76.64.37.90: ((no subject)) (2008-12-09 01:54) [#5397]

Karl Knechtel: Counting the score at the end requires negligible strength. You just have to know what's alive and dead, be sure that all territories are properly sealed (i.e. you know when the game is over, which is also an important elementary skill), and be able to keep track of numbers and already-counted intersections in your head (which is not really a go skill but a counting skill). Of course, these things are simplified by learning to score as the stronger amateurs typically do at a go club.

Making the game close with a beginner, though, requires counting and estimating frequently, as well as making some guesses as to what the student will do in the endgame, and finding creative ways earlier on to play sub-optimally (but safely) without making it too obvious. This requires far more skill. I would go so far as to say that playing for a .5 point win depends almost entirely on White's skill and not on Black's at all. (Of course, this assumes an oblivious Black player; he can always refuse to lose by half a point, in the worst case by resigning ;) )

If you are not yourself strong, you might just play for fun on a small board. Consider using handicap stones, and playing with either stone-counting or Ing style area scoring (if you pre-count stones in the bowls and return prisoners, as Ing requires, this makes the winner quite obvious; you just play until one person gets all stones on the board). It does depend somewhat on how strong you actually are; you might want to put some effort into appraising that, if you are not just holding back your rank information out of embarrassment or something :)

You might consider using handicap, as well. Two handicap stones on a 9x9 board are already a quite significant handicap; five ought to be overwhelming, but beginners can easily mess it up. I once saw a beginner with a week or so of experience succeed in giving five stones on 9x9 to a new player, because the new player filled in all his territory and thus created a self-atari. You might suggest this is a sign of low intelligence of that player's part (given a proper explanation of the rules), but it is certainly a mistake that will not be repeated. ;) If you are in an online environment, this kind of thing also offers the chance for more experienced players to jump in and give a better explanation of the rules than the beginner's stumbling attempt. :)

You could also consider teaching with non-game methods; set basic problems. They can be as straightforward as "count the liberties" (branching from there into "how many liberties for each string if opponent cuts here? If I connect there? How many liberties for the strings before and after this sequence; did that help with capturing?). I also like to use simple straight-line nakade shapes to explain the idea of life and death (which in turn illustrates the concept of territory and - which seems to be most important for a lot of beginners, and ought to be evident but seemingly isn't! - the principle of inevitability).