book ratings [#2296]
: book ratings
(2010-05-28 22:32) [#7719]
aren't you very harsh on the lessons in the fundamentals in go? i believe a beginner should focus on basic ideas like tenuki, getting ahead, keeping connected vs. being cut, ... and playing games and much less on portioned knowledge of the type "in the 3-4 joseki high approach the usual answer is..." which is much more difficult to keep track of. and this is what the lessons contain.
btw, i am 1 dan at kgs and i haven't yet finished the 1001 problem collection (ok i am not proud of this), but do you really believe they are suited for 15-10 kyus (the 5 move problems). can you solve them routinely?
: 1001 L&D
(2010-05-28 23:09) [#7721]
I've never read Lessons in the fundamentals of go, but did do all of 1001 L&D. I did them as a 5k and found them quite challenging, I don't think I would recommended it to a 15k. Some of it may have to do with approach, and what it means to "do" tsumego. Sh says "My suggestion is to read a problem out, but not too long. Then compare your solution with the given one." So maybe for something like that where you aren't too worried about getting it right, 10-15k is ok. Personally I tried pretty hard to get them all right, and managed probably about 85-90%, but I'd often spend several minutes on each 5 move problem.
: "Fundamentals" and "1001 L&D Problems"
(2010-06-26 21:03) [#7785]
When I read the "Fundamentals" for the first time, I was around 5 stones weaker than now. At that time I really couldn't get much out of it though it was fun to read. Obviously it is quite controversial whether you can get something out of it. Some people think it's the best go book at all, whereas others think it's just a good read without being able to get some real go knowledge out of it. It seems I am rather in the second group. However currently I am rereading it and we'll see what I can get out of it.
As for 1001 L&D problems you're probably right. As KGS-8k I could solve about half of these problems. When I created the list, the strength indicators did not focus on being able to solve the problems routinely, but to understand and hardwire them. For the latter you need less skills than for the former. To avoid frustrations for potential readers, I will update the list.
: new book ratings
(2010-06-26 22:22) [#7786]
I have reestimated the ranks for the books. Some of them had really been off, e.g. "501 Tesuji Problems". I have listed the problem books twice each, once for "learn and hardwire" and once for "solve routinely". What do you think, would you agree to the new estimations?