![[Welcome to Sensei's Library!]](images/stone-hello.png "Sensei's Library")
jared · Do you think we can be more systematic about this? (Quoted from original page creation)
Dave: In my opinion any attempt to name fuseki based on listing the stones played is doomed to failure. As the examples show it quickly becomes unwieldy and is in any case incomprehensible.
Sounds like a very large project, if not larger than the abandoned Systematic Joseki project. Like Dave, I am not sure about the outcome of this Fuseki Reference project. But you can always prove all of us wrong. =)
Bob McGuigan: I, too, am skeptical about the practicality of this project. In any case you have omitted at least five types of first moves, including some common ones such as 5-3, 5-4, and 5-5 moves, moves in the middle of the side, and a few other rarer first moves.
Perhaps the project should be conducted as a group of sub-pages till it accomplishes a significant level of coverage of one fuseki.
I find this idea very interesting, and moreover, promising. Why so pessimistic about it? Why expect pages to be fully fledged which barely have been created? Sorry for the smug comment: as you certainly know, the point of a wiki is not to complain about incompleteness but instead to add what is lacking.
I think, in the very beginning, it`s a good idea to stick to most common moves though. Their followups are more likely to be completed soon. Too much diversification might be disadvantageous rather than useful, because too high a fraction of links leading to yet to be created pages simply would escape people.
I think it is an awesome idea. Right now we get to ninrensei after four moves, which is right, except when we want to get to the sanrensei. So I don't think the board links should ever leave the fuseki reference area.
The fundamental problem is that a wiki (even with SL's quite clever linking via board diagrams) is not appropriate to building a fuseki reference. FusekiReference begins to build a manual alternative to the existing Go databases. If you really want to investigate a fuseki use tools like GoGoD and Kombilo on your PC or go to GoBase. They provide fast searches across tens of thousands of professional games plus various statistical analyses to assist you.
Consider Fuseki1616-0404-1604-0417?. Kombilo will show you at the touch of a couple of buttons that interest in this fuseki peaked around 1992 among the pros when it appeared in something like 10% of all games. Currently it appears in less than 1%. If such information is included in FusekiReference, how will it be maintained over time across the thousands of pages necessary to build the fuseki tree?
Or consider Fuseki1616-0404-1604-0417-0603?. It refers to a mixture of pro and amateur games. Why does the tree terminate on this page? What is the purpose of this page (it does not show enough to understand the continuation in each game)? How will this page be maintained (it is already out of date since it does not include Ch'oe Ch'eol-han vs. Yi Se-tol 2006-06-07 in the 2nd Prices Information Cup)?
Where a wiki like SL should excel is in providing the ability to accumulate commentary/analysis (text) on different position. However, look at SystematicJoseki, the weight of trying to comment on everything results in most of the comments being trivial. I expect the same in FusekiReference.
I don`t particularly like the term "reference" in the title, because of similar concerns. A wiki maintained by amateurs is supposedly not the best place to build such a reference. There is practically no chance that the collection will ever be comprehensive enough. I don`t own a GoGoD, but when I am interested in definite answers (as far as such exist), I simply try a gobase or kombilo pro games search.
Neither provides any possibility to discuss lower level ideas though, which is what I appreciate this project for. In my view, it shouldn`t be treated as something exclusive or distinct from other fuseki pages, but rather serve as a systematical guide into (or arrangement of) the stuff that is already there, spread over various paths, BQM`s, tutorials and whatnot.
Bob McGuigan: I don't want to seem to be discouraging people from working on a useful project, but the number of pages needed just to do a thorough coverage of the first four moves of the game, assuming each player plays in a different corner each time, is already daunting. For example, in a parallel fuseki where Black plays on the 4-4 point in the upper right and the 4-3 point in the lower right there are at least 64 different ways White could play her first two moves in the upper and lower left corners. If you change Black's move three to a 3-3 point that's another 64 or more pages, change it to 5-3, another 64 or more, etc. There many many more possible positions for the first four moves. All these hundreds of four-move fusekis are playable and have a different character. So it looks overwhelming to me just to deal with the very very early part of the fuseki systematically. I think a far more useful approach would be to discuss general fuseki principles. What low level players should be thinking about is the corner-side-center order of play, how to develop from corner positions, etc.
Actually, as an amateur-friendly fuseki mini-reference I think people could do a lot worse than to pick up Go Seigen's A Way Of Play For The 21St Century. It's not advertised as a fuseki reference, but it sure reads that way to me. I am very impressed by the usefulness of this book.
For example, you just want to collect a few examples from gobase, and look at them all at once, on one page. Wouldn't it be nice if that effort was saved for others to enjoy?
So "Reference" then becomes a complete misnomer...
I deleted the whole project (as unkx80 agreed), leaving the starting page as a warning against similar approaches. Despite being dozens of pages it nowhere went beyond the 6th move, and usually stopped and 5th, 4th or even 3rd move.
I believe we should discourage anyone who tries to do something similar against mathematics again. I feel sad, when I see how so much enthusiasm can be wasted.
Kind regards Tapir.