So many posts and good ideas being posted here...I don`t have time to do them justice yet, but I am grateful for the interesting input.

For now, I`d like to toot my horn just a little and say that I believe I do have one crucial talent, which may help me for years to come:



It seems many people want to be proved right, or will not admit another`s point of view has merit. But if you can accept being wrong, you can rebuild your way of thinking. Sometimes rebuilding is faster than repairing something faulty. I only gained my "talent" because I had to - due to circumstances, I was forced to learn music and languages later in life than is normal, but thank God I did, because the experience has kept me flexible, even if it has been galling on many occasions.

_________________
Learn the "tea-stealing" tesuji! Cho Chikun demonstrates here:

Could this be a real epiphany?

Spurred on by John`s recommendation, I took a peak at Chess for Zebras, and I have ordered it. The snippet I saw hit me like a bullet between the eyes: it`s skill you need, more than knowledge.

That`s not to say knowledge isn`t useful, far from it, but over and above all it`s not the size of your knowledge that counts so much as what you do with it. To use an analogy, seven-year-old Sosuke speaks better Japanese than me, even though I probably know more words (and he gets confused when I use adult words to him), because he practices many hours a day with master speakers (his parents and teachers and school friends), and learns quickly how to use what he knows.

What are go skills then?

They must include

* reading
* positional judgement
* applying strategic knowledge appropriately
* psychological skills

Indeed, often skills are suprisingly mundane things when you look at them. It`s not complicated to drive a car, for instance, but it seemed hugely difficult before I learned how to do it. Again, in go, the most basic thing (pace Robert), is to occupy an open corner on your first move - it may seem moronically simple, but knowing it and applying it in your first games of go represents the step up in skill from, say, 30 kyu to 29 kyu.

In fact, it seems that I don`t know very much more than I did when I was, say, 3 kyu on KGS, but only that I`m more comfortable with what I do know. Extra things I have learned certainly help, but they`re not what make the main difference. From reading others` discussions and kibitzes, it seems that by around 9 kyu you`ve already at least heard of or have some basic grasp of the main ideas, but when I look at weaker players` games, I see those skills being used haphazardly or being forgotten in the heat of the moment; and so it must seem when somebody significantly stronger than me looks at my games.

Therefore, knowing go principles is one thing, but you must constantly practice applying them, so that you find out when they work and when it doesn`t. Problem books provide practice, as do reasonably slow games. While there are definitely many things you need to learn, the crucial thing is still in remembering to practice them.

Eventually you might achieve a certain level of fluency, in which reasonable ideas come automatically, but it seems to me that that is the point you have to rethink everything, in order to get to a higher level of fluency. In other words, there is a constant process of building the house, and then rebuilding it even better than before.

So what I am arguing here is that there should be a balance in operation: let the unconscious mind synthesise your learning into a workable system (relational memory, consolidation, fluency), but never rest there, always be willing to challenge, expand and rebuild what you think you know.

Therefore, rather than on memorising sequences from dictionaries, I`m going to concentrate on books that "rewire" my brain by causing me to think and think again. Again, instead of trying to memorise pro games, I`d go so far as to recommend people to think about them. Why did Lee Chang Ho play there? Why did Yamashita seem to violate a principle? You might be far off-beam, but the act of thinking about it, that is exercising your skills, won`t hurt you at all.

Now, back to study with excitement and an open mind!

_________________
Learn the "tea-stealing" tesuji! Cho Chikun demonstrates here:

Knowledge is a requirement for skill.



Choice of knowledge, quality of knowledge, amount of knowledge and knowing how to apply knowledge all matter.



It is not basic per se, but it is basic within the theory / under the assumption that corners must come first.



Practice is one way to find out - application of principles about when something works can be another way and can be a short cut if the principles exist.

Is it? Maybe not. I think kids are perfect examples -- at such a young age they acquire skills with little to no [conscious] knowledge about what or how they do what they do.

That they do not express to us their go knowledge does not mean that they would not need go knowledge for their go skill.

First, this is my study journal, and it`s about me. I assume it`s okay to be self-centred in your own journal, isn`t it?

