10 books to reach 5 kyu
-----------------------

The following existing or anticipated books are needed to turn most initial newbies into EGF 5 kyus, provided they a) play regularly and think about their moves, b) learn from their mistakes and c) learn the books' knowledge to apply it in their games:

1) A book for absolute beginners also teaching simple rules (so that no space of the book is wasted for territory scoring difficulties), the most basic classical opening principles, the advice to learn from one's games and mistakes, Kageyama's advice to be aware and study the fundamentals.

2) A reading + tactics book with problems to reach the tactical level of EGF 20 ~ 15 kyu.

3) First Fundamentals for the conceptual knowledge needed to leave 20k ~ 10k and reach 9k. (For the endgame, this suffices to 5 kyu, so that an extra endgame book is not needed.)

4~6) Three reading + tactics books with problems to reach the tactical level of EGF 5 kyu. Topics: tesuji (such as Tesuji (Davies)), life + death, purpose-orientated tsumego / shape / monkey jump.

7) An opening and joseki book, which is a mixture of a joseki selection similar to 38 Basic Joseki, the most important opening theory of Opening Theory Made Easy and the most basic joseki and conceptual theory of my Joseki series, so that the reader readily understands every move of the selected josekis without having to reinvent basic go theory.

8) The parts of 'Fighting Fundamentals' and 'Attack and Defense' needed until EGF 5 kyu, combined in one book.

9) A middle game book with strategic and other major concepts explained specifically for players up to EGF 5 kyu. E.g., territory versus influence, sacrifice, local move choice, making meaningful moves.

10) A book for those having difficulties, such as how to overcome a basic reading weakness or considering the opponent's view at all.

That should do!

Since already about 10 books are needed to make most players EGF 5 kyu, more than 10 books are needed for turning absolute beginners into players stronger than 5 kyu.

Expanding you statement into details to explain your reasoning is not evidence.

Of course, strictly you are right. However, without concept of how to achieve 10 sufficient books for the purpose, this aim will not be realised.

From my observations, the 10 outlined books contain essentially all the contents needed to become 5 kyu, because most players up to 5 kyus do not make significant numbers of mistakes outside the scope of mentioned contents.

So the question remains whether most players find suitable didactical style. The mixture of conceptual and problem books and the possibility of problems in the conceptual books and vice versa cover the major learning approaches, according to discussions during the last 17 years.

I will not claim this as evidence either but interesting story from Lee Sedol's Commented Games is that mostly up to the time he became an insei, the only books he had access to were the classic problem books. He lived on a small rural island and most of his teaching was direct from his father. He got some commented pro game books later as a gift I think. His brothers and sisters also became quite strong.

I'd say certainly you can reach strong dan level with less books, but I will claim to have no evidence except anecdotal stories (such as your own). This topic is brought around by Robert's arguing someone else's claim with 'lack of evidence', but then makes a similar statement with no supporting evidence of his own.

In the spirit of this thread:

Two book to reach high dan level:
1. good rules pamphlet,
2. large collection of GoSeigen (or almost any other pro) games.

I mean - this is ridiculous.
Robert - you are widely known (at least to me, heh) as making wild but (un)authoritative statements with nothing to support them but your own perception, and this is a good example.

Show me the proof, the numbers, the studies... show me somebody who did that and then prove its not an outlier. Give me more background - like the 'student' has only books to read, does not play games, does not analyse after games, does not watch high-dan kibitz, does not look at pro games, what?

You want to be scientific and exact - then be scientific and exact. Otherwise its only an opinion, not better or worse than the next guy's.
Pulling statements like that out of your... hmm, lets say: hat - and then insisting they must be true because you think so - this is exactly the quality which endears you to so many people around the world.

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

As said before, I support my statements by my observations, e.g., of how players up to 5k play and which mistakes they make. You might not believe it, but what I witnessed in hundreds (thousands?) games of such players was that everybody makes almost all the same kinds of mistakes, which prevent them from already becoming stronger.

It is not "evidence" in a strict sense, because I did not film everything I saw, but it is pretty convincing, would you not agree? Go books must teach them to avoid their mistakes; it is this simple!



The difference is: I rely my opinion not on my own experience of having needed only 4 books and a half (until 5k), but on having observed or carefully studied many games of many other players, see above.

***

Everybody speak up who has studied the regularly occurring mistakes of players up to 5k in at least hundreds of games and found a greater variety of mistakes than can be cured by 10 such books as I mentioned.

Honestly, I can't even actually figure out the question being asked. What exactly are we judging about these books?

_________________
Occupy Babel!

"Would they probably suffice to turn most of their readers from absolute beginners to EGF 5 kyu?" (The players must a) play regularly and think about their moves, b) learn from their mistakes and c) learn the books' knowledge to apply it in their games. The players may get other advice, such as talks with other players or advice from club teachers.)

The question brought up is "can you get beyond EGF 5k with less than 10 books"

Anecdotally many have, so it's not a very interesting question.

I think the two of you are talking about different things. Robert appears to be claiming 10 books are sufficient to reach 5Kyu, Oren appears to be discussing whether 10 books are necessary to reach 5kyu.

