I like those one-liner quotes in GoGOD, though am not sure how informative they are since they are so terse. But they get me thinking that rather than describing one's own style, one should relate what others think, which is usually much more humbling. So some things my teachers have said:
"Ah, chicken-style!"
"You like to play yourself."
"You like gote too much."
"If you play this way it means you want territory. If you play this other way it means you want influence. Your move says you want everything."
Do you know about this test? http://style.baduk.org/
I took it again after some time and got the same result:
"Your style is flexible
Your Go style is flexible: you can play for territory as well as for influence.
Usually you make such decisions according to the whole-board situation or the playing style of your opponent.
You may force him to choose the strategy he hates. For example, if he likes moyos, you can play for influence yourself, just for making him angry.
Your Go style is actually the best one.
You may improve your Go by studying different things, but I suggest paying attention on yose and positional judgment."
I suppose that's as reasonable an assessment as any, but it's a little like a cold reading, I take it with a grain of salt. But I do think your opponent's moves matter. You can't just start out with this notion of "I'm going to play this way" because your opponent has something to say about that
Actually, I'm trying to change my style a bit and focus less on the attacking game. Attacking, as Yuan Zhou points out in has books and Guo Juan 7p has pointed out in her lectures, is fun. The rush of controlling the game, whether you kill or not, is hard to beat. But it is a hard style. You have to be very precise or you can wind up gaining nothing and the counter-attack can be worse than your attack.
In Yilun Yang 7p's workshop lecture, he talks about territorial openings, moyo openings and fighting openings (for black, of course.) I noticed that in a lot of his examples, a moyo game or a fighting game will degenerate into a territorial game if black isn't very mindful of his goal. I got a chance to ask him about this in person at one of his workshops. He looked at me very seriously, and said: "please, play a territorial game." I don't know what to think about that. One of the benefits of being an amateur is I can play how I like. But I can see where he is coming from...
) It was a book of early games of Go Seigen. The ancient games in Korschelt had mystified me, but Go Seigen made sense to me, somehow. Influenced by his play, I adopted a fleet-footed style, building up large frameworks. A few years later, when I was living in Hawai'i, a visiting Japanese 2 dan told me that I had a thick style. That surprised me, but I instantly knew that he was right. It had crept up on me without my noticing. 