Life In 19x19

People do talk about being too honest as White in a handicap game, but in Japanese they use the word, shoujiki, not hontou. Honte is a different concept.

When I started playing go I was much better at taking handicaps than at giving them. My play as White was too honest, too straightforward, too simple. White needs to keep the game from being too easy for Black. IMO, it is not necessary to play trick plays in order to do that. But you can't be too honest, either.

Here is a six stone opening, with variations, from Okigo Jizai, by Hattori Inshuku (1824), with comments by Hattori and myself.

Enjoy!

Bantari wrote:As a side-note, my trusty internet says 'honto' means 'truth', while 'honte' means 'shame'.
Any comment from language mavens?

'Hontô' (本当) is the Japanese word for truth, while 'honte' is the French word for shame, and the romanization of the Japanese word '本手' (proper move).

Bill Spight wrote:People do talk about being too honest as White in a handicap game, but in Japanese they use the word, shoujiki, not hontou.

Indeed, shoujiki is closer to "honest", and hontou is closer to "true".

The 本 (hon) present both in hontou and honte carries a meaning of truth/realness.

What he said was, "Dishonest moves are moves that are made which would otherwise be foolish against a non-beginner."
Tonight, I just got slaughtered by an opponent I had never played with before. Basically, what he did almost made me want to break the Go board in two and never play it again. At this point, I can pretty much live in gote (often sente) and end the game with 30 or so points (including dead stones). This is with of course a 9 handicap. Yes this is a losing score (at least on 19x19) but at my skill level I'm happy to even get an above-zero score. But this guy played a "trick" move, as he called it, and several moves later he had about 20 of my stones in atari. I thought he was merely reducing territory I already had (as is the normal course) but in reality he was setting me up for a huge capture.
In the endgame, when it looks like black and white stones surround each other simultaneously, it's very difficult to read out a sequence of play right down to the last liberty. He knew he could get away with it in this particular case, otherwise he would have NEVER attempted something like that even against someone only 5 stones stronger than I. He would have won by a huge margin even if he hadn't done it. That, I think, would be a classic example of dishonest play. It doesn't teach me anything at this point except how to hate the game.
When I first started playing this game, I was excited. Now I take my 9 stones and just try desperately to end the game with a score higher than zero.

tynan wrote:What he said was, "Dishonest moves are moves that are made which would otherwise be foolish against a non-beginner."
Tonight, I just got slaughtered by an opponent I had never played with before. Basically, what he did almost made me want to break the Go board in two and never play it again. At this point, I can pretty much live in gote (often sente) and end the game with 30 or so points (including dead stones). This is with of course a 9 handicap. Yes this is a losing score (at least on 19x19) but at my skill level I'm happy to even get an above-zero score. But this guy played a "trick" move, as he called it, and several moves later he had about 20 of my stones in atari. I thought he was merely reducing territory I already had (as is the normal course) but in reality he was setting me up for a huge capture.
In the endgame, when it looks like black and white stones surround each other simultaneously, it's very difficult to read out a sequence of play right down to the last liberty. He knew he could get away with it in this particular case, otherwise he would have NEVER attempted something like that even against someone only 5 stones stronger than I. He would have won by a huge margin even if he hadn't done it. That, I think, would be a classic example of dishonest play. It doesn't teach me anything at this point except how to hate the game.
When I first started playing this game, I was excited. Now I take my 9 stones and just try desperately to end the game with a score higher than zero.

This is one reason that go has handicaps. Take more stones from this player. Like 13, maybe.

A lot of us regard high handicap games as teaching games, where the object is not necessarily to win. But some people play all out, even when giving 9 stones or more. There is nothing wrong with that, as long as the handicap gives each player a 50-50 chance.

tynan wrote:It doesn't teach me anything at this point except how to hate the game.

If this is the only thing you got out of this experience, then it's sad indeed.

Of course, how to teach or how to help beginners is another huge topic,
very deep (with many other threads of discussions. )
Maybe this person could have taken a better approach, maybe not -- we were not there, so it's not easy to tell.
Some people can wipe us off the board but still make us feel nice about it.
If they're genuinely trying to help us improve, instead of just crushing for fun,
we can often feel it.

At the same time, Go can be brutal sometimes -- many of us here already know this.
Take some of the vocabulary for example: punish, severe, vital points, kill, life-and-death, painful, etc.

This may sound cliche, but often, our worst opponents are ourselves.

So we need to find a balance, between:

• Taking responsibility for our moves -- after all, nobody else forced us to play them.
• Dealing with people such as the guy early in Hikaru who enjoy tormenting beginners with bad moves.

The final result of your game depended on both you and him, yes;
but what you can learn from this experience depends on you, not him.

Bill Spight wrote: When I started playing go I was much better at taking handicaps than at giving them.

I think you have discovered an ultimative truth.
Asuming the same opponent taking a handicap should always give a better winning chance than giving a handicap to him


@tynan: When using the concept of "dishonest move" it shouldn't imply a "dishonest character". If your opponent plays a trick move he actually gives you some extra chances to punish it. If you don't find the correct counter he gives you some extra chance to learn something about life & death or tesuji.

When I play a game I usually don't care who is teacher and MUST play some special style for some reasons, but I prefere to set up a handicap that gives both a 50:50 chance to win and requires that both do their best. This way BOTH players can learn something.
If white thinks that trick moves gives the best chance there is nothing wrong with it (independ if it's really the best strategy).

Actually if it's a sure-win-strategy for white to play only calm moves I think the handicap is too low and I would consider it as unfair in a game played for fun. And for white it will be quite boring. (Of corse there is nothing wrong with reducing the handicap for a teaching game, but it should be treated differently than playing a "fair" game and be clear for both players from the beginning.)

You should welcome if you force white to take risks when making trick moves and fight back as hard as you can instead of trying not to die and accept losing on points for sure. Better to die big in a semeai (and have at least a small chance to win) than simply losing for sure without a fight.

asura wrote:

Bill Spight wrote: When I started playing go I was much better at taking handicaps than at giving them.

I think you have discovered an ultimative truth.
Asuming the same opponent taking a handicap should always give a better winning chance than giving a handicap to him

Just a truth about myself. As a 2 kyu I could take 4 stones from a 4 dan but could not give 5 stones to a 7 kyu.

Bill Spight wrote:Just a truth about myself. As a 2 kyu I could take 4 stones from a 4 dan but could not give 5 stones to a 7 kyu.

I'm just curious, are you now equally good with w and b in handi games?
And how is handicap vs even games?
In theory a KGS like rating seems to give white a small advantage (because the effective handicap is 0.5 stones too small.
For me it seems somehow that I'm slightly stronger in handicap games (with b and w) than in even games. What does this say about me?