Life In 19x19

On http://book.kongfz.com/6525/97754558/ that is the used book price, the original price was about 65, which seems reasonable back in 1993.

I found this an interesting remark:

John Fairbairn wrote:At least, even here I see people talk about deciding to studying joseki, or the endgame, or life and death. All fine things in themselves, but not holistic. It may seem that doing a bit of A, then B then C amounts to a mixture of ABC, but I'm not so sure. I'm beginning to believe that there is a undervalued synergy in doing A and B and C together in a way that is not really possible here. It's possibly not just convenient but hugely more beneficial to have a book, as above, where you can read about josekis and turn immediately to a section on life and death problems that result from josekis, or to a section on counting the resulting endgame plays, whenever you have a query.

I actually wonder of how much value such a "holistic" is to the average avidly-studying amateur. In fact, I feel that at my level, it would be really useful to spend some time (let's say, a couple of weeks) drilling just ONE topic regularly. For example, work on a book with exclusively semeai problems, and study it for an hour every day until it's finished, then repeat the same book a few weeks later to see if you can still do it. Then, you would hopefully firmly increase your knowledge on one subset of basic shapes, and then move on. Of course, you'd have to keep playing games as well while working on this.

Unfortunately, I personally don't have the time for that any more, and also not really the determination... Anyhow, my point is that I personally don't really see the benefits of the "holistic" approach. There is the danger of trying a little bit of everything but not really studying anything thoroughly. Of course, if a standard pattern has some remarkable endgame continuation or life-and-death aji, that's important to know. But, the joseki books or middle-game books that I know (for example the Ishida, and Yilun Yang's "Strategic Fundamentals") already háve the most important (tesuji) continuations and ajis!

Actually, there is a great holistic exercise available in any language, even for the illiterate: study professional games!

By the way, typing this made me wonder what would be the best way to improvement: a mixed study regime, working through a few problem books simultaneously, or the more focused approach of just finishing one book before moving on. As I've never managed to actually finish a problem book, my studying was always actually the mixed variation. But I'm now wondering what would've been best

gaius wrote:what would be the best way to improvement

At your current rank,

- absorb all knowledge you can find, in particular read all available good or better books, study at least 1500 problems and at least 1500 games (up to the late middle game, otherwise you never finish, but don't neglect the endgame topic entirely)
- find out (or take a teacher who finds out) what truely your greatest weaknesses are and concentrate study on those topics
- play a lot and attend tournaments

You indicate that you don't have enough time. Well, time is money: pay a teacher for doing part of your work. You also indicate that you are, eh, not optimally motivated at the moment. You need to overcome that. Finish the (easy enough but not dull) problem books instead of stopping in the middle!

RobertJasiek wrote:

gaius wrote:what would be the best way to improvement

At your current rank,

- absorb all knowledge you can find, in particular read all available good or better books, study at least 1500 problems and at least 1500 games (up to the late middle game, otherwise you never finish, but don't neglect the endgame topic entirely)
- find out (or take a teacher who finds out) what truely your greatest weaknesses are and concentrate study on those topics
- play a lot and attend tournaments

You indicate that you don't have enough time. Well, time is money: pay a teacher for doing part of your work. You also indicate that you are, eh, not optimally motivated at the moment. You need to overcome that. Finish the (easy enough but not dull) problem books instead of stopping in the middle!

Robert,

When providing this advice, does different methods of learning (or knowledge absorption, for that matter) factor in? You seem to have a solid plan in mind whenever someone asks advice on how to improve, and I'm curious if you believe there is one "superior" way that applies to everyone, or if you believe that the advice you give applies to the majority, with the caveat that some people may not be suited for such a method?

Perhaps I lack the discipline required, but I've never been able to study effectively (not even in school). I've somehow managed to do pretty well in academic endeavors, but I'd say my biggest weakness is my lack of study ability. Yet, I have still learned (and still learn) quickly, gaining in knowledge through using skills and refining my techniques endlessly. Perhaps a teacher would be best for me, since I run on a "show me the result" learning pattern.

Your thoughts, Robert?

