Table of contents |
Discussion greatly encouraged! Go nuts! Everyone is encouraged to stick their own guiding ideas, of any level, into the boxes, just keep things somewhat organized.
Purpose of the bank: Good play comes from good ideas. There's no way around it. There's a great deal of advice and information i.e. proverbs, invasion descriptions, joseki, examples, and much more, spread all over SL. But in an effort to perhaps humanize things slightly, here's one individual, working his way through all the information he can handle and presenting what he's got from it. There's much to be learned from an encyclopedia, but there should be a good deal to learn from observing an individual attempt to conquer the encyclopedia and watch through his eyes.
After teaching a number of total beginners who have learned the game themselves and often, if I mention this simple almost self-evident fact, I get a big "OOH!" reaction, so I'm putting it here.
Territory is nothing but really really big eyes!
Many beginners don't figure out without some help that a block of territory has what we would call 'eye space'. They don't need 2 tiny 1-point eyes to make life when they can make 2 eyes in their territory if there is a need to. There's lots of extra issues such as how big a space is needed for 2 eyes, but the core idea, territory == big eye, can be a big revelation.
I'm overly fond of this idea, I feel it's quite fundamental to how I play. I'm greedy, but to a point. I don't need the entire board to win, just 51% of it after all. If my loose framework marks me ahead by 40 points, even paying 19 points and keeping 21 would win me the game. And in paying, I expect to not be badly surprised by a nasty tesuji or counterattack because I wasn't stretching myself thin trying to do too much. Those 21 points should be undeniably mine. That's not to say I'd ever cut that close a margin ^^;;
This thought is the basis, on small scales, of sacrifice tesujis. On bigger scales middle-game development, large-scale sacrifices, and even ko fighting in an indirect kind of way. Stretch the idea a bit further and it encompasses efficiency of stones.
I'm tempted to say that All moves should be threats. But I have a feeling that there are simply times when a purely defensive move just has to be made. I see this idea all the time from stronger players. Each move ought to threaten to make you win the game, otherwise, simply don't make that move, some call it being 'active'.
What I'm afraid is that players starting out don't recognize that many things can be threats. Threat to kill, threat to cut, threat to make a big moyo, threat to solidify a moyo, threat to make ko while ahead in ko threats. All these place pressure on the opponent to neutralize your move. Perhaps this is sente in the ultimate sense? "Here I make a moyo, do somthing about it."
This comes to an idea that I hold near and dear in my play. Keep up the pressure for as long, in as many ways, as creatively, as you can. Make it a test of mental will and stamina if you can get it so far. As Janice Kim was quoted saying, down to the caps: "KEY PRINCIPLE #1 - GO IS LIKE A BIG GAME OF CHICKEN"
There are simply no absolutes in Go that I can think of, so many 'bad ideas' I put here probably derive from statements that tend toward absolutism. That's not to say these are the only bad ideas, they're just what happen to come to mind easily to write here.
Pros worry a great deal about sente, it's worth quite a bit after all. However, just because a move is sente (like an important peep that WILL be answered) doesn't mean it will help you. If it doesn't you've just committed aji keshi at the best, maybe wasted a pefectly good ko threat, and at the worst you've made your opponent happy by handing them a thank-you move that hurts you far more than you've accomplished anything.
Here comes things that are items of debate. There probably aren't any 'right' answers, just points of view. Style issues pop up here I think.