Looking at the recent Kiseido book Graded Go Problems for Dan Players, Volume Seven: 256 Opening and Middle Game Problems today, I had some thoughts about the opening. For those unfamiliar with the book, it's whole-board pick-the-next-move problems. While the level is way above my head, I'm learning a lot from it because of this approach.

But I realized something about the opening, and how at my level it is so difficult. When you look at the answers to the problems, and especially the follow-up moves, you see that the correct answers depend on a certain way of thinking that SDKs don't have. Let me try and explain. Say you have a problem where the correct move is to extend someplace, and the follow-up for your opponent is to extend on their side. If the first extension starts building some territory, an SDK will be likely to dive in and try and invade, reduce or live. But dans - according to the book - see that this is not the biggest move, and will play elsewhere to build their own territory.

This sort of move by SDKs could probably be called overplays, but I don't think that's actually what they are. I think they simply show a lack of whole-board understanding. However, as an SDK, I can't play the way this book shows me, because of what my opponent will do. Instead, I have to fight because of these overplays, and that's where the game gets very complicated. So I wonder, at what point will I be able to go further with my opening, since at this level, playing good openings really isn't possible.

It's not that one should play "sub-optimal" openings, but since SDKs have less of an understanding of the consequences of moves, we have to get into these fights, that may not be good. (That's probably why most SDK games I play or watch end up with large differences in score, or with resignation.) Perhaps what happens is that we need to develop fighting skills to be able to parry these overplays, and then, when we get strong enough, focus more on the opening.

Any thoughts on this from dans?

_________________
My blog about Macs and more: Kirkville

I think you nailed it there. If you cannot beat the supposedly "inferior" style of your opponent, then there is little point in studying difficult whole-board problems about supposedly "superior" style. Maybe a book like "Attack and Defense" by Ishida Akira would give you better results (fundamentals first!). And tsumego/tesuji problems, of course. That said, if you think these whole-board problems are interesting and you enjoy them, by all means continue! Enjoyment is the most important thing in go if you ask me.


Are you implying that dan games do not end with large differences in score? We wish! . Also, please don't start thinking that there's anything wrong with fighting. It happens at every level: just watch some Lee Sedol - Kong Jie games and you'll get what I mean. Just keep this in mind: don't be greedy, and don't start running with useless, valueless clumps of stones.

_________________
My name is Gijs, from Utrecht, NL.

When in doubt, play the most aggressive move

That reminds me of my early years of play. My opening was far above the rest of my game. As a result, my opponents would make such invasions and I would attack. (Games against better players developed similarly, because of the handicap stones.) What can I say? Get good at attacking.

As for further improvement at the opening, you might play stronger players, but take large komi instead of handicap stones. And it wouldn't hurt to study Go Seigen.

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

I think that Kirk makes an excellent point. To a certain extent, our opponent's skill is a limiting factor. I can't play an elegant game if my opponent is making wierd moves. As others have said, the way to get past this is simple: get better ourselves. As soon as we develop the skill to punish overplays that are typical for our rank, we'll rank up and get to play folks whose overplays will be at a higher level.

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

When I was around 2d I began playing regularly with the same opponent who, though also a dan-level player, had that same invade-and-fight style. At first I was annoyed that he played such "obviously" poor moves but I had trouble winning. Then I concentrated more on fighting and once he saw that he couldn't win with his style he mellowed out and we had much better games. In kirkmc's case it's a cultural thing at his level but I think if he improves his fighting skills he'll win more games and move up to the next level.

If you study the games of pros who like fighting, like Lee Sedol, you can learn a valuable lesson. They aren't just berserkers, they have good whole-board perception and goals, not just "what can I kill". Often the sdk players just aim at killing something when they fight. If you can look for non-killing results from fighting it will help your game.