Hmm, I was responding to this quote


That would seem to indicate that he believes you need more than 10 or so books to get above 5k. Many dan players have done with less.

I think he's talking about summing up all necessary knowledge into book form. Excluding any other ways of learning, such as teaching games, watching/replaying the games of stronger players etc. Learning in a vacuum with only access to players of your own strength or weaker as opponents or similar. Purely a thought exercise rather than something prescriptive.

I would think if a total beginner is paying the right teacher, it would be possible to go beyond 5k with no books if taught for a long enough number of sessions

_________________
http://tchan001.wordpress.com
A blog on Asian go books, go sightings, and interesting tidbits
Go is such a beautiful game.

If they get other advice isn't this discussion kinda moot?

If a 9d would teach someone for a period of time that guy would probably get more information than 10 books are worth without actually reading any.

I tend to think that the relation of books to go-playing is sort of like the relation of books to, like, weight-lifting. Maybe if you're reading some sort of one-volume encyclopedia...

But, as some said here as well, this question is either trivial or badly defined, as must be the answer, by extension.

What are you really trying to say here? The best I can approximate it is this: there exists a subset of books (10 or so) which when carefully chosen can cumulatively address the common shortcomings observed in play of players up to 5k. If my approximation is correct, it seems to imply that there are no books which deal with issues above 5k. If it is not correct, then I am not sure what this is all about...

So:
Can people reach above 5k with 10 books or less?
- if only thing they do is reading books, i would say that my guess is: Absolutely No! They probably can't even reach 10k or 15k.
- if they do other forms of study (play, analyse, whatever) then they can get above 5k with much less than 10 books, possibly with no books at all.

When I started playing, there were less than 10 books altogether, and there were still dan players. What does it prove? Exactly nothing.

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

I don't think it's simple. Here's the problem. When a stronger player reviews a weaker player's game, they see mistakes. Then if they want to explain a mistake, they have to put it into words (except when showing a variation should suffice.)

Examples (S = "Stronger Player", W = "Weaker Player")

S: You have to move from the weak side.
W: Yes. (Thinks: I thought that was the weak side.)

S: If you play this way, your opponent will be over-concentrated.
W: Yes. (Thinks: Well, only if I think there's a chance my opponent would respond that way.)

S: Black can just cut this way. (Shows variation far beyond W's reading.)
W: Of course! How silly of me for not seeing that.

My point is: this kind of conversation can go on even if W has read all the suggested books and S never uses a concept not introduced in those books. It takes a lot of game experience and feedback from stronger players to make the right interpretation of concepts. Even then, the concepts are often useless without reading to support them.

IHMO, most books help to the extent that they save some time for the teacher and the student, because they provide a common vocabulary and set of concepts for analysis. The tactical books can help the student improve reading, and since many mistakes are reading mistakes, I have to concede they should help there. But since real games aren't often exactly the positions shown in books, subtle differences can make a good move in the book be a bad move in a game or vice versa.

No. I think that it requires more than 10 books to make MOST players stronger than 5k. (Of course, there are players needing fewer and a tiny number of players never reading any book. Maybe even "many" players need fewer, however, the "many" is "smaller than 50%. We tend to recall anecdotes of fast improving players, but actually their percentage is small.)



I mean neither "excluding other ways of learning", nor "learning in a vacuum". However, I do require the assumption that players reading the books actually learn well from them.



No.



Sure, but MOST players do NOT get a paid teacher's advice. Most players do, however, have a chance to read 10 reads.



Nobody has said this.



The question is whether MOST players can.



This is not a requirement.



The question is whether MOST players can. Anyway, my point is that at most 10 books suffice for most players.



Your anecdote contributes to the evidence that presumably at most 10 books suffice.

Books should teach better than your typical club teacher.



Or it takes a few good books.



Yes. Reading support is necessary.



There will, of course, be players not overcoming this hurdle. I think, however, that most players can overcome it, especially if the books inform them to avoid slavish application of book knowledge and advise them to apply knowledge flexibly to fit varying positions.

Conceptual books should teach concepts. Examples in these books should not be understood as "in positions like this, always play exactly that shape move".

A strong player is not necessarily a good teacher. However, you don't have to send them off to get a teaching certificate to benefit from their knowledge. You do have to take an active role. For instance:



S: You have to move from the weak side.
W2: I thought that was the weak side.
S: No, it's stronger than the other side because . . . .



S: If you play this way, your opponent will be over-concentrated.
W2: My opponents don't play that way.
S: The way I showed you was the best reply. If White tenukies, then you have a strong attack like this.



S: Black can just cut this way. (Shows variation far beyond W's reading.)
W2: I would never be able to read that out in a game.
S: But you see the point, don't you?
W2: Yes.
S: OK. Do you think that your opponents will be able to read it out?
W2: No.
S: OK. So give this kind of cut a try in your games. You understand the point of doing so, now. That means that you will probably be able to handle the cut, even if you can't read it out. If you wait until you can read everything out, you would never make the first move in the game.

Well, maybe I made the strong player a better teacher than usual. But if you just shrug the strong player's advice off when you don't understand, then you won't get much out of it.

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.