Who to study when...
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 3:25 pm
you are interested in professionals who play a solid game with the intention to win in the endgame? (Or do they all do that to a certain degree?)
Life in 19x19. Go, Weiqi, Baduk... Thats the life.
https://lifein19x19.com/
For commented games of his I'd recommend John Fairbairn's "Final Summit" which covers a ten-game match of his against Go Seigen. I've not even got/read it myself yet (though I mean to one day), but if it's anything like his book Kamakura (Go vs Kitani) it will be excellent.Sakata Eio in 'Killer of Go' wrote:Among us professionals, the playing style of the late Takagawa Kaku was representative of this slow but steady method. Takagawa absolutely refused to resort to unsound play, and perfected the art of the long, drawn-out battle. In general, go differs from chess in that go is a game in which this kind of marathon-style strategy is appropriate.
I am interested in why are you interested in such games/players? Personally I have always liked Takagawa (at least the image that I have of him, I never met him). However, I find it difficult to study his games; they are too subtle for me to understand.tapir wrote:you are interested in professionals who play a solid game with the intention to win in the endgame? (Or do they all do that to a certain degree?)
Takagawa (or his ghost-writer) wrote very clearly, IMO. His Igo Reader ( 高川囲碁読本 ) in 5 vols. is aimed a kyu players, but it reveals a logical approach to the game. His Fuseki Jiten does, as well. I think that both sets of books are consistent with an approach that aims to gain and then preserve small advantages.ez4u wrote:I am interested in why are you interested in such games/players? Personally I have always liked Takagawa (at least the image that I have of him, I never met him). However, I find it difficult to study his games; they are too subtle for me to understand.tapir wrote:you are interested in professionals who play a solid game with the intention to win in the endgame? (Or do they all do that to a certain degree?)
Sure, but applying those ideas requires an ability to confidently assess whether you have a small advantage versus, say, a big disadvantage.Bill Spight wrote:Takagawa (or his ghost-writer) wrote very clearly, IMO. His Igo Reader ( 高川囲碁読本 ) in 5 vols. is aimed a kyu players, but it reveals a logical approach to the game. His Fuseki Jiten does, as well. I think that both sets of books are consistent with an approach that aims to gain and then preserve small advantages.ez4u wrote:I am interested in why are you interested in such games/players? Personally I have always liked Takagawa (at least the image that I have of him, I never met him). However, I find it difficult to study his games; they are too subtle for me to understand.tapir wrote:you are interested in professionals who play a solid game with the intention to win in the endgame? (Or do they all do that to a certain degree?)
I started playing at OGS again, and I found I have enough time to count after each move on a turn based server. Also I was puzzled by a comment by Antti on his blog "endgame is the most fun part of the game". I want to have fun in the endgame too. Frequently I find myself winning games because the opponents lacks patience and tries to "optimize" where not warranted (at my level amateurs invariably play the "strongest resistance" move when they can't read the sequence, it is really amazing), I lost many games too where I tried to crush the opponent instead to go the long way. What better way to learn patience and stamina than to fight games until the end?ez4u wrote:I am interested in why are you interested in such games/players? Personally I have always liked Takagawa (at least the image that I have of him, I never met him). However, I find it difficult to study his games; they are too subtle for me to understand.tapir wrote:you are interested in professionals who play a solid game with the intention to win in the endgame? (Or do they all do that to a certain degree?)
It is indeed a fun feeling to win a game you were 10 points behind in the middle game after your opponents submits and lets you win the final "half" point ko as you have a surfeit of threats and then to make a defensive move inside his territory to prevent a 10-move long snapback sequence and then you win by half a point.tapir wrote:Also I was puzzled by a comment by Antti on his blog "endgame is the most fun part of the game". I want to have fun in the endgame too.
As clearly as dryly. But... I do not agree with "very clearly" for two reasons:Bill Spight wrote:Takagawa (or his ghost-writer) wrote very clearly
Quite so.ez4u wrote:Sure, but applying those ideas requires an ability to confidently assess whether you have a small advantage versus, say, a big disadvantage.Bill Spight wrote: Takagawa (or his ghost-writer) wrote very clearly, IMO. His Igo Reader ( 高川囲碁読本 ) in 5 vols. is aimed a kyu players, but it reveals a logical approach to the game. His Fuseki Jiten does, as well. I think that both sets of books are consistent with an approach that aims to gain and then preserve small advantages.
Indeed. I am reminded of a comment by Go Seigen about an opponent who was past his prime: "An old man who plays honte, honte is hard to beat."In addition, understanding when a calm play "here" is good enough, versus all those other choices there and over there, is very hard to grasp IMHO. This is particularly so in studying pro game records where you do not even know what were the other plays that he considered and rejected.