Forum for Fujisawa Rina
Women's Professional Qualification Exam vs Professional Exam [#2186]
Seems that Rina passed a women's only exam, rather than the open exam. Rather like the Women's Kisei vs the Kisei. Might it be worthwhile to change the wording to reflect this: youngest to achieve pro status via the women's exam and Cho Chikun as youngest via the open exam ?
Dave: I think that Rina passed the women's special qualification exam (女流特別採用試験). She did not qualify under the open qualifying tournament for all insei. As I understand it there are only a few women pros in Japan that have qualified in the normal tournament. Xie Yimin is one and I believe that Suzuki Ayumi is another (there are one or two more, but not for example Kobayashi Izumi). So Rina is the youngest pro but does not really replace Cho as the youngest or Xie as the youngest women's pro in any meaningful sense.
Velobici: Dave, could we move the discussion to the discussion subpages...would have moved it myself, but then your comments would appear under my name rather than yours. Look forward to discussing it with you there.
tapir: Is there some list of players passing by which exam? And anyway the professional status achieved is the same. (There is no separate stratum of female kishi - as it seems to be the case in Shogi.) Also regional branch players may pass by a separate event, being normal pros nonetheless.
Kirby: Hi, tapir. You might find these links interesting:
![[ext]](images/extlink.gif)
http://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/saiyo/2010/f_honsen.htm
http://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/saiyo/2010/honsen.htm
tapir: As she was tied with two other players 6:2 i would be interested to know how they break ties :)
I agree that it might be good to clarify. The clarification adds information, at the very least.
We should also keep the wording that says that she's the youngest to become pro *in Japan*, since it's common knowledge that Cho Hunhyun became pro at 9 years old. The wording of the news was slightly misleading in the AGA ejournal.
John F. It's even more misleading to say Cho Hun-hyeon became a pro at age 9. Context matters. When he transferred to Japan he was 2d in Korea but was started as a 4k insei in Japan, and did not achieve 1d there until he was 14. I see this important piece of info is missing from his SL page.
Actually, if we are including reservations, Ogawa Doteki should probably be given the plaudits for youngest whatever. He was 6-dan at age 13 by the Oriental count.
John, looks like the SL page has been fixed to note the two distinct events:
- 1962: He became a 9-year-old 1 dan pro at Hankuk Kiwon. He went to Japan to become a pupil of Segoe Kensaku, and was initially ranked as a 4 kyu insei.
- 1967: Achieved 1 dan pro at the Nihon Ki-in at age 14.
Kirby: It's not misleading. The statement we are talking about here is simply, "youngest pro". Cho Hunhyun holds that honor. Maybe the context with which he became pro was different than what some Japanese pros did, but the fact remains, he *was* a pro at age 9. Maybe you personally don't like the way that he became pro, or you'd like to discredit the Hankuk Kiwon Association as not being "official" like the Japanese counterpart is, but a pro is still a pro. To say otherwise is certainly misleading. As HermanHiddema notes, we can add contextual information about the exact circumstances surrounding each professional. But the general title of "youngest pro" belongs to Cho Hunhyun, even if you don't personally like the context.
Also, if you read my original reply to this thread, you'll note that I simply am arguing for maintaining the wording that we should maintain the wording of "in Japan", since Cho Hunhyun was pro at an earlier age in a different country.
Your argument ignores this. Cho Hunhyun *was* a pro when he was 9. Regardless of context, he was still a pro.
You can add contextual information to be of benefit to readers, but to make generalized statements that are not true *is* misleading. And that is what was done in the AGA E-Journal. Let's take a look at the headline: "Youngest-ever Pro is Female".
Ask yourself, is that headline, taken by itself, true? I don't think so, regardless of the circumstances by which somebody else did it, there existed a pro at age 9.
Also, you can turn the "4k distinction" argument around, as well. Just as Cho Hunhyun first became pro in Korea, and then went to Japan to become pro at a later age, who is to say that this could also not happen with Fujisawa Rina?
If Rina, for whatever reason, were to go to Korea when she were 15 and become a pro there, would it take away from her having become pro at age 11?
No, because she still obtained the status. Adding context is great, and I encourage the E-Journal to do it. But they should at least make sure that the content that the *do* have is accurate.
