![]() StartingPoints Referenced by
|
Tsumego Speed And Accuracy Table
Keywords: Life & Death
Dieter: I picked this idea from Matthew Macfadyen who has started a table like this at If you have gone through (part of) the following tsumego collections, then add your name and data to the entry. Add an entry if the collection hasn't been mentioned yet. 1. The problem academy at gobase, level 1.2. The problem academy at gobase, level 2.
Name: Dieter. Rank: 2D. Number of problems: 25. Run number: 1. Seconds per problem: 8.4. Accuracy: 92%. 3. The problem academy at gobase, level 3.
Name: Dieter. Rank: 2D. Number of problems: 25. Run number: 1. Seconds per problem: 18.4. Accuracy: 84%. 4. The problem academy at gobase, level 4.
Name: Dieter. Rank: 2D. Number of problems: 100. Run number: 1. Seconds per problem: 33.6. Accuracy: 89%. 5. Beginner exercises at SL
Name: Dieter. Rank: 2D. Data irrelevant due to replacement of some of the harder ones. 6. Maeda's graded Go problems volume 2
Name: Dieter. Rank: 2D. Number of problems: 25. Run number: 1. Seconds per problem: 74.4. Accuracy: 84%. 7. Chinese book ISBN 7-5326-0661-9
Name: Dieter. Rank: 2D. Number of problems: 50. Run number: 1. Seconds per problem: 14.4. Accuracy: 98%. 8. 1001 Life and death problems
Name: Dieter. Rank: 2D. Number of problems: 200. Run number: 1. Seconds per problem: 10.7. Accuracy: 99.5%. Actually, the numbers are not entirely fair. Many of the problems in this book feature in the abovementioned Chinese work, which I am studying simultaneously. NotesDieter: Time elapsed rather than used. Some collections are on the web others in books, so the time needed to browse through them may differ. Some people have slower connections than other people. Which makes speed hardly measurable, but it can give an idea. Also - and that is what Matthew used it for - the table gives an idea of how different collections compare to each other, and there one player's elapsed time can be a useful fact. Dieter: An interesting hypothesis, after having done several collections, is that I apparently do not allow myself to drop below a certain accuracy level. While doing the Maeda vol 2 collection, I missed three problems early on and immediately slowed down my solving speed. So, the way the problems are presented has an effect (for me) on speed. Whether all solutions are together at the back or after every page, affects my solving behaviour. Tristan: While I think this will be a very useful page, may I sound a cautionary note? I believe one should emphasise repetitive study, not speed. I do not keep a tally of my time taken and success/failure ratio (it's enough to think about solving the problems), although normally it takes me about 30 minutes to run through a set of 150 and I have now moved up from about 80% accuracy at level 3 of the Korean problems to 100%. What I do do is this: if I find a problem that I do not fully understand, I pause over it and convince myself why the failure lines fail and the success line succeeds. I am not satisfied to "solve" a problem merely by being able to recognise the vital point; I have to find out why it is vital. This is really my major point about repetitive study: most of us are good at solving problems and seeing tactics in a shallow way, i.e., being able to see strong moves, but we are also lacking in deep understanding of the underlying themes. The hardest part of many problems is not finding the answer itself, but in knowing how to complete the sequence, particularly against the strongest resistances. I believe that only when one has gone over an idea over and over until it is deeply understood rather than shallowly known has one truly studied it. This, incidentally, seems to be the reason why the original Korean problem books contain no answers - you have to convince yourself completely why your answer is correct. Harpreet: Accuracy is, of course, most important but speed tells you something about how well you have learned the material. Weaker players can solve some of the same problems that strong players can solve but much more slowly. This means that often certain tesujis or ideas or not well learned and are then harder to build upon in more complex problems. If you look at the MacFadyen page about problem answering you'll see that accuracy for the very easy problems is uniformly quite high but speed varies quite a bit. I am certain it is diagnostic of skill. That's why repetition of similar themes is so important in studying problems. Dieter: Completely agree with you Tristan. There is more than one criticism thinkable for the approach this page seems to encourage. Still, the page gives me an incentive to study tsumego and it may do so for others. Tristan: An interesting thing has come up for me: my accuracy now, after nearly two weeks repetition, is total but my speed is much slower. I am finding myself questioning the solutions and trying to "break" the problems by finding alternatives, as it is not interesting merely to click on the right point for the 14th time. The more I look at the problems, the more sidelines and queries I see: what appeared to be straightforward themes and shapes can hide more complex patterns. This is a copy of the living page "Tsumego Speed And Accuracy Table" at Sensei's Library. ![]() |