![]() StartingPoints Referenced by
|
Teaching go to newcomers / Discussion
Sub-page of TeachingGoToNewcomers
(Sebastian:) Thanks to Jared for trying to put some order into these pages. Unfortunately, in the process, contributions by several people got deleted or obscured. (Not by me. -Jared) I am trying to salvage what was there before, while moving his outline into HowToTeachGo/ProposedOutline. I think a good outline should start at the level "teaching"; I regard the three-tier hierarchy Jared proposed (“Curious people are newcomers, and thus this is a sub-topic of Teaching Go To Newcomers, which is, itself, a sub-topic of How to Teach Go.”) as an added complication and believe a clear outline should start at the level "teaching". There seems to be a bit of confusion between the terms “Newcomer” and “Curious Cats”. This page deals with Newcomers who are really interested in Go. I think, these are very different from “Curious Cats”, who don't have the time or patience to learn it (yet). As Jared pointed out, the name “newcomer” does maybe not adequately express this distinction, and only lead to confusion. Thoughts? Kris Rhodes: (How about a page on HowNotToTeachGo?) Dieter: Yesterday, I taught the basic aspects of the game to a newcomer. Then he played one of our clubmembers. I told him incidentally that he should put down the three stones so that White's lower right corner remained empty. Next, I played another clubmember. We wished each other good luck with the game, saying "Onegaishimasu" - or whatever it should be. It occurred that the newcomer was struck by both habits of politeness. He later asked "Should I know other things ?" I will most certainly include those GoodHabits in my next "first session" and include others like how to hold and play a go stone in second and third sessions. People usually get overwhelmed by too technical explanations. They just love it when those side aspects come into the picture. And I remember I did. teaching go to children....amadis: I would like to organize a go afternoon for children, but the idea is a bit terrifying. Any advice from people who are experienced at teaching go to kids? How would you organize such an event? Scartol: Things I usually include in my first lesson:
... and along the way I toss in the things I find most intriguing; the respect players show each other, the history of the game, how to hold a stone, Japanese terms, etc. I think it's important -- whatever is being taught -- to combine information with excitement. adamzero: Scartol, I do basically the same thing as you do. Except I leave out Ko until it comes up in the game. To do corners vs. sides vs. center I take three groups of six stones, surround maximum territory in each region (9, 4, 2, respectively), so they can see the difference, and then play both black and white of the first 10 moves of a typical game on a big board, w/out further explaining, just so they get the idea of what looks reasonable. And then we play 9x9. I always play real go from the start, never capture go. I keep people on 9x9 for a while before moving to 13x13, but the move quickly to 19x19. Hane-and-connect should be a no-brainer first, I feel. I never analyze during those initial games, except to say things like "Now which part of the board do you think has the biggest potential" or "How much territory do you think plays on the first line lay claim to?" or "I'm trying to get into your house here-- what are you going to do to stop me?" or to compliment on a good move. I start with a six stone handicap on the 9x9, and someone people win the first game and kill all my stones, and others I kill every stone they've played, but the improvement is always very quick regardless. One peice of advice I can't seem to stress to beginners enough is to keep their stones connected when I threaten to disconnect them. I've taught probably forty or fifty people this way, at the UChicago Go Club. I'd say that there is about a thirty or fourty percent retention rate, of players who are still there are month layer, but I think this is most strongly correlated to initial desire to learn on that first day. Some people would say this is overexplaining, but the kids here are smart, and its hard to get the feel of a new game when you don't have even the most rudimentary idea of how to realize the objective of the game. BenShoemaker: To create a useful TeachingGoToNewcomers page I think we need to discuss:
I personally would find the organization and completeness of such lists to be very helpful. (As I think about it, it would be nice to have a list of concepts for the beginner to study further, not just during the first lesson. If the list could be in order of complexity, that would be great, but maybe at least ordered to allow certain concepts to build on others.) Dieter: I think we have that already at TeachingPaths and BeginnerStudySection Chris Hayashida: Having started playing go just over a year ago, and now teaching a beginner's class, I thought I'd share my thoughts, less on material, and more on style:
As for technique, I would say that these are the most important, after the basic rules:
Conversely, I think these can wait:
Scartol: The more I teach beginners, the less use I have for the 9x9 board. It feels analogous to teaching someone how to play chess using only pawns. The complexity of the board's regions and groups is what makes the game interesting for me, and beginners get none of that on a 9x9 -- it's all corner play. I moved to the 13x13 as soon as I was able, and I encourage my students to do the same. Stefan: I think I know where you're coming from. Most beginners in our club don't play on 9x9 very long, but do on 13x13 for a while. I'd say 9x9 is for getting a working knowledge of the rules, 13x13 for getting a working knowledge of the basic techniques and concepts, and 19x19 for finding out you'll never have a clue. Chris Hayashida: Sorry, I didn't mean that the beginners should stay on a 9x9 board for very long. I should have written "smaller boards" instead of "9x9 boards." Usually our beginners start playing on a 13x13 within two or three nights. (More than anything, I think it's a lack of boards that's causing this, but the AGA will soon fix that. :) However, I do think that simplifying the game does appeal to some people. My comments above apply to 13x13 board as well. Our club is a little different, since we meet weekly in a local coffeehouse. Many people come to the coffeehouse, see the game, and decide to start playing. I think the simple rules attract potential students. It also helps that you can get several games in the course of an hour. These people are a little more intimidated by the 19x19 boards. I think it's a different situation than a "real" go club, since people visiting there would only be coming by if they wanted to learn to play anyway. Gabaux: I was teaching a couple of newcommers to play go, and some of them became definitely stronger players then me :-)). My idea was to teach the minimal theory first, only the rules and the calculation of liberties. The first-hand experience is very important. I urged them to play a lot of games in a rather short interval of time to get as much practical 'feeling' as they could. Sometimes I let them win, but not too often, to learn how to exploit overplay, how to recognize bad shapes. I have found this approach very efficient. mgoetze: And what's wrong with giving beginners a large handicap? I always give first-timers 5 stones on 9x9 and it works just fine. Also, I can give them some immediate and easy-to-follow advice (just try to keep your stones connected), while for an even game I suppose they would just be totally lost as to how to start out. I recently watched a 25k teach someone go on KGS and she was going on about "Corners, Sides, Center" before even explaining the ko rule, let alone playing a game... I get the sense that this site is a sister-site to SL, but just in case people don't know about it..