I realize what I'm about to say is still a bit "Western" in it's approach, but ...

In other (non-go) areas of my life, I've found that holism is, in and of itself, is a separate skill.

One can learn to pour concrete, cut and nail boards, run wires, connect pipes, set windows, and apply roofing. But all of these skills together will not at all guarantee that you will be skilled at building an entire house. That is to say, you could certainly build a house, but it probably would not be one that was a "good" house in the larger sense that it met the needs of the people who lived it in.

In order to play a good game, there must be a synergy in the skills we learn, and this synergy is a skill as well, which we might call "holism". But it is one which we do not generally talk about studying, we acquire it through having a built-in aptitude, by reading between the lines in existing books where possible, by oral tradition (if we take lessons), by sink-or-swim, or not at all.

I feel like this is what John is saying about holism in English go literature.

Saying "I could benefit more from studying just one topic in depth, then moving to another, rather than from holism" sounds to me like saying "I could benefit more from studying one topic in depth, then moving to another, rather than from studying joseki". It misses the point and doesn't really make sense.

I know this oversimplifies the situation a tad, but I do think it's at least partly accurate.

gaius wrote:Actually, there is a great holistic exercise available in any language, even for the illiterate: study professional games!

I agree. Especially if you take your time.

By the way, typing this made me wonder what would be the best way to improvement: a mixed study regime, working through a few problem books simultaneously, or the more focused approach of just finishing one book before moving on. As I've never managed to actually finish a problem book, my studying was always actually the mixed variation. But I'm now wondering what would've been best

I have not kept up with the latest learning research, but as far as I know, it does not matter whether you concentrate on one thing at a time or mix them up.

One of the best advices I read was by Bill: study what you like. It's also what Antti Törmänen, now insei, says elsewhere on this forum, interviewed by Hushfield, that he would have wanted to take his study less seriously and enjoy it more. Indeed, only when one aspires to become a professional, as Antti is presumably doing, it becomes serious business. We amateurs play Go for fun and in our quest to get better, we should also have fun.

That said and agreeing that pro games are out there abundantly for "holistic" study, I still think that there's a gap between oriental books and western books, after having taken lessons with Minue 6d Korean amateur. I cannot publish his study material, out of courtesy (although I'm more than a little worried about his current state, since he has vanished from any scene and used to be very talkative and sociable). Many of his haengma exercises were precisely about the positions that come up in your games all the time and you always have the feeling you apply some mediocre 'suji' whereas the 5d-6d deal with it swiftly to their convenience. John related to that very eloquently in an earlier reply.

Pro games never have these sequences because the pros will never leave such occasions for the opponent, or resist heavily when they occur. These middle game joseki are under the surface all the time and to infer them from pro game study, well honestly that's beyond my capacity. The haengma exercises were real eye-openers to me. I doubt I would recognize them hidden under a pro sequence, let alone solve them correctly all the time.

There's a reason for go books. There IS a gap between the East and the West. Robert will not suffice with his single lifetime to cover all the analytically deconstructed aspects of the game "in full detail". Therefore, having translated "holistic" material will already be very helpful. More importantly, I will enjoy studying it.

John Fairbairn wrote: As to balance, overall, the middle-game portion gets 178 pages, compared to just 115 for josekis. I may have lost touch with the English literature but I suspect that, if anything, the ratio might be reversed here, and if you strip out the problem type format which tend to characterise many of our middle-game books (the encyclopaedia has its own problem sections, don't forget), I suspect that josekis get a bigger slice of the pie over here. If so, I suggest that's unbalanced.

I don't really have the impression that joseki are overrepresented in the Western literature. However, it is probably the case that joseki are overrepresented in amateur discussions. I suspect that this has little to do with what books are available and a lot to do with most of us amateurs being insecure about our ability to judge moves. It's a whole lot easier to say "This move is good because the joseki book says so" than to find an explanation (which also runs the risk of being wrong.) Also, my impression is that overreliance on joseki is not a purely Western disease.

I do agree, though, that it would be nice to have an integrated reference work in English.

John Fairbairn wrote: However, my biggest astonishment came a few years later when I read here that there are people who don't like this book.

