Life In 19x19

aokun wrote:Lastly, well ... mom and the knight. I think the fellow in the videos made a slight tactical error in putting his mom in for the 3-3 point.

Opinions vary on this, but it's well known warning. 33 for me is Michael Caine, who can do whatever wants without getting me into therapy.

snorri wrote:5000 moves doesn't sound like much, but ask a pro to memorize twenty 250-move games with completely random moves and see how that goes. I treat this as a case of overlearning. There is a coloring to the moves and sequences that gives them a personality. Why do pros encourage you to play over games on a real board? It adds the sense of sound and touch. It's good for the memory to just pile on additional input that may not be pertinent to the thing that is being memorized. That's just the way the brain works. It is not like a hard disk.

Efficiencies for encoding josekis are possible, but most of the game is not joseki, so you really don't save that much. I evaluated a hybrid haengma-coordinate approach, but it suffers from a kind of Amdahl's law. The non-optimized moves become the bottleneck.

5000 is a massive amount. It does just seem a bit of a shame to spend them equally on "normal" moves and the peculiar moves. But I take your point about a hybrid being hard to get right.

Ortho wrote:One thing about the "meaning of the moves" issue-a well-known Korean 7d amateur spent some time at our Go club and spent an hour or so teaching a 3k before the club meetings. Many times I overheard them and she was teaching him josekis or other moves saying "just play here" and he was continually saying "I don't understand the meaning/purpose of this move". It became clear to me over hearing this many many times over the course of a few weeks that she regarded the meaning or purpose of a move as surplus information not necessary to play Go really well, and she would definitely lean in favour of the "just remember the joseki moves by whatever means" side of this argument IMO.

Yeah, the "meaning of the moves" (or worse, the "meaning of each move") always sounds a little bizarre to me. Like something out of that old Kung Fu series. "Snatch the pebble from my hand" stuff, it seems. Because you're supposed to study this stuff that no one really seems to know.

Some moves have a clear meaning, or, if they are very good, multiple meanings. Others have so many follow-ups the meaning is not clear until the results of an enormous number of subsequent variations are analyzed. Joseki books, for example, don't tell you the meaning of the moves. Rather, they give evaluations of results. If some new variation is discovered that can be forced, a joseki may be abandoned in a branch pretty far back from the refutation. This happens all the time. Do we then suggest that professionals didn't understand the meaning of the previous move before? If you answer no, I'd reply that the meaning has limited use. If you say yes, then maybe the meaning is inaccessible to amateurs.

It's almost misleading, too. I can take any 20k game and make up a "meaning" for most moves. (We'll leave out: take sente by pointless self-atari.) That doesn't make them strong or easy to remember.

snorri wrote:
Opinions vary on this, but it's well known warning. 33 for me is Michael Caine, who can do whatever wants without getting me into therapy.

Can't get much more vivid than Michael Caine. It was detriments like 'im that built this bloody empire!

Hats on!

I don't understand he point of all these complicated encoding algorithms. The purpose of memorizing pro games is too get a feeling for shape. If all you remember is " bob triangle fish" clearly that isn't happening.

snorri wrote:Yeah, the "meaning of the moves" (or worse, the "meaning of each move") always sounds a little bizarre to me. Like something out of that old Kung Fu series. "Snatch the pebble from my hand" stuff, it seems. Because you're supposed to study this stuff that no one really seems to know.Some moves have a clear meaning, or, if they are very good, multiple meanings. Others have so many follow-ups the meaning is not clear until the results of an enormous number of subsequent variations are analyzed. Joseki books, for example, don't tell you the meaning of the moves. Rather, they give evaluations of results. If some new variation is discovered that can be forced, a joseki may be abandoned in a branch pretty far back from the refutation. This happens all the time. Do we then suggest that professionals didn't understand the meaning of the previous move before? If you answer no, I'd reply that the meaning has limited use. If you say yes, then maybe the meaning is inaccessible to amateurs.

Now, I`m really trying not to be negative but could it be that all this memory stuff is barking up the wrong tree?