I accidentally typed in
And I can't find a list anywhere of web-based sites for leading folks through the basics. Should we start one? -- Scartol
Scatterbrain?: The Go Institute @
Zarlan: The Shigeno-Yasuda method seems to demand that you get people to keep playing AtariGo for quite a few games. I thought that this method, although rather good sometimes, might be less good sometimes as it may prove to be difficult to keep a person interested enough to keep playing AtariGo.
Here's the idea:
First you explain liberties, atari and captures, the very core of Go. Ko and suicide should probably be explained if it occurs though. Well at least ko. After one or perhaps a few (I havn't tested it or anything) he/she/they might understand a few things (one should perhaps ask and discuss). This is why it has to be a 19x19. On the 19x19 there should be a lot of space for life & death and many possibilities for a ko to occur. Also I think it would probably turn into the resemblance of a game of Go according to StoneCountingScoring (a badly played one but still). After this you explain territory and show the score of the game (or last game) and tell them about the rest of the rules. Although I thought of this because of a possible flaw in the AtariGo teaching method, it is from there that I got my inspiration. Letting people discover important concepts by them selves, by putting them in to a sitiuation where they will inevitably encounter them sounds like a very good idea. As a beginner I think there should be a place for a few newcomer games to be posted and commented (not only pro games). I have commented one of my games against gnuGo 3.2 and want to post it and get some feedback. Maybe there is but I could not find such a place. Do you think it would be useful? I will make a new page and place a link here, BeginnerGameSamplesToComment. Thanks anyway. Orcun mgoetze: I believe that it is important not to explain too much at once. I see many beginners struggling with concepts such as "eyes" and "territory" before they have even played their second game. Why the complications? Just explain the rule of alternation and the rule of capture, then say that (for now) the objective is to have more stones on the board at the end than your opponent. (The group tax won't really matter.) Then give them a handicap and just play. One of the wonderful things about go is that concepts such as life & death are nothing but a consequence of some very simple rules... why make the game seem more complicated than it is? After 2 games or so, explain the ko rule... and go right on to playing another. Also, I try to discourage beginners (as nicely as possible) from thinking too long... the fact of the matter is, they're going to be thinking about all the wrong things, on time that would be much better spent actually playing. Zook: Here's a table Feature Interest Risk Explain capture rule Basic rule None Liberties, chains Basic concept None Explain territory Game purpose Vague "make" territory Forbid suicide Most rules forbid What's the point Prequel to eyes Conflict rule 1 Explain ko The last rule Confusion Postpone/forbid ko Clarity Not the game Atari-Go Simple Dull Exercise rule 1 Atari disease Not the game Explain eyes Basic concept Too much Explain life and death Intellectual challenge Way too much One-eyed Go Simple Not the game Exercise eye concept Eye obsession 9x9 Simple Dull 13x13 Best of both worlds Still dull 19x19 immediately The real game Completely lost Cultural features Distraction Distraction Origins of the game Some don't care Teacher plays pupil Sometimes only option Gap in level Knowledge transfer No goal Pupils play each other Mutual stimuli Loss of pride No gap in level Slow progress I tried to contact the AGA about sponsoring my new go club and they never even responed. Is this a normal thing or did I not write to them correctly? Cole StormCrow: That's a hard question to answer without knowing what email address you sent your mail to and how long you've waited for a response. The AGA is a volunteer organization and the people performing the various tasks have lives away from the AGA. Shaydwyrm: I have recently begun teaching an older gentleman to play go, and I have run into a bit of a brick wall - my student has developed the most severe, almost comical case of atari blindness I have ever encountered. He is already grasping the basics of more advanced concepts such as eyes, territory, and ko, but I fear that I may have gone a bit too fast. Now he rarely sees his own stones in atari, and I don't believe I've ever lost a stone against him except in ko - he simply doesn't consider the possiblility of capture. I am somewhat at a loss as to how to repair this defect in my teaching. Does anyone have a suggestion for me?
Heresiarch: Perhaps you should send him to Though I prefer territory scoring, nobody should start with it. Let's put away with our preconception. Rather start as simple as possible. First tell'm the aim of the game.
The one with more stones on the board at the end has won. For heaven's sake, what could be easier? This naturally leads to the question how stones come and go. Tell'm (skipping eyes), pair the suckers (sorry ;--), and start'm playing - on 9x9, to be sure. Hold back yourself. Only tell'm what can be done, not what should be done. Relax. Enjoy watching their crazy games. Explain ko when it happens (and treat triple ko as tie - you won't believe what they come up with :--). Avoid any "super" solution. At the end of round one - yes, we're doing a four-round Swiss Tournament - chart their results and explain'em what went completely wrong. Keeping open two eyes might be a good idea . . . Then start the next round. Don't worry, beginners don't really care about losing. After round two you might suggest the trick with the parking reservation - also known as "territory". Always pick up some situations from their games and explain'em. After the tournament do a simultane with them - you should have your fun too. All they get is the start. Don't be gentle. Try to kill everything. Gee, this was a great first day! This is a copy of the living page "Teaching go to newcomers / Discussion" at Sensei's Library. ![]() |