So currently I've been focused on DGS since it fits in better with minding kids and my unusual sleep cycle (I sleep 10pm-4am at the moment). What I've found is:

a) It's pretty beginner friendly (read: get lots of games in) once you find a few other fast players. I've a few regular opponents on there already where we'll get through a game in 2 days most of the time. Slower than if I played on a real time server in terms of games/day but I don't have many hours that I am not "on-call" with the kids with the kids off school/preschool at the moment and in the summer this will get even worse!
b) You get more time to mull over games and this leads to things sticking better in your memory, for me at least.
c) You can still play fast if you want to so long as you've enough games running concurrently. I'm trying a play quickly, review at leisure approach at the moment but indulging myself in playing out variations when I find myself in an interesting position in a game.

In other matters, I'm finding both the Irish and Global go community to be great. I'm getting loads of help as a beginner and a lot of chances to play against much stronger players. A local KGS 4d is giving me teaching games at the moment on DGS which is very interesting. I think I learn most about shape from playing against stronger players and watching what they do. Though I suppose one could also do the same reviewing games from people a few stones stronger than you off the Go Teaching Ladder or similar. What would people think of me doing this? i.e. reviewing KGS 10k/DGS 14k games and studying what shapes they use or is this a good way to pick up more bad habits by emulating weaker sdk players? My worry is that if I look at games more than 4 or 5 stones stronger than me that I won't really understand them.


I tried to review bits of this game, especially focusing on the opening. My opponent is a BGA 13k, so a nice challenge for me in an even game. Any comments appreciated.



There's also a tournament on at the end of May in Galway which I'm considering going to. I'll lose all my games and finish last of course but it should be a good laugh.

Boidhre, Basics: Broken (fractured) shapes:

Perfect Ed, thank you.

Oh one thing that's been bothering me a lot. Do I post too many games for review on here? I don't see other people doing it and I'm feeling a bit guilty for taking up so much of people's time. But equally I find the reviews very helpful for reinforcing what is not sinking in properly for me, i.e. broken shapes as Ed keeps having to point out to me, and potentially another beginner reading this might get some value out of it so I really don't know.

It takes different lengths of time for different people to digest things.
For the super lucky ones, one game, they understand the broken shapes forever.
For others, maybe 50 games. For still others, maybe 100 to 200+ games, or even more.
(For me, it was 2~3 years.)

Don't feel bad about posting the games you'd like to get reviewed. Nobody is forcing anyone to come in here and review your games! You'll know you've posted too many when you nobody comments on them.

Also, I always enjoy reading reviews of games (I should really post my own!), especially reviews from Ed.

_________________
KGS: schultz [?].

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$ Best local play?
$$ . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . .
$$ . . . X . . .
$$ . . O . O . .
$$ . . . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . .[/go]

Easy but instructive.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$ Black to play
$$ . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . O . . . O . .
$$ . . . . X . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . .[/go]

What is the best local play for Black? Similar point as previous problem.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

A few comments on the early play.



Edit: Added a variation at move 83.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Excellent Bill, thank you.

So I'm introducing a new fun element to my routine. Playing 9x9 versus Champion Go. I suck at 9x9 which is indicative of my general suckiness at tactics so this is probably good training for me. I'm up to Level 4 on two stones and Level 2 on everything else (ignoring 4 stone handicap which is a doddle to get all the medals on).

Still though, yet another metric with which to measure progress. Time to go back and start reading basic books on tactics I guess.

Gah, I think I need to buy a real board and stones. Apart from the aesthetic appeal and pleasure of playing with physical stones, I just can't play anywhere close to my (weak) strength on a real board after having almost completely played online. Any advice on stone size etc? I'm totally lost.

Boidhre, congrats. Getting your first set is fun!
Japanese glass stones: 10 mm is OK
Japanese slate & clam shell stones: Size 38 (10.7 mm) is very nice.
Japanese table board: 2 inches (5 cm) or thicker is quite nice.
Japanese wooden bowls: you want "extra large" size for 10+ mm stones.
There's a (steep? ) learning curve to anything related to Go, including the equipment. Enjoy!

There's a steep pricing curve too if you happen to be in Europe!

The kind of set you're talking about with slate and shell stones would set me back around €600 with 8mm stones! My wife just might kill me if I spent that much on a set for a game that I'd been playing a month...

Boidhre,

I agree about costs spread out over time and the comparison to tech! I've no problem paying for craftsmanship, my current desk cost quite a bit more than what we're talking about for a go set. Thing is, that desk was the last in a long line of desks and I'd view this go set in the same way, I'd be interested in getting the kind of set you describe when I'm a lot stronger in the game as a reward to myself but I don't think it's reasonable now to get it with me being such a new player.

As for calling it a game, well, over here anyway that's not a derisive term for me, chess is called a game but can be taken as seriously as any other profession by its players. I'm one of those people who takes their games rather seriously! Oh and I joke about my wife being angry with me, she'd just mock me ruthlessly over spending a lot on a board and stones at this stage.


Oh, and I have a €20 go set... I just can't stand playing on a cardboard board and plastic stones after playing with glass stones on a wooden one... I'm a salesman's dream really.

I have a couple sets, one that gets a lot of use is actually a cheap Korean mdf board and glass stones that works great.

I think Ed's preference for big stones is a bit odd, 8 mm is fine. You can get reasonable 8 mm glass stones and a katsura/shin-kaya board for not too much.

Many people like it when the stones don't quite fit, and when they get small it can be disturbingly hard to see connections.

What's changing is generally the vertical dimension and not the horizontal. I've seen old slate and shell stones from Japan that were extremely thin.

Yes, you're undoubtedly right. I'm thinking of cheap sets I've seen where the stones were both flat and a bit small. But if you're ordering from somewhere that lets you specify the size down to 0.5 mm...