![]() StartingPoints Paths Referenced by
|
Stubborn Play
Path: BadHabits · Prev: SpeculativeInvasion · Next: SocksAside There is a certain class of go players who are stubborn and persistent beyond belief in continuing a futile line of play. You've all seen them, they are the ones who try and pull off completely ludicrous suicide invasions into solid territory, hoping by some outside chance that you might screw up. This is annoying on two fronts. One it wastes your time and takes enjoyment out of the game. This is not the same as wasting time in a lost game, because often, the game still isn't lost for either opponent. Secondly, it is insulting because your opponent is choosing a line of play that relies not on his skill, but on your lack of skill. Sometimes they actually succeed when you get frustrated and ticked off enough. This style of play doesn't just piss off your opponent, it doesn't help you improve at all. Snappy: The worst part about this style of play is that when you do fall asleep and your opponent does capture some huge group, they think it's their skill that won the game and they don't get any better. In their defense however, most of the time this bad habit arises from a failure to correctly read the situation. Stefan: Could it be that we have a new proverb? "Know (and avoid) the time-wasting tesuji"? :-) If this happens in the club, I don't mind asking somebody to already start another game on another board. And be it in tournament or club games, children, we should thank the opponent for training us in that most precious of Go skills: patience! Especially if he rips us off, because then the lesson will be really effective. naruto3: I am one of those stubborn players who never quits when they have lost :-( it is a bad habit and i know i should not do it. lol andycjp: Iam guilty too sometimes.I apologise to all those I have annoyed. I think it derives from investing too much self esteem into the game.If you are wise losing is a chance to learn but alas I am not wise. ilanpi: A long time ago when I was 13K, I played an even game with a 9K player and made a completely ludicrous suicide invasions into solid territory. He started up in the chat telling me: "I agreed to play with you. Don't do stupid things." He continued by giving me baseball(!) analogies. Anyway, I somehow managed to understand what people on this page are trying to say, so I did another completely ludicrous suicide invasions into solid territory, but this time even more unreasonable. He immediately resigned. I am very proud of this game, especially because I managed to figure out how to win a lost game, but also because I dealt with unfair verbal harrassment by opponent during game.
That game was played exactly one year ago and
my rating has since improved
10 ranks. The other player stopped playing with his ID shortly
after the game, so his subsequent ranking is unknown.
I just looked over the game, which is Vice-ilanpi on this page
I therefore basically disagree with pretty much everything written previously on this page. Charles: So, some etiquette tips. Playing one speculative invasion, when you are behind, and resigning when it fails, is possibly looking for a place to resign; and can be OK. That is, in a bad position you acknowledge by your play that normal moves are futile. Pros may do this. Persistently invading just in case your opponent might make a mistake is a bad habit. It seems to peak, for some players, at about 8 kyu. It is annoying, not because it never works, but because go is supposed to be an enjoyable game of skill. Mostly stronger players feel some obligation to work out whether an invasion is good, before starting it (I'm not saying this happens 100% of the time). Otherwise, you may well lose both (a) ko threats and (b) points. You also lose the reading practice. In fact it is a common observation that those who do this also (a) spend too many plays in the endgame trying to set up swindles and (b) play 'safety plays' themselves. etrynus: Ilanpi - I enjoyed the story but I think your last sentence is going a bit far. Speculative invasions are always annoying. Would you say that at your level, if someone made an impossible invasion, and somewhere you accidentally, say, self-atari'd, that you would tip your hat and say good game? I think that at any given level, there is a different standard as to what a pointless invasion is, and those standards should be kept to for the most part. In your game against Vice, however, your first invasion (I think) was completely legitimate and in an even game Black could have probably made life. Your second one, though, obviously was not, but I can see why you'd want to piss that guy off for being such a jack***. Anyways, my point is, that even though you were probably right in your game against Vice, I would argue to others reading this that your specific example shouldn't be a reason to promote speculatively invading (because your first one was not), since it was a special case and your opponent was just plain rude. Ian Davis: I am now thinking about the last time I played ilanpi. He is stronger than I am but I remember getting annoyed at