DieterVerhofstadt/Deliberate practice (version 1)

The idea of deliberate practice

In a post on L19 I asked around who is applying the idea of deliberate practice in the sense that they study some aspect of Go and then implement it in their next games, to review and improve on that very aspect, then move on to other aspects, while maintaining the strength obtained in previous cycles.

Many players seem to think this is only possible through recreating the same board position, hence only by replaying the same opening. I strongly disagree: deliberate practice is not only about specific positions but about concepts, ideas, intuition, reason, ...

One of the critiques is that in a complex affair like Go, it is impossible to reinforce a good implementation through positive feedback in absence of a teacher, because game results are the compound of numerous decisions, not only the one in focus. This is true and perhaps the most important reason to have a teacher. However, I believe it is possible to assemble a learning track, in which the aspects taken in focus, are progressively making the biggest difference for the game result, not in every single game perhaps, but over a streak of games.

What really makes a difference

I've written about this in the /basic laws of gamesmanship?, where I've discerned the following aspects as making the biggest difference in any players' games:

• don't resign
• don't lose on time
• don't play games in dire conditions, be it poor internet connection, being deprived of sleep, having drunk alcohol or otherwise not being in an acceptable state

While the first one may go against sportsmanship, it is important to develop some fighting spirit. There will be time to become a gentleman or lady later. The second one, on top of reducing stupid losses, will save players from playing random blitz games which don't allow for any kind of deliberate practice in the first place. The third one will increase the level of concentration.

Bottom line, these first three kinds of deliberate practice focus on reducing stupid losses. It has occurred to me that many players, including myself, lament about stupid losses in an otherwise advantageous game. As a differentiator, stupid losses are much more significant than "poor implementations of the micro Chinese. So, any amateur player who wants to generate positive feedback from games, should start out with reducing stupid losses, not with practicing the micro Chinese.

Put it into practice

It's all very well to make such statements, but are they really true? I thought I'd put myself to the test and play 10 games with the above threesome as focal points. Don't resign, don't lose on time, play in good conditions.

1. In my first game, I played a 1k, with 35 minutes sudden death. I lost on time! Lessons learnt:
   • Avoid sudden death games because they are more blitz than they appear.
   • In sudden death games, the determining factor is whether you have more time left than your opponent. They are really all about time, not about Go.
   • Even so, I was behind on points. Positional judgment and basic technique can improve.
2. Second game: 10+25/4 against a bot 1k, +R. Lessons learnt.
   • Played too fast in byo-yomi this time. Took many risky decisions.
   • Basic life and death missed early, then found later.
   • Bot couldn't play ko.
3. Third game, against 1d in 10+25/3. Won +50.
   • Good time management.
   • Two awkward noseki variations. The small nadare one went into a favorable ko for me.
   • Most importantly the guy kept on playing with 50 points behind, but it didn't bother me because it's the first amendment: don't resign. So, when you have decided you won't resign, you're less troubled by an opponent who doesn't. It's an exercise in stamina.