Could you use Chapter 1 from both editions (Ishida pages 2-15; Takao pages 2-10) to illustrate this?
I'm not sure I'm seeing what you meant.

Many of them do, but not nearly all. I personally use that kind of database more for entertainment than for serious study.


Really? Could you give me an example? I've never heard of any other dictionary that is even nearly as comprehensive as Ishida, be it in English or some other language.


As a KGS 1 dan, I'd say this is definitely not true! In fact, I would say that studying Ishida/Takao before reaching KGS dan level is not very efficient. Better study tesuji and tsumego.


Mechanically playing a joseki at every chance you get is a terrible idea and shows that you do not understand joseki at all. You have to play the move that fits the whole board, whether or not that happens to be the one variation that you memorised. In my experience, tesuji and tsumego is much more helpful than joseki study at kyu level.

That said, the best of luck in regaining your strength! Cool that you're still enjoying go after such a setback, major respect from me .

_________________
My name is Gijs, from Utrecht, NL.

When in doubt, play the most aggressive move

If you know 350 joseki and you're only 1kyu, I wonder what's gone wrong with your game. YY syndrome?

_________________
North Lecale

And amateurs can spend enough time on the subject.


Perhaps amateurs' mistakes are more "reversible" than professionals' mistakes. May be that an incorrect amateur sequence leads to the same result as a correct professional one, because a mistake with black is compensated for by another mistake with white.
Usually professionals' mistakes are non-reversible.

_________________
The really most difficult Go problem ever: https://igohatsuyoron120.de/index.htm
Igo Hatsuyōron #120 (really solved by KataGo)

How do chromosomal abnormalities lead to joseki obsession?

(My emphases.)
So he does not really know them.

Interesting question. Has two meanings, the literal meaning and the intended meaning.

Reflections on the Intended Meaning.

Probably not good to study Go too much as long as your rank is shooting up. Just play. And learn from reviewing your own games and watching what your opponents do.

Eventually, though, many players "plateau" before they reach 3d. For such players, study helps. Tseumengo first, of course, but everything else too.

Study of joseki is good because it gives "tried and true" examples of things like shape and various tseuji and thinckness and sabaki and invasions and L&D, etc. I am including corner enclosure invasions and side joseki here. The proverb "joseki are for forgetting" is a good thing to remember, but, it is not always true. Every now and then a joseki has a move in it that you just want to memorize.

Study of joseki is also good because it helps you play your joseki better in games. One could argue that this is, or should be, a secondary purpose. I have seen reasons given for both sides of this argument.

Reflections on the Literal Meaning.

Joseki can be studied because they are interesting in themselves, not primarily because you hope they will help you get stonger.

About chromosones, personally I like to see deeply into things so that I can feel that I really understand them. It is quite possible because my chromosones, genes, genetic material, whatever, is different from others. It is possible that my tendency towards OCD is genetically inherited too. If so, I prefer to think of the difference as just part of the way we are all different from each other, not as an abnormality.

No offense taken, though, Javaness2. In fact, I was happy to answer your post because I like the KGS player Javaness a lot and you have a similar name.

Absolutely! There was very little English language Go literature back them. Ishida was one of the best books available. It was not at all uncommon for a 1d player to have studied, or at least be familiar with, every Go book published in the English language. I had about 5 fully commented professional games available to me. They were my second most valuable study resource. I also learned a lot by watching what my opponents were doing when they were stronger than me. Whether or not this is "study" is hard to say, but, it helped me more than any other single thing.

As I mentioned, many players at the 4d level had so completely exhausted the English literature that they had to turn to the Japanese Go journals. In one game I met a joseki variation that had only been published a few months earlier in a Japanese journal. I played my side of the joseki correctly in the local context, even though I had never seen it before, but misunderstood the significance in the global context and so lost the game. The journal article explained the global significance. (The article was translated into English several months later; that was how I found out what had happened.)

Another huge difference was that it was vastly more difficult to get to play Go with other people back then. A greater emphasis on study was required for those who wanted to improve. I attended every club meeting in the Washington DC area within 1/2 hour of my house and still could only get 3-4 games a week. I got a game every day at work, but, those were weaker players. Now I average at least 2-3 game a day!

The biggest difference was that there was no internet, no game database, at least not any that I knew of. DrStraw, one of the best American p-layers in Virginia, arguably the best at least for a while, says that he made huge progress by playing against himself.

On KGS, it is sometimes possible get free reviews of your games by stronger players, and free teaching games from stronger players. (For example in the KGS Teaching Ladder, in The Study Room, and in many other rooms.) There was nothing even close to this.

Today, there are many excellent teachers, like Kaz and Breakfast (Alexander Dinertchen) who often give lectures for a small fee (the price of admission to the KGS+ club). There was not enough interest in America to support the few Asian Go professionals who tried (and failed) to make a living teaching Go in this country.