his constant badgery play towards the end of the game. My own personal taste is to speculate with what I consider an endgame probe to see if my opponent does know how to defend against a rip off - but only if I myself find it moderately difficult to find the correct reply. This though is probably hypocritical, because during the rest of the game I'm sure most of my plays are attempted rip offs. anon: In even games, I find it far simpler to have learned not to worry about winning. If I can't see a way to win then I resign. I might see "rip-offs" and "swindles" that work only if my opponent makes an error. But I don't bother with them if I see they don't work. The benefit of looking for them is doing the reading to see if they work or not. Once that is done, there is no value so I don't play them (if they don't work). In handicap games the story is totally different, of course. ilanpi I find it really strange to read all these comments relating affect to opponent moves. I can't imagine thinking that an opponent's move is "annoying" except in the sense that it is a move which I don't know how to deal with, that is, a good move. Maybe I haven't played enough go to associate emotion with types of moves except for the simple "moves which help my position are a source of satisfaction and moves which make it worse are source of annoyance." To answer your question etrynus, yes, I congratulate all my opponents if they win, unless I feel there was improper behavior, almost always when opponents make offensive remarks in chat. Unfortunately, I have failed to do this on a number of occasions, and I was wrong for that (Hu if you are reading this, I'm sorry for my bad behavior in our one game). If I make a self-atari after my opponent made an unreasonable invasion, then I most certainly understand that his invasion was not at all unreasonable, since I was not cool enough to handle it. My general philosophy (for all game playing) is: Do anything possible within the rules to win but do nothing that is outside the rules, and I expect my opponent to do the same. I think the only legal play that has upset me is intentionally continuing to play after game is over in order to win on time. As most people know, this is the regular practice on Yahoo Go. I'm afraid that I have been guilty of this on one single occasion, a 9x9 game on KGS when my opponent was in severe time pressure. However, I do not know whether this practice is actually legal, as it does appear to be fairly unethical. Maybe someone can answer this question: there is a speed go tournament with absolute time (no byo-yomi) and one player has almost no time left, is it legal for the other player to continue moving after there are no useful moves left in order to win on time (time pressure person has to keep saying "pass" then press his clock!!)? If even thinking up such a hypothetical situation seems unpleasant to many go players, I should specify that I am a veteran chess player where such scenarios are the rule rather than the exception. For example, one of my less pleasant memories is losing a speed chess tournament in the last round when both sides were left only with King + Rook each, and with 7 and 4 minutes respectively. My opponent refused to accept a draw and we spent the next 8 minutes shuffling our 2 pieces at the rate of about 2 to 4 moves per second. The tournament director was a relatively weak player, so didn't know enough to stop the circus. By the way, I invite people to use this story when discussing the relative merits of chess and go. Charles I've taken to agreeing with people who say "I can't imagine X". Yes, Ilan, I agree with you - you can't imagine an opponent's play being annoying. I also encourage people not to use Ilan's story... Conan: this is a serious subject about go spirity. For what i read, i completely agree with Charles. Playing moves that dont work are a bad habit, and the main issue with players with that habit is weakness. U wont see 5d* up trying to pull silly tricks. And to Charles example of pros, its not that they try to pull silly stuff, they make game complicated, complicated for both, and its not the same as a hamete (which i was attent victim several times). Lets say i play a hamete, and my opp fell for it, then it was a good move? NO it wasnt, this goes to ilanpi. Its about go spirit, not about go result. U may win ur games, but believe me, u end up in that rank/ strengh forever, because u never reach a better understanding of go. The time thing is delicate, your case its clear that it was a bad spirit situation, but in some circumstances, i think its justified. Lets say u have 20 stones in 25 min, and the opponent spent 20min on reading the tesuji that captured a group. Game is over, in a matter of points, but the opp used more time than you, and that counts, so if you make game complicated, he wont have time to think, and will play either bad or lose on time. I think this is ok, BUT of course, if the opponent survives the byoyomi, thats time to resign. Path: BadHabits · Prev: SpeculativeInvasion · Next: SocksAside This is a copy of the living page "Stubborn Play" at Sensei's Library. ![]() |