice is far more valuable, in my opinion.

This is an unusual opinion, and it's one I'm sure a lot of folks don't share. But, I don't believe SDK's need dictionaries. I think that at their level, tesuji, shape and reading are much more valuable. The corner patterns have the highest density of these kind of problems during the game. It is a waste to then rely on an opening book and lose this fertile ground for study.

2) I don't consider go theory books to be in the same vein, since they will use josekis as examples illustrating a concept.

Understanding is much better than both experimentation and imitation. To get good understanding quickly, a player needs go theory books or stronger players' regular advice or both. The fraction of players succeeding with only experimentation is tiny.

No argument that understanding is the end goal. Some amount of imitation is probably necessary, but the goal should be to imitate as little as possible. They should be constantly trying to invent.

shapenaji wrote:

$$W fake joseki follow-up
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . X . X 2 . .
$$ | . . X , 1 . . . .
$$ | . . X O . . . . .
$$ | . . O O . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . O . . . . . .

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W fake joseki follow-up
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . X . X 2 . .
$$ | . . X , 1 . . . .
$$ | . . X O . . . . .
$$ | . . O O . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . O . . . . . .[/go]

Same for the question why White is better.

leaves aji on the right because of the push and cut, this might be playable though if the right side is more solid

Actually there is more to it:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W follow-up
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . 1 . X . X X . .
$$ | . . X , O . . . .
$$ | . . X O . . . . .
$$ | . O O O . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . O . . . . . .[/go]

Due to the aji, White's left side extension is bigger than usual because White 1 becomes possible. Black started making 2 points more but the effect can be that he loses more points in the corner. So to justify your "is playable", one must consider also this variation. It is not the kind of thing learned easily from opponents but is found in reasonable dictionaries.

Don't just say "this is wrong", which is my impression of a lot of Joseki books.

There I agree and so my next book will have comments of the kind "locally inferior but can be played if...".

the important part is to recognize that you got a bad result

For that very reason, my joseki dictionary will evaluate every joseki and failure variation. This is something I have missed in all other joseki dictionaries I have seen so far.

The reading, tesuji, and whole-board-judgement practice is far more valuable, in my opinion.

Without reading, nothing works:)

Tesuji: Some tesuji are so unexpected that one cannot rediscover them all. It is possible, of course, to study them by reading tesuji books instead of joseki dictionaries.

Whole board judgement: Necessary but it is often an overkill for comparing different local variations. There local positional judgement (for corner sequences) becomes useful.

I don't believe SDK's need dictionaries.

Most of the low dans having told me not to have read a joseki dictionary have shown a poor variety of corner sequences in their games up to always playing 4-4 to avoid entering unknown waters. Your development is an exception.

I think that at their level, tesuji, shape and reading are much more valuable.

(I am not convinced about shape.)

Tesuji and reading are necessary but "much more valuable"? Joseki study can make an SDK at least as much stronger as tesuji and reading. So I think "about equally valuable" is a better guess.

The corner patterns have the highest density of these kind of problems during the game. It is a waste to then rely on an opening book

No. First joseki study made me 2+ ranks stronger, afterwards opening study made me 1.5+ ranks stronger. Presumably it can also work in reversed order or if both joseki and openings are studied simultaneously.

They should be constantly trying to invent.

Could you do that as a kyu player? I started doing it at about 2 dan.

I would welcome you to use any joseki dictionary in a 10 minutes absolute game on KGS.

RobertJasiek wrote: Actually there is more to it:

$$W follow-up
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . 1 . X . X X . .
$$ | . . X , O . . . .
$$ | . . X O . . . . .
$$ | . O O O . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . O . . . . . .

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W follow-up
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . 1 . X . X X . .
$$ | . . X , O . . . .
$$ | . . X O . . . . .
$$ | . O O O . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . O . . . . . .[/go]

Due to the aji, White's left side extension is bigger than usual because White 1 becomes possible. Black started making 2 points more but the effect can be that he loses more points in the corner. So to justify your "is playable", one must consider also this variation. It is not the kind of thing learned easily from opponents but is found in reasonable dictionaries.

Consider that black has been given a tenuki on both sides, and consider the difference between black follow-ups at A and B at the end of the following SGF. It's a 2 point difference, maybe even a 1 point...

There I agree and so my next book will have comments of the kind "locally inferior but can be played if...".

For that very reason, my joseki dictionary will evaluate every joseki and failure variation. This is something I have missed in all other joseki dictionaries I have seen so far.