I just don`t understand what Robert is trying to get me to think or say. I think he wants to help me, but I sometimes wonder if he`s trying to troll me. English is not his native language, and maybe my English is difficult for non-native-speakers to understand properly, and perhaps he misinterprets my words. And what is it to him anyway? I`m only a 1k, I like reading go books and I like playing, and I like to share my thoughts about the books I have read. It`s not even as though the books are in competition with his - I buy Japanese books because they`re convenient, and others buy Japanese books for their own reasons. And I think the MyCom books, especially, are really good.

I accept that principles are very important and useful. You need something to help you play go, and if the game is not solved, then principles derived from logic and long experience appear to be just what you you`re looking for.

I accept that knowledge is very important.

I believe that go skill is a mixture of many things. I

I agree with Rowson`s assertion that skill is more important than knowledge. In fact, I think this is obvious.

I cannot believe Robert actually has his entire system consciously present in his mind while he plays. Whose working memory is capable of such a thing? He must have an unconscious mechanism that causes the appropriate principles or shapes or tesuji or whatever to come to mind in response to the situation at hand. He must have internalised much of what he knows, and made it automatic. Otherwise it would be simply impossible to play under any time limits. The only other possibility is that he has a truly incredible mind that can hold all its knowledge in its consciousness without pause.

I think you should consciously try to apply new things you learn, and try to find the right idea for the situation. It's just impossible (for me at least) to do it all at once. I apply one principle, and wonder if I ought to have tried another one; or sometimes I simply forget!

In fact, I believe learning is all about changing your mind, because really that is what learning is, when you think about it - you are making a permanent change in the structure of your brain. Literally, you create new connections and strengthen existing ones. You also unlink bad ones. When you rethink a concept carefully and test it, you become more skilful at applying it; when you acquire and understand new knowledge, you are changing the wiring within your brain. Conscious work may cause the changes, but the changes happen unconsciously. If you want to know more, please read about memory consolidation and relational memory.

But if you lose the capacity to change your mind, you will find it much harder to learn. If you think you`re always right, that`s a danger, and if you think you`ve found inviolable truths, then that`s a danger. If you think X principle must always take precedence over Y principle and that Z principle is always correct under XX circumstances, then you`re going to be setting yourself for severe mental turmoil when you encounter a situation in which such rigid thinking fails.

Again, it seems much wiser to play the position on its own merits and not to try to force your own system onto it. Use your system, and everybody has one (it`s called their "go skill set"), but let go be the master, and the system the servant. I don`t know how better to express this. If you think your personal system is a sure-fire winning strategy, and that you can operate like some sort of computer grinding the position up in the mill of your program, then you`re only setting yourself up for a huge disappointment.

But once more I ask, what are you trying to get me to say, Robert? Do you want me to take up your system like some sort of super-duper-power-checklist? Do you think that would turn me or anybody else into a much better player? Or does it bother you in some way that I think for myself, have my own opinions, and am willing to express them? And why me? I`m still a nobody (but I assure you that I`m working my hardest to change that).

_________________
Learn the "tea-stealing" tesuji! Cho Chikun demonstrates here:

It is nearly impossible to "express" implicite knowledge by transforming it to explicite knowledge, which can be written down, and so can be read by others.

I suppose that you are concentrating on explicite knowledge, so the implicite version cannot be of any use for you.

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

It's ok, and if you insist, only you write here and you learn nothing, only we learn from you:)



No. (Are you surprised that your study aims meet also different opinions?)



Great, but do you expect everybody to take your opinions on books as deserving no discussion?



Ok, let me say 99%. 1% I forget and need to look up from time to time. Concerning "consciously": most of it as references to "storage addresses" somewhere in my brain. It is important to be able to seek every part of the knowledge system when needed - not to have at any time a full picture with all the details of principles etc. in front of my mental eyes.



Every brain works like this, but not everybody has the courage to learn enough explicit knowledge:)



A conscious set of mechanisms.



No. Think of my knowledge in my brain to be ordered like a dynamic dictionary. I see the TOC immediately, but I need to use the TOC to look up whatever is relevant. The TOC has levels of structure, and this allows fast or even very fast access to every needed knowledge. Time limits are a problem only where my knowledge has to refer to and apply complex thinking such as reading in unknown situations.