For reviewing your own games, there was nothing like the sgf files and the CGoban KGS sgf editor. Often you had to record your own games, or remember them. Remembering them turned out to be more efficient. This was good for fuseki study, but not very helpful for complicated middle game fighting - the crux of the game. It was to difficult to get the complex positions exactly right from memory, at least for me.

This gives you some idea. There were many little things that we take for granted today and that were not available in the 1980's and that make a huge difference.

I apologize for being ambiguous. He "knows" the variations. Not that he has memorized them, but, he can reproduce most of them, find the "trick" to punish or whatever. Yes, he "really knows" them. At least that is my impression. Hope that clarifies what I meant to express.

Hmmm, I will comply with your request for some concrete examples if some day time permits me to do that.

To explain what I meant. I have both editions of the dictionary. I opened them both up and started going through them joseki by joseki and word by word. I found a lot of the text from the old edition was "cut and pasted" into the new edition. This was not suprising, and it is not a bad thing.

The preface to the new edition, if I remember correctly, says that many of the diagrams were lifted from the old edition. This is a good thing (imo) because it makes it vastly easier to compare the two editions. Many joseki take more than one diagram. If the diagrams were broken in different places, or if the text said the same thing in a different way, it would be vastly more difficult to compare the two editions.

I was hoping that this exercise would bring my knowledge of joseki up to date. This has happened a little bit, but, not too much. Even though there have been many new "joseki" (perhaps in the broader sense of the word "joseki"), discovered over the last 20-30 years since Ishida's edition, only the most common, most basic, and most well established of them are in this book.

There are three main benefits that I obtain from the exercise of comparing the two editions. First, it helps me review the Ishida joseki that I used to be familiar with. Second, it gives me confidence that (most) of the joseki that I learned from Ishida are the same now as they were then. Third, I understand the joseki better as I work though them again. I know more about shape and tseuji and L&D now than I did in 1991, so I can understand the joseki better now than I could them. (I don't do so well in play because my mind kind of fuzzes out while I am reading out variations.)

Hopefully this clarifies what I was talking about.

You may well be right. Of course, Ishida is one dictionary in three volumes. One example of what I was talking about was the Nihon Kiin Joseki handbooks. These are not really advertised as "one" dictionary, but, I was considering them to be multiple volumes of what are really "one" dictionary. If I remember, they are referenced in the SL. One must be careful to distinguish between the "small handbooks" and the real thing. The "small handbooks" on joseki and fuseki are excellent imo and i have all three of them (Even Game Joseki, Star Point Joseki, and Fuseki). They are no way as complete as Ishida. I assumed the "big" ones, taken together, were more complete, but, I don't know for sure, because I have never looked at them. I have also heard of other more complete collections than Ishida, but I don't remember the exact reference, I believe they are in Japanese (not really a problem even if you don't know Japanese) and I am not sure they are more comprehensive.

It may well be the case, as you suggest, that there is no more single comprehensive reference that Ishida. That is an important side issue, but, not really what I was getting at. Certainly there are books on joseki that are more advanced than Ishida and that give more complete descriptions of the individual joseki than Ishida. One of them is often referenced in Kogo's joseki dictionary. Don't remember its name either.

They are all above my level.

ps

Of course, there are the Nihon Kiin "notebooks" that the Ishida/Takeo dictionary is derived from. The joseki in the dictionary are a subset of the josekis in the notebooks. You could argue that the Nihon Kiin noteboks are not books. Also, I do not know if the notebooks contain explanations or just the moves. So, even if you consider them to be books, they might not be comparable. In addition, the notebooks are not publicly available, as far as I am aware.

John, I agree that if it were indeed the case, it would not be very surprising, nor would it necessarily be a bad thing.
After all, if a variation was deemed "bad for White" 400 years ago and the current assessment remains unchanged, it is still "bad for White".

But my concern is (again, my emphases):I will take the arbitrary numbers of (75% - 80%) for "most" and 60% for "a lot". I think these numbers are quite reasonable and lenient.
I don't think your evaluation is correct, that's why I'd like you to take Chapter 1, for example, to substantiate your claims.

EdLee,

I can not tell you how pleased I am to have received your rapid reply to my recent post. You are absolutely correct in the percentages you assign to my terms. That was exactly what I had in mind (well, maybe 66% instead of 60%, but that is a minor difference). These are the interpretations that I have found in the mathematical community. I wonder if you (like I) have a strong background in mathematics. Or, maybe it is the same in engineering?

Yes, those percentages are a subjective impression on my part and they are only based on my examination of the first 40 or so pages -- I guess that is the first chapter. I did not keep count.

On the other hand, the actual percentages are not really a matter of burning personal interest, so I must demur (hopefully politely) and not accept your invitation to verify my subjective impression. Yes, if I was going to write a formal review, I would be more careful, but, I still don't think I would bother to publish my "back-up calculations".

Respectfully Yours,

Deacon John

ps

If you are the same EdLee who is a KGS admin, I thank you for your contributions to the KGS room monitoring functions. I really like KGS and it is people like you who help make it such an enjoyable experience.

