![[Welcome to Sensei's Library!]](images/stone-hello.png "Sensei's Library")
Some big changes between version 46 and the current page! I'm not sure how much I like the differences...
"The term strategy in Go usually refers to skills and plans for handling the global position" or "Go strategy entails devising a plan that may lead to victory, while considering the global position" -- the latter strikes me as more restrictive (it's possible to think strategically without having a definite plan?)
List of "strategic position" factors rather than "strategic skills"?
The old list of strategic concepts began with the contents of the book "Strategic concepts of go"--while this may seem arbitratry, it meant that "easier" concepts were listed first; the new alphabetical list strikes me as less useful.
The difference between the old "planning" heading and the new, shorter, list of "strategic principles" is hard to justify.
New heading "strategic plans" with paragraphs from Secret Art of War: each of these already has its own page--should they really be duplicated here?
Multiple boxes with quotes from Sun Tzu--yes, they're nice, but I'm sure we could keep the old Znosko-Borovsky quote as well!
I think the discussion at the end of the version 46 page was useful, and should be retained in some form.
I appreciate that someone has put a lot of work into these changes, so I'm reluctant to make further changes without some discussion first.
I took a look at the differences page, and I must say it left me confused. I really cannot tell whether the changes were positive, negative, neutral, or some combination. As for the extensive quotes from Sun Tzu, we already have such a page here on SL, don't we?
(A little later): We do have pages on Sun Tzu and The Art of War, but a quick search did not find anything with some real go examples applying Sun Tzu to go. (I thought I remembered seeing something though. <shrug>) Such pages would be a welcome addition to SL. :)
Hi,
It's possible to think strategically without having a definite plan?
From Wikipedia: A Strategy is a long term plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal, most often "winning." I'd say it applies for Go Strategy.
List of "strategic position" factors rather than "strategic skills"?
Agreed.
the new alphabetical list strikes me as less useful.
Not alphabetical. Strategic positioning is first because if you aren't aware of what is going on on the entire board, no concepts, principles, or plans will help win the game. Once you've learned to evaluate a whole board position, then understanding concepts like aji will augment analysis of the entire board, and provide insights into techniques that will help with the execution of a plan (e.g., kikashi). Concepts like kikashi are stepping stones to higher-level strategic tools like counter-attacking. Finally, these items pull together to allow the execution of planning at the highest level.
but I'm sure we could keep the old Znosko-Borovsky quote as
While the Znosko-Borovsky quote is quite applicable to Go Strategy, I feel that sourcing a single author (Sun Tzu) enhances consistency, simplicity, and authority. Perhaps a page devoted to quotes is in order? "Strategic Quotes Applied To Go"?
I think the discussion at the end of the version 46 page was useful, and should be retained in some form.
I thought the idea of "no plan in the opening" was a bit tangential and controversial, and detracted somewhat from the idea of describing Go strategies and only Go strategies. Even though "no strategy" can be considered a strategy, it is devoid of instructional value.
Hi Thangalin,
Thanks for the comments. Possibly I didn't make a couple of things clear:
It's possible to think strategically without having a definite plan?
From Wikipedia: A Strategy is a long term plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal, most often "winning." I'd say it applies for Go Strategy.
Yes, but the way go players use a particular word can be different from the way it's used in everyday English. For example, suppose someone follows a "strategy" of making a thick position. In go, it's hard to predict exactly what will follow, and even harder to be sure that victory will follow, so such a way of playing doesn't fit the definition offered on Wikipedia. However, I think most of us would still use the word strategy in this context. Personally I believe amateur players often get too hung up on trying to stick to a definite "plan" (I know it still happens to me sometimes), whereas good strategic thinking in go requires more a more flexible attitude.
...
the new alphabetical list strikes me as less useful.
Not alphabetical. Strategic positioning is first...
I was referring to the alphabetical list aji; amarigatachi; amashi... underneath the heading Strategic Concepts. I thought the old version of the page listed them in a more useful order from the point of view of someone learning these things for the first time.
I have to agree with xela that, in addition to the ordinary English meaning of strategy, go players use the term in a way that is peculiar to go, not necessarily related to planning, but more of what we might call whole board thinking. The current page does not seem to reflect that. Also, I question the attempt to be "authoritative" about such things on SL. We have a variety of perspectives and opinions. :)
WholeBoardThinking I see as a component of strategy, not a strategy in itself. You need to understand the different battles taking place across the entire board, including implications of kos, ladders, capture races, and so forth, before you can devise an appropriate strategy. When I discuss strategy with fellow Go players, I refer to plans at a level higher than what is described on WholeBoardThinking.
xela: Unless the order of a list is declared, it should be alphabetical. Feel free to re-order the links, but add a parenthetical note as to the order (e.g., simple to complex, frequency of use, what have you).
Your remarks underscore that you are writing from your own viewpoint, that the page as it is now is your essay.
Essays from different perspectives are welcome additions to SL. :) But I think that they need to be labeled as such.
I suggest we shorten the page, with index pages for concepts, principles and plans. We can leave the citations on the page, as well as a few examples per chapter.
See Strategy/Proposal?