I feel this is certainly an improvement, and I'm glad to hear that this book will be different.

Without reading, nothing works:)

Tesuji: Some tesuji are so unexpected that one cannot rediscover them all. It is possible, of course, to study them by reading tesuji books instead of joseki dictionaries.

I would say there is a difference here, Tesuji books involve the illustration of a concept over the course of many problems. They show us what is shared.

Joseki dictionaries (Generally speaking, yours sounds different), involve preparing a very specific position, where there is no guarantee that the concepts WILL carry over. (Unless it is also a tesuji theory book)

Most of the low dans having told me not to have read a joseki dictionary have shown a poor variety of corner sequences in their games up to always playing 4-4 to avoid entering unknown waters. Your development is an exception.

I found star point joseki boring initially, it's not as though I wanted to avoid joseki, I actually loved them. Corners have some of the most interesting tesuji, I waded into the avalanche variations for a while, because I found the basic variation (out of our earlier fake joseki example), to just rush into the middlegame.

I actually tried to pick up a book for the avalanche variations, it was the one time I did. The problem was, I just didn't see how the joseki book was teaching me to choose a direction. I figured if I learned direction and tesuji, then the joseki would just make sense. And by the time I learned Direction and tesuji, I was pretty confident that I didn't need the joseki book.

Tesuji and reading are necessary but "much more valuable"? Joseki study can make an SDK at least as much stronger as tesuji and reading. So I think "about equally valuable" is a better guess.

Hmm, I don't know, I feel as though it may make them stronger in the short term, but leave holes in their understanding. They won't have had the practice developing their joseki, so they won't feel as comfortable in unusual waters.

No. First joseki study made me 2+ ranks stronger, afterwards opening study made me 1.5+ ranks stronger. Presumably it can also work in reversed order or if both joseki and openings are studied simultaneously.

I certainly think joseki study can improve a player. But my contention is that if they are not extremely careful, it can become a crutch.

Those players who study it and succeed must pay very very close attention to the writing of the book. As long as it is possible for a player to memorize variations without understanding them, they may not spend the due diligence that is required of various joseki.

They should be constantly trying to invent.

Could you do that as a kyu player? I started doing it at about 2 dan.

Definitely started doing it as a Kyu player, I was always trying to play on the very edge of efficiency, which led to me getting too thin, which made my tesuji develop so that I'd stop getting cut apart.

I've been planning a "Sai Skype Service" for games. You can consult with a sstronger player during the game everytime you are about to move. That way you don't have to memorize life and death, joseki, shape, fighting principles, reduction, counting or in fact anything at all.

Javaness2 wrote:I've been planning a "Sai Skype Service" for games. You can consult with a sstronger player during the game everytime you are about to move. That way you don't have to memorize life and death, joseki, shape, fighting principles, reduction, counting or in fact anything at all.

But then you don't play.

shapenaji wrote: Consider that black has been given a tenuki on both sides, and consider the difference between black follow-ups at A and B at the end of the following SGF. It's a 2 point difference, maybe even a 1 point...

Maybe it is an exercise for somebody to provide an accurate endgame assessment?:)

just didn't see how the joseki book was teaching me to choose a direction.

It is a major mistake of all previous joseki dictionaries indeed.

by the time I learned Direction and tesuji, I was pretty confident that I didn't need the joseki book.

There are also lots of other kinds of strategic choices than those related to direction or tesuji:)

Those players who study it and succeed must pay very very close attention to the writing of the book.

If it is one in a style similar to the Ishida.

As long as it is possible for a player to memorize variations without understanding them,

It does not work. Maybe one remembers such variations for three months, but then one has to start all over again. Understanding is the key to memorising well. Same for pro games.

Definitely started doing it as a Kyu player

Wow!

This talk about joseki, direction of play, and the value of joseki dictionaries prompted me to take a look at an ancient joseki/fuseki dictionary. I thought this was interesting:

13 and 27 look particularly, eh, ancient:)

Bill Spight wrote:This talk about joseki, direction of play, and the value of joseki dictionaries prompted me to take a look at an ancient joseki/fuseki dictionary.

What is the name of this ancient dictionary?

tchan001 wrote:

Bill Spight wrote:This talk about joseki, direction of play, and the value of joseki dictionaries prompted me to take a look at an ancient joseki/fuseki dictionary.

What is the name of this ancient dictionary?

囲碁定石集
四十番碁立

Except that the 囲 is old style.

Igo Joseki Collection, Forty Go Openings