Hi John,Yes, both. Yes, the same person.
And my subjective evaluation is I agree with the back-cover: it is a "complete rewriting."
Thanks.

The following is the correct diagram for Diagram 41 on page 8 of 21st Century Dictionary. It was kindly provided by John Power. He apologises for the lapse and takes the blame, even though there was actually a technical, layout reason why it happened.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W New Diagram 41, page 8
$$ -------------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . O a O . . . . |
$$ . . 3 1 . . X . . X . . |
$$ . . . 2 X . . . X . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . |[/go]

But John has read the thread here and says he takes issue with several comments. In particular he would like to refute the idea that the Takao text is in any way a cut and paste version or otherwise a copy of the Ishida book, beyond stereotypical phrases such as ‘The result is favourable for Black’. This applies to both the Japanese and English texts. He says, "When I started translating, I looked at the Ishida version and found that the text was significantly different. So I put it aside and did my translation from scratch (as I write in my preface). This can easily be confirmed by comparing page 2 of Takao with the first page and a bit of Ishida."

Like several people here, he was interested in just how many changes there were between editions, and initially he tried to keep track of them, but soon gave up as there were so many.

The idea of combining the two books would have been too great a task, and would have violated the copyright of two pros, he says. There was also the problem of Takao's wishes. Although some diagrams were dropped by the Japanese editor for space reasons, Takao himself rejected many diagrams from the Ishida book.

Both amused and exasperated by the conspiracy theory about Kiseido trying to market both versions, John does point out that there are a few remaining copies of Ishida in stock, if anyone wants to get in quick. But he adds, "For nearly three and a half decades we have been urged to update the book and when we finally do we get this reaction."

I imagine most readers on this forum are of a moderate, friendly disposition. It might surprise them to hear how much their less moderate colleagues have a go at authors and publishers. I've posted a few examples already from my own experience, but usually I protect the guilty with my silence. John Power does, too, but he says it does get wearing when "year after year I heard criticism for not including josekis invented after Ishida was written."

He also told me a funny new story on this theme - shortly after the Ishida came out, a top European player told him the book had ruined a European championship. Another player (name omitted here) in the championship had come up with his own twist on the Magic Sword and rode it to a win that year. But his rival attacked the Ishi Press as "reprehensible" because people who had memorised that section of the book couldn’t handle the new (and, obviously, omitted) variation. John was so gobsmacked that he said he couldn’t come up with a retort.

All go writers and publishers I know have similar experiences with readers, sometimes much worse ones. Why? Is there a hunting season we don't know about? Are supposedly intelligent go players really stupid? T Mark reminded me the other day of Einstein's remark that there were only two things in the world that were really infinite: the universe and human stupidity. But E was having doubts about the first one.

I hasten to add that I'm less pessimistic than Einstein. I know many go book readers who are absolutely wonderful people, and they more than make up for the other lot.

John, please convey my apology to John if I have in any way offended him. I would be glad to discuss this subject with him in more depth through private emails if he is interested. My address is in my KGS profile.

I am very glad to have purchased a copy of the Takao/Power edition. I view it as an essential addition to my Go library. I recommend purchasing a copy of the Ishida edition too, while it is still available, if you do not already own it.

It is just too difficult to work from printed out copies of the on-line versions of Go books. It is even more difficult to work with the on-line version itself for the kind of study that I like to do. I often buy a hard copy Go book instead of printing out a softcopy version. The cost of the ink is usually a large percentage of the cost of the book, and a nicely bound volume is vastly easier to carry around.

In addition, it is likely that the Ishida edition will soon become unavailable from the retail booksellers imo. My experience is that a high quality Go book like Ishida usually doubles in price as soon as it it transitions from the retail market to the out-of-print market. If future students of joseki find it even half as beneficial to work with both editions as I have , the price is likely to continue to rise long term. In other words, I think the Ishida edition is a good investment even if you never open it! (Now, imagine my red-face if I turn out to be wrong! Nevertheless, that is my opinion.)

I expect to continue to profit from working with both editions at the same time. Seems to me that any serious student can get more that way than by working with the Takao/Power edition alone. I have listed five specific benefits of this approach in my previous posts.

As one author in this thread mentioned, the development in the star point joseki theory has been much greater than the development in the even game joseki, and we can expect the second volume of Takao/Power to be even more exciting than the first. Personally, I can not wait to get a copy!

DeaconJohn

http://senseis.xmp.net/?DeaconJohn

Where can I get the Ishida from please? I have never seen it anywhere. (of course I already have the Takao Shinji one - just want to fill a gap in my library ^^)

http://kiseido.com/go_books.htm

Still lists Ishida here.

I bought the Takao set in Japanese a while ago. When the Takao set came out, the Ishida became unavailable as a new book in Japan. I haven't really felt there's much of a reason to get both.

Obviously, that player lost the game because he lost two stones strength by memorizing joseki.

I think we all owe John Power and others like him a lot. I for one appreciate the new edition, never felt I had the right to demand it and have a lot of respect for his efforts.

_________________
I am John. John-I-Am.