If you want to be fully clear on this, you should info about the circumstances surrounding their promotion to each professional. At what branch did they qualify as pro, how many other insei were competing in that particular exam, what was the playing level of those insei, etc, etc.
Personally, I think that qualifying as pro through any exam is an admirable achievement, and that adding all sorts of qualifiers only detracts from it.
Qualifying as pro is remarkable achievement. Agree wholeheartedly. Regarding the Open Qualifying exam vs the Women's Qualifying exam, the distinct parallels the distinction between the Open title tournaments and the women's only tournaments, such as the Kisei tournament and the Female Kisei. The shared characteristic is the distinction between the restricted entry and unrestricted entry. Cho Chikun is the youngest to become a Japanese professional in an unrestricted entry exam. Fujisawa Rina, the youngest in a particular restricted exam, the Women's Qualifying exam. Did we have this distinction as well for Svetlana Shikshina and Alexandre Dinerchtein...perhaps I am misremembering ?
I understand the distinction, and I agree that adding it adds information. What I am worried about is the implication, even unintentionally, that Fujisawa Rina would not have qualified if it were not for the restricted entry. The implication that she is not strong enough to qualify through the open exam. That may or may not be true, we cannot be sure, as she did not compete in that exam. Perhaps she would have also had a good chance to qualify through the open, but even then it would make sense for her to choose the restricted "women only" exam, since with less competition you simply have a greater chance of qualifying.
Dinerchtein and Shikshina were both promoted by special recommendation, but it is not explicitly mentioned on their SL pages. I think that this distinction is somewhat more relevant, as they did compete as yeongusaeng in Korea, and did not qualify through the normal channels. On the other hand, there is a difference in the level of competition to become pro in Korea vs the level of competition in Japan, so perhaps even this distinction is spurious. Dinerchtein once beat O Rissei in pro competition, so I think there can be little doubt about his playing strength.
I am not necessarily opposed to adding the information, but I do not think it really enhances an article when we add all sorts of qualifiers to the promotions of players.
Perhaps an appropriate course of action would be to note which pros gained that status via special recommendation, which via women's only, and leave all the rest unmarked....as they are the majority that qualify via the open exam. Don't know what we can do about those folks that wish to find fault with method of qualifying.
There are special tournaments for regional branches of the Nihon Kiin as well. However nobody proposes to add qualification for professionals who qualified "only" via the regional branch tournament. (As e.g. Catalin Taranu did.) I always sense a kind of allusion that female professionals somehow are not real professionals.
Not real professionals? Why do you think that? Having had the good fortune to watch a couple female professionals play in tournaments from a distance of 10 feet or less, I can vouch for their intensity and concentration. I am not strong enough to make any judgments about their play.
Fujisawa Rina was only the 30th ranked insei when the latest open competition began, so she did not qualify for the preliminary tournament. See http://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/insei/inseijoretu_200909.htm. As the chart shows, the top 10 insei automatically qualified while numbers 11-20 played in the preliminary tournament with eight outsiders.
I agree with you, Herman. That's why I still hold to the fact that Cho Hunhyun's pro status at the age of 9 is valid.
John F. I agree it's valid, and remarkable - after all he was earning money from playing professionally for a time. But as he was no longer a pro once he moved to Japan, and dropped as far as 4-kyu, that hiatus is too big an issue not to be mentioned.
Sure. Mention it. I'm just saying that, to make a generalized statement like "youngest pro", as the AGA did, can also be misleading. If the AGA statement said, "Youngest Pro from Japan", for example, it would be less misleading.
Conversely, it is great to add contextual information about Cho Hunhyun being 4k in Japan, too. It's still a true statement. But to say "Youngest pro" by itself, without the context of pros from other countries, is not a true statement.
And "no longer a pro when he moved to Japan" is not accurate, either. Cho Hunhyun was still a pro, but just not recognized as one by a Japanese association. If Fujisawa Rina moves to Korea to try to become a pro there, will she "no longer be a pro"?