Isn`t the point of studying the meaning of a move not to remember the move, but to be able to play that move or others like it when the situation calls for it? For example, if Onimoto Sousuke, 11 dan, says "this move b is a situational joseki. Normally you lose five points compared with the alternative at a, but you might choose b to function as a ladder break or to form a large-scale formation with your 5-4 point in the opposite corner", then it`s not so much the move itself you`re learning from as the reasoning behind it.

Again, there could be applications for mnemonics, for example, I use "Di, Dick and Ed" to remember "Descent - Ikken tobi; Diagonal - Keima; Empty Triangle - Diagonal" as a way of remembering ways to play a supported 3-3 invasion against 4-4 and keima enclosure, but generally I`ve found it`s just easier to remember the reasons for choosing each move.

I think the problem with just memorising stuff is that every position on the board affects everything else to a greater or lesser extent, and so even a perfectly memorised sequence could be a poor choice or could be profitably altered in some way according to the needs of the situation. If you`ve studied the thinking behind the moves, then you`re going to be able to act in a much more flexible way than someone who`s simply retrieving items from a memory palace.

Put it another way: "use complicated mnemonics!" or "think carefully about why you play x in move y situation!". Which piece of advice would you bet on Lee Chang Ho giving you, if one of the two?

snorri wrote:the "meaning of the moves" (or worse, the "meaning of each move") always sounds a little bizarre to me.

Have you studied a good or a bad set of possible meanings? With bad meanings, it is easy to conclude that they would be bizarre. Use a good set and structure of meanings!

Because you're supposed to study this stuff that no one really seems to know.

Many meanings are basic and many people know them somehow. A problem is to be inaccurate, have important gaps and lack structure in the knowledge of meanings. Studying material on meanings gives you a reasonably complete related knowledge, regardless of whether other players fail to do related study.

Some moves have a clear meaning, or, if they are very good, multiple meanings. Others have so many follow-ups the meaning is not clear until the results of an enormous number of subsequent variations are analyzed.

In such cases, dynamic meanings apply: meanings referring to strategic or tactical choices. Decisions such as "Giving the opponent the strategic choice to achieve either X or Y.". If the player dislikes at least one of the reasonably possible opposing choices (X or Y), then the player must NOT choose a move with such a meaning of giving the opponent the related choice.

Joseki books, for example, don't tell you the meaning of the moves.

This is, of course, wrong: my joseki books tell you the meanings and strategic choices, even if they are dynamic.

Rather, they give evaluations of results.

Usually, they don't, or, if they do, the "evaluations" are very weak. "Black is better." Occasionally, comments are bit more informative: "Black has 12 points in the corner and White has a wall facing the upper side." It is a shame! All joseki books should give evaluations of stone difference, territory, influence, strategic choices etc. for each joseki and explain possible meanings carefully, quite like my books do.

Do we then suggest that professionals didn't understand the meaning of the previous move before?

It is better to understand limited knowledge before the value of new moves is fully understood. If variations are complicated, then knowledge must admit that it is partial or makes an assumption such as "no unexpected refutations have been discovered thus far".

I can take any 20k game and make up a "meaning" for most moves. (We'll leave out: take sente by pointless self-atari.) That doesn't make them strong or easy to remember.

Meanings must be relevant for achieving a result helping the player making the move.

Tami wrote:Now, I`m really trying not to be negative but could it be that all this memory stuff is barking up the wrong tree?

Possibly, which is why I'm inquiring. However, some of the examples discussed so far seem legitimate:

- a checklist
- remembering pro games to permit their study in conditions not conducive to using a board
- remembering joseki sequences, although this one is a little unclear, as the relationship between the sequence and the result is murky at this point

speedchase wrote:I don't understand he point of all these complicated encoding algorithms. The purpose of memorizing pro games is too get a feeling for shape. If all you remember is " bob triangle fish" clearly that isn't happening.

I don't think anyone is presenting this as an either/or thing. At least I hope I'm not coming off that way. Memory has gotten kind of bad rap in Western culture over the past few centuries. Because of this, I think the pendulum has swung a a bit too far in the extreme direction of insisting that understanding precedes remembering all the time, or that remembering things just for the sake of remembering them is somehow bad. Taken to the extreme, that would of course be a silly proposition. No one would say, "don't remember the words in a foreign language. Instead, just try to understand the meanings of the phonemes and their flow." It is not 100% wrong---sensing the cadence of a new language does help in acquisition---but eventually one has to learn something.