There are people who don't like the translation of Shuko's Dictionary?!

Actually, I can understand where Herr Jasiek is coming from -- it would have been nice to have a section with just the problem diagrams, organized -- but I can't see this as anything but a minor criticism of a book with a high level of overall awesomeness.

65 yuan in 1998 (and 24 rmb for a used copy is about right) is actually relatively expensive for a Chinese go book, even after taking into account its size. In the saturated market of Chinese go books, the high price is a likely indicator of quality...

Bill Spight wrote:On the question of holism, at least in the context of learning go, my favorite method of study has always been pro games. They have everything. At least implicitly.

This is true, of course.

John Fairbairn wrote:As it covers the basics so well, I even think it's a shame that so much money was spent, with the best of intentions, by Oriental organisations on things like freebies to the WAGC for a handful of people. If they had spent some of that money on having this book translated (not by me, I hasten to add!), far more westerners would have seen the benefit of the money and we would have a much better grounding.

This is neither here nor there, but I sometimes wish some of this money were spent on putting copies of the Elementary Go Series and similar books in public libraries. When you think about it, there are already a lot of really excellent books in English. As great as it would be to have more books translated (especially the very good Chinese encyclopedias) I wonder if we would do more good by making these existing books more widely and easily available. Having used copies of Attack and Defense on Amazon for $93 each doesn't count.

Marcus wrote: When providing this advice, does different methods of learning (or knowledge absorption, for that matter) factor in?

Yes. Different people learn differently. As an extreme example, some players learn by playing only.

You seem to have a solid plan in mind whenever someone asks advice on how to improve,

I take my own experience of jumping from 10k to 3d in "no time", see what someone says when he asks and his rank and use my teaching experience. Altogether give me a good idea of suggesting a "solid plan".

and I'm curious if you believe there is one "superior" way that applies to everyone,

As soon as one knows some more details about a particular player's knowledge backgroup, ability and learning style, the more specific ways can be found. The superior common requirements remain the same though: much spent time helps much, motivation is necessary, the greatest weaknesses must be overcome, knowledge / reading ability etc. should cover every field. (Everybody else would state problem solving here but I think that emphasising this too much could lead to overlooking the other aspects, as if one could become pro by leaning nothing but problem solving.)

if you believe that the advice you give applies to the majority,

Basically yes. Of course, if somebody has already done 1000 problems, then I do not suggest 1500 but 500 more from 1d to 3d or 4d. Note though that my advice in the earlier message was for a Dutch 1d! Kyu players need less.

with the caveat that some people may not be suited for such a method?

Surely there are people that cannot learn well from books but might learn from, say, verbal hints. In that case, they need to get the book knowledge from sources suitable for them: clubs.

If you ask me if fewer than 1500 problems and games each will do - maybe, maybe not. Maybe someone needs 1000, someone else 2000. With such a number, I do not feed any 10,000 myth but it is more a minimal source of mid dan reading ability and representative ideas of what strategically can happen in games at all. Therefore it is not necessary to make it too strict. E.g., 500 games, 500 openings, 500 commented games, 500 middle game studies would also do it.

I've never been able to study effectively [...] Yet, I have still learned (and still learn) quickly, gaining in knowledge through using skills and refining my techniques endlessly.

Isn't this a contradiction?

Perhaps a teacher would be best for me

Do you think you improve fast enough?:)

Knotwilg wrote:study what you like.

That is ok as long as one improves and knows all one's major weaknesses. Otherwise it becomes necessary to study (also) what one does not like.

Robert will not suffice with his single lifetime to cover all the analytically deconstructed aspects of the game "in full detail".

I am more optimistic:)

Thanks for the detailed response, Robert.

RobertJasiek wrote:

I've never been able to study effectively [...] Yet, I have still learned (and still learn) quickly, gaining in knowledge through using skills and refining my techniques endlessly.

Isn't this a contradiction?

Perhaps a teacher would be best for me

Do you think you improve fast enough?:)

As for the contradiction, perhaps you're right. My point was that I feel like I do things backwards; I learn from my games (or from my exams) rather than from things like books or tsumego. I suppose that's a type of studying, too.