Please!! Why all this nitpicking and posturing about which exam, context, what country, etc? I posted the original story in GD (edited by the AGA without my permission) and the context was pretty clear there ("in Japan"), but the reason I posted it was implicit in the heading "something for the women to crow about". This story is an an opportunity to sell go to women, or however else you want to use it. It is a little gold nugget of information. For heaven's sake, get out there and USE the story. At the very least contact the women's or girls' magazines or editors of women's pages. The Japanese press has used it widely, and she IS the youngest in Japan however you nitpick.
I agree. She is the youngest pro in Japan - just not the "youngest pro ever". I am glad that you say that you intended this context in your GD post. I received the news from the E-Journal, and did not get this impression. And, I am glad that female go players are getting attention.
The reason that I am being a "nitpick" is that I think that accuracy is important in the news that is portrayed to the Western go population. Yes, it is good to have more contextual information about a particular topic. But I do feel that Fujisawa Rina, the great player that she is, can still get a great deal of attention and provide a positive benefit toward the go community, while maintaining a more accurate wording - "youngest pro in Japan", as you've stated.
I have met Cho Hunhyun in person, and he's in fact one of my favorite players. I admire him quite a bit. I know that Fujisawa Rina's news will bring great benefit toward the go community, but I also hope that Cho Hunhyun is remembered for his accomplishments as well.
For somebody that studies Asian languages, it's not that hard to try to confirm news stories about go, and research their background in the Asian press. But I suspect that a large majority of the western go population gets its news from people that portray it to them. Sources like the AGA E-Journal, GD, Senseis Library and the like can all contribute toward painting a picture of what's really true or false.
But because a lot of the western go population relies upon such sources for information, I think that it's quite important to be a "nitpick" about things that happen. After all, how the news is portrayed by a single source has a direct impact on how it's perceived by many.
In this case, I do hope that Rina's news serves as a source of inspiration for not only female go players, but for all of us. But at the same time, I'd still like to try as hard as possible to retain accuracy in an effort to remember pros for their accomplishments.
Perhaps by my nature of argument, I have given a negative "vibe" toward Rina's accomplishment. This was certainly not intended. In my "nitpicking", it is my desire for accuracy to be maintained. And I too believe that it's accurate to say that Rina's accomplishment is a great one - having become the youngest pro in Japan, despite the context from which she earned that right. For this is still a true statement, and one that I hope that others will respect and be inspired by for years to come.
John F. Mountains and molehills come to mind here.
In 2005 Gekkan Go World did a survey of games between male and female pros in Japan. Three had a plus score (Umezawa Yukari, Kobayashi Izumi and Aoki Kikuyo). The top ten all had respectable showings of at least 43%.
I've seen later figures but didn't pay them much attention. However, I think they are even better now, mainly because of the exploits of Xie Yimin, who didn't feature in 2005. The likes of Suzuki Ayumi, Mukai Chiaki and Ishii Akane are also keeping the women's flag flying. The women are also the only pros giving Japan any sort of respectability on the international scene.
It's true that the women are still without an open title, but then so are about 98% of the men.
In that sort of context, how you become pro doesn't seem to count for much. It should be noted also that the Nihon Ki-in does not segregate out female pros in, for example, its yearbook listings. Nor does it specify how 1-dan status was reached.
My own view is that it is fine optionally to mention the qualification route in a new story - it's part of the colour - but in a c.v. or a player's SL page an entry of the simple type "1-dan: 2010" is best.
In passing, note that Rina is to become a 1-dan, not a 1p penny.
Mef: Indeed, I think that putting the story of how one becomes professional is fine in a biographical article or some such thing, but any sort of basic list of accomplishments, or reference to rank outside of such a page can just refer to them by their rank, regardless of how it was achieved. After all, you don't see an asterisk after every mention of Honinbo Shusaku clarifying that he was never actually head of the house. Similarly, I wouldn't expect one to go out of their way to mention Sakai Hideyuki's status was initially earned via non-traditional channels, unless it was particularly pertinent to the discussion at hand.
Fact of the matter is, professional ranks are achievement based honors, how they earned that distinction seems secondary. It would be similar to distinguishing that some Japanese professionals earned their rank via the Oteai, whereas others ended up getting sudden promotions due to winning a title under new system.
![[Welcome to Sensei's Library!]](images/stone-hello.png "Sensei's Library")