Life In 19x19

I think most players enjoy playing out a won game, if they aren't trying to squeeze a game into unusual time. I personally try to limit the number of games I play during a day, especially if I am in a losing rut, so sometimes I will continue to play as opposed to starting another game, which I feel might not be able to give a good game, just because I want to play go.

SmoothOper wrote:I think most players enjoy playing out a won game, if they aren't trying to squeeze a game into unusual time. I personally try to limit the number of games I play during a day, especially if I am in a losing rut, so sometimes I will continue to play as opposed to starting another game, which I feel might not be able to give a good game, just because I want to play go.

If I may make an example with golf, when you play casual rounds and get the ball relatively close to the hole, a lot of people will tell you that your putt is a 'gimme', meaning that you can count it as good without having to actually make it. Originally, this was used for putts that were 'inside the leather', meaning closer to the hole than the length of the leather grip on the putter (maybe 9-10"), as they are quite difficult to miss. Nowadays, though, you will find players who will give or take gimmes from 3+ feet away, a much less likely putt, and often the reason is that they don't have a lot of practice finishing those short but not too short putts, and are worried about having to make them and missing.

I suspect in go, at a certain level, players can play themselves into a won position but aren't fully confident that they won't screw up the win, and this is where some of the pressure to resign comes from. At a professional level, mistakes are few and far between, and so resigning makes sense, but if you lost a group early as a 10k player and your opponent is trying to insist that you resign, who's to say they won't lose the same later? Besides, strength shows in the endgame .

Martin1974 wrote:So I'm off to another hobby, knitting maybe. Never heard of rude knitting ...

Gee, rude knitting doesn't take that much imagination.

I think it's a bit rude if you're aware of the count nearing endgame. I don't have much respect for a player who is hoping for a 10% chance to win based on time pressure or psychological lapses(boredom) from your opponent in a casual club game or online game.

The fun part of Go for me isn't winning or losing, it's making a nice game where both players are going all-out and then reviewing and learning from it afterwards. Unless you're in a tournament environment (or practicing for tournaments), I feel like it's insulting if you either make ridiculous overplays in yose or play passive with your lead.

I'm sure that I'm a small minority. At least it doesn't bother me all that much because I just imagine my opponents are practicing for a tournament or something.

I used to think it was rude to play out a loss you were aware of, but now I don't think so. Because I typically resign when I feel i have no chance, I rarely get to practice endgame.

If there's still something to be learned from the game, keep playing.

Also, part of go strength is maintaining a win, and conversely, coming back from a loss.

By continuing to play, you can increase these areas of strength in your game.

Kirby wrote:I used to think it was rude to play out a loss you were aware of, but now I don't think so. Because I typically resign when I feel i have no chance, I rarely get to practice endgame.

I suspect that this is a confusion. As you get better, what counts as a close game becomes tighter: for me a 5 point game is rather close, but it's not so close for evenly matched professionals. Part of this is that your endgame gets more accurate: at my level, a 5 point lead is only solid relatively late. By the same token, the amount you can expect to gain or lose in endgame shrinks. So what you're practicing is about smaller and smaller differences: by resigning games with larger margins, you're not losing the chance to practice what matters.

hyperpape wrote:

Kirby wrote:I used to think it was rude to play out a loss you were aware of, but now I don't think so. Because I typically resign when I feel i have no chance, I rarely get to practice endgame.

I suspect that this is a confusion. As you get better, what counts as a close game becomes tighter: for me a 5 point game is rather close, but it's not so close for evenly matched professionals. Part of this is that your endgame gets more accurate: at my level, a 5 point lead is only solid relatively late. By the same token, the amount you can expect to gain or lose in endgame shrinks. So what you're practicing is about smaller and smaller differences: by resigning games with larger margins, you're not losing the chance to practice what matters.

Middle game is more likely to decide the winner - I agree.

The point is, if one of the two players always resigns when they realize they are behind, endgame is rarely played. It is nice to be able to practice the endgame, even when you will still lose, because you can increase this strength. Also, it's not just about endgame. I have been finding turnarounds happening in late middle game. I think this is a strength that someone can grow. If I always resigned before getting to this point, I'd never grow this ability.

Kirby wrote:The point is, if one of the two players always resigns when they realize they are behind, endgame is rarely played.

My point of view is that if you can count that accurately, it means you know how the endgame will go, and you don't need to practice it.

You can always go home and play the endgame out as a problem. If your opponent is winning by 15 points, there's no reason for them to push you in the endgame, they may just play it safe.

hyperpape wrote:My point of view is that if you can count that accurately, it means you know how the endgame will go, and you don't need to practice it.

You can always go home and play the endgame out as a problem. If your opponent is winning by 15 points, there's no reason for them to push you in the endgame, they may just play it safe.

Trust me, in my case, I think I need to practice endgame, more

Since I'm already playing a game and under time pressure, it seems like a good opportunity to do so. Of course, as with all aspects of the game, I can continue to review it later. Also, there's a difference in being able to tell that you won't be able to win, and playing optimal sequence of endgame moves. So even if you're skilled enough to tell that you don't have enough to make things up in endgame, it is still a challenge to play optimally.

My changed viewpoint on this comes from the idea that the purpose of the game is not about winning - it's about learning. So if I treat the game as a way to learn something new, there can be things to be learned from playing the endgame, even if the result happens to be a loss for me.

Kirby wrote:My changed viewpoint on this comes from the idea that the purpose of the game is not about winning - it's about learning. So if I treat the game as a way to learn something new, there can be things to be learned from playing the endgame, even if the result happens to be a loss for me.

I think the problem is - if your opponent leads by more than 15 points in the endgame - he would rather avoid any risks and play only the second-best sequences, even if that gives away a few points. Thus, the learning effect is not as high as in close endgames.

I am now trying harder to count during playing, which at least starts to work for me in slow games (tournament games etc.). Besides a better judgement of the score it's also a good opportunity to calm down and look at the game from another perspective. I also try practising to count while watching high dan games played online. In fast games, I am still somewhat unsure about the result especially if there is heavy fighting going on.

BTW it's funny that this thread has been reanimated after a couple of months...

schawipp wrote:I think the problem is - if your opponent leads by more than 15 points in the endgame - he would rather avoid any risks and play only the second-best sequences, even if that gives away a few points. Thus, the learning effect is not as high as in close endgames.

Yes, I agree. I just think that it's better to get some practice in than none at all. If I feel that the learning effect is near zero, then it's probably more effective to resign. But if there is some non-zero learning effect, I think it's worth it to play out the game.