Life In 19x19

Subtitled
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfTbSJb-XcU

Voice Over
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRy4HgcMVTY

Can you let me know which version you prefer?

Do you understand any Chinese?

What's your rank?

Rather surprised he praises Dinerstein's 2-2 as his own creative innovation, it's been played professionally before and there are quite a few diagrams of analysis in Kim Sung Rae's After Joseki book. Maybe not so known in China, but I would have hoped researchers for the program would have done a pattern search. His 2nd jump was very nice though .

Damn, I just posted the WeiqiTV link to this, but this is translated, so more useful here. Thanks.

Can you guys let me know which version you prefer?

Do you understand any Chinese?

What's your rank?

The 2-2 is a well known tesuji; I do not know if it is new in the particular whole board position; maybe the commentator has been praising the latter.

After O2, Black can also play F3 for a global exchange; this is not discussed in the commentary. For this reason, O2 is not necessarily what the commentator calls a gote-sente (meaning a gote with a sente follow-up).

Playing flexibly instead of heavy around the upper left corner, with the intention to develop the white influence on a large scale well, is the obvious strategy and move for me to do. Maybe indeed it is a sign of what the commentator calls European creativity, but there is no need to praise specifically Dinerstein for it. I do not agree that only (strong dan; I am not sure about kyu) Europeans would play such a move; I have seen such moves also in Asian pro play. In fact, Saijo Masataka taught me this kind of move, which is a threat to connect and move out and a threat to develop a sphere of influence of the outside, i.e., a double threat. On a smaller scale, such moves were sort of joseki moves in the Edo period. Is it the large scale flexibility that surprises the commentator (but not me)?

What does the commentator mean when he says that Europeans are weak at the fundamentals? I agree, but I would have wanted to know what exactly he means so that possibly we could learn more about it. Instead, he concentrates too much on tactics.

RobertJasiek wrote:What does the commentator mean when he says that Europeans are weak at the fundamentals? I agree, but I would have wanted to know what exactly he means so that possibly we could learn more about it. Instead, he concentrates too much on tactics.

I believe he is referring to the fact that Westerners, even Western pros, haven't memorized all the same shapes and sequences that strong Asians have. The example was Ilya Shishkin's misplay in the corner in the first video.

xiaodai wrote:Can you guys let me know which version you prefer?

Do you understand any Chinese?

What's your rank?

Xiaodai,

I suspect the dubbed version is far more useful to most of us than the Chinese version. If you dubbed the video, thank you.

I don't speak Chinese. I struggle even to order food.

I am 1k KGS.

Dubbed specifically means spoken version. The Chinese version of the video also has English subtitles. Do u prefer to have hair subtitles that u can read or someone reading out the subtitles so u can focus on the go board.

I prefer written subtitles.

Thanks for posting these videos.

I prefer written subtitles too.

Being hard of hearing PLUS not being a native speaker of English, I also prefer written subtitles (or any other transcript), for me it’s a LOT easier to read English (no matter how many mistakes) than to understand spoken English.

<edit>

I’m around 12k on OGS (but only played correspondence games for a long time, so perhaps rather 13k), and I don’t understand any Chinese.

</edit>

xiaodai wrote:Can you guys let me know which version you prefer?

Do you understand any Chinese?

What's your rank?

I found the voice-over version far easier to follow. I speak a little Chinese, but not enough to not need to read the subtitles. I found that having to read the subtitles forced me to constantly look away from the board, and it was much harder for me to understand than when listening to the voice-over. I play at 5k.

p.s. Thanks for sharing!

The English translation is very professional. Do you know what made it?

RobertJasiek wrote:The 2-2 is a well known tesuji; I do not know if it is new in the particular whole board position; maybe the commentator has been praising the latter.

After O2, Black can also play F3 for a global exchange; this is not discussed in the commentary. For this reason, O2 is not necessarily what the commentator calls a gote-sente (meaning a gote with a sente follow-up).

Playing flexibly instead of heavy around the upper left corner, with the intention to develop the white influence on a large scale well, is the obvious strategy and move for me to do. Maybe indeed it is a sign of what the commentator calls European creativity, but there is no need to praise specifically Dinerstein for it. I do not agree that only (strong dan; I am not sure about kyu) Europeans would play such a move; I have seen such moves also in Asian pro play. In fact, Saijo Masataka taught me this kind of move, which is a threat to connect and move out and a threat to develop a sphere of influence of the outside, i.e., a double threat. On a smaller scale, such moves were sort of joseki moves in the Edo period. Is it the large scale flexibility that surprises the commentator (but not me)?

What does the commentator mean when he says that Europeans are weak at the fundamentals? I agree, but I would have wanted to know what exactly he means so that possibly we could learn more about it. Instead, he concentrates too much on tactics.

I am probably not an "European" player anymore, but I agree with the above. Neither of the moves surprised me very much, and both are what I would have considered in the position. I would probably not play the O2 myself, but I can definitely see myself playing the move in the upper right, it seems very natural to me and I feel I make moves like that a lot (possibly too much.) I think I seen pros applying such concepts in their games constantly. Unless there is something very specific in this move that I do not understand, which is very possible.

My guess is the commentator has to comment on something or there is no video (and possibly no pay) and he picked these two moves for whatever reason, and then maybe embelished somewhat. It might be "fashionable" to praise the european pros these days, I dunno. Or maybe it is a local phenomenon - certain moves and concepts are polular in one area but not in another, I have seen this happen, especially with jokes/fuseki choices.

On this week's new episode the presenter apologised for the 2-2 mov commentary. Apparently someone pointed it out to him that the 2-2 moves has been played in the 50's or something.

I might translate that some time as well