Loved In Emerald
Hi I am now slightly less new to the game of go thanks to a combination of outside reading and people fielding my dumb questions (special thanks goes to charlesmatthews, bobmcguigan and adamzero). I now have a rudimentary understanding of some of the more basic concepts and now one of the things I'm finding paticularly interesting is the concept of aji (and leading on from this when to play honte). Since I discovered the idea of honte I have actually begun to play considerably better although I think is a line to be drawn between use ond overuse which I haven't found yet :p. Anyways... I feel I'm making progress, thanks again to anyone who's posted here with advice as you've all helped a lot :D. Cya!
Suggestions/useful links for beginners ie. myself:
Please feel free to post anything you think might help in this section (I'm not expecting anything but if you have some time to kill I wouldn't complain :p).
Jan: I take it you mean Igowin? If you can beat it at 12 kyu, you're probably around 18-20 kyu on KGS. Still, good job! (After I learned the rules, I encountered my first Igowin hurdle at 16 kyu :-)
The best advice I can give is to play a lot (on servers or in a real club) and to ask a lot of (seemingly) dumb questions here, both of these things helped me a lot. Oh, and don't be intimidated by the dan players here ;-)
Fhayashi: Your 'dumb questions' are rather quite interesting, and it would be a shame if they kept getting deleted as you update your homepage. Perhaps you can put up this one and the old ones and any new ones on a new page - such as LovedInEmeraldQ1, LovedInEmeraldQ2, LovedInEmeraldQ3?...
LovedInEmerald The main questions have been answered by BQM 41, weak group, splitting attack, series and parallel principle for weak groups, choice of corner opening plays,running fight (running fight example 2), thickness cycle , frameworks, 4-4 point low approach, diagonal contact then pincer, Why Don't We Open At Tengen and four star points box formation... my big rant about the speculative invasion I thought was largely only interesting to me :). Watch this space for the return of the material to the site with hopefully some useful changes ;).
Dumb Questions: :p
LovedInEmerald Just a quick question again Charles :). Going on your reply to my diagram of a professional game would you say it is more instructive to analyse games with weaker players? If so that is quite interesting as with chess it is better to analyse grandmaster games regardless of your skill level (few games are beyond the analytical skills of even a fairly weak player as it's easier to see why a move is strong than to think of it yourself). I guess with go it seems easier to analyse weak moves than to analyse strong moves as the possible replies quickly get beyond the realms of calcuation. As an aside, you were right about the bad shape being paid for in some other coin as it was black who won that game.
- Charles I think the correct answer is in terms of what you are trying to learn. Pros make good shape: you can apprehend that in some way from their games. Kyu players make dreadful shape, and looking at how that gets punished (or should have been) will tell you something different. In fact classic tesuji should be quite rare in pro games just because the sides are well matched. See more at Studying Professional Games.
It just seems as though there should be a way of sorting through the pros and cons of even a fairly complicated position but at the moment I couldn't say I'd even know where to start.
- Charles Welcome to the marvellous madness of being a go player and actually caring ...
LovedInEmerald Going back through all my old questions and adding things I've learned since then to show why my play in the diagrams was incorrect it seems odd that no-one pointed out these things. Do you reach a point when it becomes hard to understand how much some people don't know about the game and you don't even think of explaining certain things? It's actually quite interesting in a way as to me the things I've added now seem like things to consider whilst playing (ie. I would not forget about them when explaining/considering a position/shape). For example, I've never read anywhere that it is generally bad to add to stones if there is no tsuke play by the opponent. Is this because this is something so fundamental that it is not considered by higher ranked players or is it just a guideline that somehow got lost in the explanation of thick and heavy shapes. Anyways, I could kind of ramble on like this for hours as this is not the only example but it's just something that I've noticed as I was writing my page/question analyses.
Charles Speaking for myself: in teaching the knack seems to be to make one comment, or not many anyway, about the problem that appears to be most pressing. (See bottleneck theories for example.) In writing for a general audience I'd consider the other approach, throwing out ideas that match what I'm trying to do with the space I have. More like what is said at rank and what you know.
Woohoo! Back online after huge computer problems and 200 tesuji problems \o/. See y'all after the next 300 :o.