Life In 19x19

Magicwand wrote:3) everything you post on L19 is an advertisment of your worthless books. it is not a discussion.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but this crosses the line into personal attacks. Please refrain

RobertJasiek wrote:2) Do not make arbitrary claims about what I understand.

Would you feel better if I'd have said you didn't understand the language of the text?

1) Come to the lifein19x19-forum.
2) See a thread with many reactions, radiate with joy and expect a discussion with substance.
3) Read the thread, see that is is only filled with pro-Jasiek and contra-Jasiek arguments again and feel slightly sad.

Why does it have to be this way?

Also, I apoligize for my off-topic comment in advance.

(To make sure I am not misinterpreted, the above question is rhetorical. I take no responsibility for any emotional, physical or financial harm caused by this message. The content states the opinion of the author only, and in no way any rights can be derived from it.)

On one hand the Cosmic Go Style is very popular on the other those that seem to adhere to it don't seem to do all that well at the top levels of playing, I wonder if this is a case of a book containing good writing but bad go?

SmoothOper wrote:On one hand the Cosmic Go Style is very popular on the other those that seem to adhere to it don't seem to do all that well at the top levels of playing

Eh? What about Takemiya? Ok, not top level, only 9p;)

RobertJasiek wrote:

SmoothOper wrote:On one hand the Cosmic Go Style is very popular on the other those that seem to adhere to it don't seem to do all that well at the top levels of playing

Eh? What about Takemiya? Ok, not top level, only 9p;)

That's right. He only got a scarce few major titles, after all.

Phoenix wrote:

RobertJasiek wrote:

SmoothOper wrote:On one hand the Cosmic Go Style is very popular on the other those that seem to adhere to it don't seem to do all that well at the top levels of playing

Eh? What about Takemiya? Ok, not top level, only 9p;)

That's right. He only got a scarce few major titles, after all.

Well, I am just trying to explain why other than Takemiya, that style isn't seen at the top levels. One hypothesis is that there is a disconnect between the literature and the strategy pertaining to Cosmic Go.

can we get back on subject please and take the arguments somewhere else?

I actually find that Go World has many wonderful articles about Takemiya. Any fan of Takemiya's play would be well served in looking at the issues that have him inside

I have a very nice book called The Art of Positional Analysis which basically consists of pros commenting pro games, and 12 of them are commentaries by Takemiya (made around 1986, which I believe was during his peak). He is quite the outspoken commentator, and often points to parts of the game in which he would have played differently. Random sentence: "My eye would gravitate to nothing but the capping move of 1 in Diagram 5." This sort of thing lets you see a bit about how Takemiya thinks. On the other hand, it's not entirely unreasonable to assume that Takemiya was strong not because of his style, but rather because of his skill. At one point talks about the popularity of the three star points in a row saying: "It's gotten to the point that if it is played too much, I will have to come up with another way of playing. However, one never sees any impressive uses of the three star points in a row. Practically everything is rote mimicry that has little in common with the spirit of my play." and goes on to lament that the imitators - professionals all - presumably don't study enough and ought to come up with more original ploys. Good luck with that!

sounds like a nice book!

Uberdude wrote:Yuan Zhou has written a series of books focusing on the styles of different players and has one on Takemiya:

[sl=MasterPlayTheStyleOfTakemiya]Master Play The Style of Takemiya[/sl].

If you can read French there is a translation of a book by Takemiya himself where he analyses his own games:

[sl=LeGoCosmique]Le Go Cosmique[/sl]

I'll second Yuan Zhou's book on this. It's the only book I've seen that explains in clear examples why this way of playing isn't as easy as it looks.

Get a go database (all of them will do) and replay his games. Don't worry about comments or theories about his style or books. Replay them, study them, learn them, play guess-the-next-move with them. Even if you completely fail to understand the crucial fight, the exercise will be helpful.

I hate to admit it, but I actually enjoyed the discussion about RJ's strength more than which books to read to understand Takemiya's style. Guilty pleasures ...

At first sight, it's a drag to see another thread being hijacked for RJ-advertisement/bashing. But why do we all love this kind of discussion? I think it is because we are deeply reminded about our own egos and the frustration of loving go so much and still suck at it. To see someone genuinely believe he masters (aspects of) the game despite an obvious and impenetrable barrier of amateur 4-5D is not only funny, it polarizes the atmosphere, precisely because we want to believe in the amateur expert and simultaneously know it can't be true.

To some degree we all do what Robert does: we teach, we speak out on forums and we write articles on improvement or other essays (see all my stuff at SL). We do this because there is no one else in the vicinity but also because we love the costume of an expert. No one carries this as far as Robert, who has taken on the duty to fill perceived gaps in Western go literature and who also thinks his games are worthy of study, blaming his rank not on a fundamental lack of understanding but on being bad at very specific aspects of the game, like byo-yomi.

We have done this too! "I was ahead by 20 points but lost due to a stupid blunder". How often haven't we heard this from ourselves and other amateurs. We all like to think we master the game at a higher level than our rank warrants. The truth is, and we know it, that deep understanding only comes through continuous execution at the highest level. Whe project our frustration about that truth on the bluntest of challengers.

Incidentally, I think high level pros look upon 7k and 4-5d as "making roughly the same blunders". This may be unfathomable for a 4-5d but that is actually proof of how big the difference in understanding is. Still, I admire Robert's Quichotic quest.

Knotwilg wrote:... precisely because we want to believe in the amateur expert and simultaneously know it can't be true.

I don't know this. In fact, I haven't heard anyone stronger than Robert say that something he has claimed is wrong.

The truth is, and we know it, that deep understanding only comes through continuous execution at the highest level.

Deep understanding? What's that? I am however fairly sure that both you and Robert understand how to play go better than I do.

Incidentally, I think high level pros look upon 7k and 4-5d as "making roughly the same blunders". This may be unfathomable for a 4-5d but that is actually proof of how big the difference in understanding is.

Where did you hear this? And what does it mean? Is it roughly the same blunder to make a judgement after reading 3 or 10 moves? Does it mean that pros are like gods and everyone else is a mere mortal? It seems to me that there is a reason that go ranks go from 30k-9d, and nothing magical happens when you cross a certain barrier. I don't see why anyone stronger than oneself should not be able to help you to improve.

Still, I admire Robert's Quichotic quest.[/quote] Me too.