Do I learn fast enough? I like to think I do ... at least, for the amount of time and effort I have available to play the game. It's a little discouraging sometimes to see some of my former equals (Loons, for instance) get stronger while I continue my slow climb ... but I never feel like I'm stuck anymore (not since 7k or so), so that's got to be a good sign, right?

John Fairbairn wrote:

There is a scanned PDF on the web. If plug the name into Google, you will see one of the links has PDF in the title. I can't see the black move numbers when I view the file but it does allow you to see what the book content looks like.

Is this aiding piracy?

Your Milage May Vary! Personally I did (and do) not think that saying to a mainly non-Chinese-reading audience that a copy of a book in Chinese with unreadable diagrams exists is going to suddenly halt sales of the book. If anything, I think the opposite. I was excited to find the copy because I wanted to know whether the material was interesting enough to warrant finding the book without being able to read Chinese (hence potentially helping sales!). As noted, you can get a pretty good idea of what it looks like. My conclusion is that it is not, BTW. The text may be better than usual but sadly I can't read it. Overall the coverage is typical for such compendiums. As noted the same thing exists in Japanese, just normally divided into five or six volumes sold together.

Back to the piracy question though, it is interesting that Google's system ranks the site 4th out of 7000+ linked to the book title, ahead of amazon.cn for example. Since the diagrams are unreadable, maybe the text really is that good!

So what you are saying is that it is ok for non-chinese people to pirate chinese language go books because they can't read the language anyways. With the same logic perhaps it would seem ok for chinese people to pirate non-chinese go books since they can't read it much anyways and also because it has the potential to promote the sales of such books.

John Fairbairn wrote: What dawned on me was that the Oriental countries all have this "holistic" kind of book, but also their magazines are equally holistic, and you could even say that their playing environment is equally holistic
...

But (so long as minds are kept open and those tempted to try to apply killer logic can rein themselves in) L19 itself does at least provide the glimmerings of a holistic way of talking about go.

It seems that this subject deserves it's own thread, but since we're talking about it here, I'd like to throw my two cents in.

So far, it seems only redponey has attempted to clarify the concept of holism as related to go. He writes:

redponey wrote:In order to play a good game, there must be a synergy in the skills we learn, and this synergy is a skill as well, which we might call "holism". But it is one which we do not generally talk about studying, we acquire it through having a built-in aptitude, by reading between the lines in existing books where possible, by oral tradition (if we take lessons), by sink-or-swim, or not at all.

I feel like this is what John is saying about holism in English go literature.

I don't know if this is what John is implying or not, but it does point in an interesting direction. The question for me is "How do we decide on a move?" For each board situation, there are a wealth of factors that come into play, and I suspect that John's enlightenment comes from the realization that the design of specialized go books promotes the focusing on one particular aspect at a time such as joseki or the life of a group, whereas the game demands a broader and more multi-faceted approach.

How to develop the ability to be aware of the range of forces pressing on a position and to grok the best response is something of a holy grail that we are all searching for. Is this really something that can be offered in book form?

One of the first go books I read, Go! More Than a Game by Peter Shotwell offers something of a holistic approach, in that he presents principles and then shows these principles in action during games. He also supplements the technical aspects with essays on go history and culture, which I think is not irrelevant to a holistic approach. I'd love to read a more advanced book structured in a similar manner, but a book I fear can only play a tiny role in teaching us to better prioritize the wealth of sage advice.

In my opinion, one of the best tools we have at our disposal here on L19 is the Malkovitch game. Here we can see what players do and do not consider as relevant. While the format may bore some to tears, it does offer a glimpse into the decision process, and the narrowness or broadness of a players viewpoint becomes apparent.

daal wrote:How to develop the ability to be aware of the range of forces pressing on a position and to grok the best response is something of a holy grail that we are all searching for. Is this really something that can be offered in book form?

Sure. Not only something but a lot. See Joseki Vol. 2 Strategy. Although it emphases joseki over middle game, it provides advice for locally and globally applicable concepts, analysis methods and decision making. How? Learn all that, then you can apply it.