There are a number of ways of remembering things better. One is to understand them. That's often the best if it is possible. I'm not arguing that point. Another is brute force repetition. Another option---the one being discussed here---is memory techniques. There is no one correct solution for each situation.

quantumf wrote:

Tami wrote:Now, I`m really trying not to be negative but could it be that all this memory stuff is barking up the wrong tree?

Possibly, which is why I'm inquiring. However, some of the examples discussed so far seem legitimate:

- a checklist
- remembering pro games to permit their study in conditions not conducive to using a board
- remembering joseki sequences, although this one is a little unclear, as the relationship between the sequence and the result is murky at this point

A few more:

- the rules for capturing races, to save time during game play (I'm not saying one shouldn't try to read, but when counting is faster or more accurate, why not?)
- the faces and names of people you meet at go events, to make new friends
- some words in an Asian language, to read go books
- some poetry, to calm your mind or share
- the sizes of endgame moves, to win close games

snorri wrote:
As for volume, let's set some expectations. The grandmaster norm for digits is memorizing 1000 in an hour. In 1993 the world record was 900. Now the world record is 2660. So let's say 500 moves in one of these training runs. Probably keep around 10 journeys of this size for training, but if one ditches training and just uses for review of joseki encodings, 5000 moves. Kogo's had about 62,000 moves the last time I checked. I think 5000 moves would be in the ballpark for a grandmaster who knows nothing about go. I am not a grandmaster and I don't know how long it will take to meet that norm. I was probably 30% of the way there at my peak, but my journeys are kind of rusty.

So the conclusion is that I wouldn't do it this way. If I wanted to learn a lot of joseki, I would do it mostly the traditional way and only use mnemotechnics in tough spots.

It sounds like it's hard to get an advantage out of these memory tricks here, I wonder if it could be used backward to get an advantage? A go board (or a specific game) AS a memory palace?

Tami wrote:Put it another way: "use complicated mnemonics!" or "think carefully about why you play x in move y situation!". Which piece of advice would you bet on Lee Chang Ho giving you, if one of the two?

Neither. What little advice I've seen from Lee ChangHo in English is mostly just "learn to read better." About that, he's right, of course. I'd like to see more of his thoughts sometime.

But I don't think of it as an either/or thing, so plean pardon me if I resist attempts to frame the discussion that way. I'm not saying mnenotechnics is the best way. I don't say it's necessary, and I certainly don't say it's easy. I'm just trying to respond to the OP's question and I do say there are some possible uses. I'm not even trying to sell a book.

Oh, and for those not as strong as shapenaji, just use your favorite opening and make each move a locus to remember something...

Be very vivid and imagine the players or something happening on the board. For example, if toothpaste is on the list, maybe imagine Cho Chikun brushing his teeth and then spitting on the move where the toothpaste is to be remembered.

shapenaji wrote:It sounds like it's hard to get an advantage out of these memory tricks here, I wonder if it could be used backward to get an advantage? A go board (or a specific game) AS a memory palace?

I tried to respond, but my response got lost. Anyway, use a game with key moves in the game marked as loci (a ko, invasion, probe) and put iteams you want to rememeber there, or just your favorite opening. Imagine the players---people are sometimes easier to remember than objects---actually doing something interesting with the object you want to remember at that point in the game.

snorri wrote:

shapenaji wrote:It sounds like it's hard to get an advantage out of these memory tricks here, I wonder if it could be used backward to get an advantage? A go board (or a specific game) AS a memory palace?

I tried to respond, but my response got lost. Anyway, use a game with key moves in the game marked as loci (a ko, invasion, probe) and put iteams you want to rememeber there, or just your favorite opening. Imagine the players---people are sometimes easier to remember than objects---actually doing something interesting with the object you want to remember at that point in the game.

Nice ideas. Seems like one could get quite a large collection of (admittedly small) palaces by referring to popular openings (low chinese, high chinese, sanrensei, great wall, rotating komoku, kobayashi, mini chinese, etc)