I am not a savon with a photographic memory. See above for how I do it.



Exactly. That's what I do. The better case of to have the idea already stored, the worse case is having to invent an idea at the moment when needing it. The problem is not creativity but needed time for thinking to invent something.



Sure.



As is it a danger to reject to possibility for proven truths, which happen to be always right.



I do not see the conflict you are trying to construct. One's own system should be open for taking every position's merits as input.



Rather it is an excitement to further develop the system where it is still insufficient.



1) It bothers me when you make statements in the direction "knowledge is no good, now I try the intuition only path".

2) My checklist AFA written down is far from complete. Dozens of further books are needed. Until then, verbally floating around principles can be at least a partial substitute for explicit knowledge.

3) Knowledge like the one I write about can make everybody a much better player if a) he still does not know related knowledge and b) he is not fundamentally opposed to investing effort in this learning style.

4) As somebody who you seem to accept both knowledge and subconscious insight, you should, IMO, in fact seek as much of both as possible.

5) I am not trying to get you to say something specific. You choose your words. At the same time, see the other points.



You express opinions that, in my opinion, are controversial and deserve discussion. You are the 10,001st go player with whom I have an intense discussion, and you ask why you?;) I discuss with everybody who chooses to discuss something interesting in public. You would be a nobody if you kept all your discussion to a private chat.

_________________
"The more we think we know about
The greater the unknown"
Words by neil peart, music by geddy lee and alex lifeson

Do you have a go teacher, Tami? Just curious. I hope you get stronger, if only to give me some hope for improvement.

edited by Magicwand

_________________
"The more we think we know about
The greater the unknown"
Words by neil peart, music by geddy lee and alex lifeson

Actually, I agree with a lot of things you say, Robert, but sometimes I cannot help thinking you find disagreements where there aren`t any.

[




I also enjoy discussions, but sometimes it becomes exhausting talking to you. I appreciate the fact that you are seeking truth about go, but I also would like to have time just to get on with studying and playing the game, not to mention other life goals. Maybe it`s not your intention, but you do come across in a very dogmatic and inflexible way. If you did not argue with every single thing and were sometimes just to let things by in order to concentrate on the main point, it might lend your position greater force and clarity. For instance, whether or not corners really must come first was not the point...that`s why I said "pace, Robert".

Life is just too short for taking these discussions to these extremes.

_________________
Learn the "tea-stealing" tesuji! Cho Chikun demonstrates here:

I want to commend you on writing the most gracious response that I have seen on this forum, while at the same time being honest. Keep up the great posts!

Robert, I have been interested in your books in the past but have not bought one. Unfortunately, you are your own worst enemy when it comes to marketing your books.

The dogmatic and inflexible opinion would rather be the "corners first" idea. I promote the flexible opinion "any first region (3rd line or higher) is possible".

If you dislike discussion about minor things, then why do you hold opinions about them when a discussion is mainly about other major things? You like to hold such opinions and I like to counter them if I disagree to them.

Even traditional theory is not dogmatic about corners first; playing around tengen has long been considered as a valid alternative. Talk about teaching beginners has a tendency to introduce inflexible thinking such as "corners first" without good reason. (The usually stated reason that it is the easiest to make points in the corner misses the related counter-reason that early territory-making, surrounded stones near the corner have the least impact for later development.)

You have to start somewhere, although I do concede that passing is an option. I introduced the "corners first" idea as an example of some applied knowledge, as an example of the skill an utter beginner might acquire first. It occurred to me that you would probably take issue with this, and I acknowledge that there are interesting and important issues concerning that idea, but as whether the first "skill" one might acquire is learning how to occupy a corner, avoid a capture or ladder, hold your stone elegantly or whatever was irrelevant to the main argument I said "pace", which is a gentle way of saying "just this once, please refrain from disputing".

From now on, I am going to have to be very much more sparing in responding to you. If you have any big questions about Japanese go literature, and should choose to ask me, I will be delighted to help you if I can, but beyond that I cannot spare the time and energy to keep on sawing sawdust.

_________________
Learn the "tea-stealing" tesuji! Cho Chikun demonstrates here:

As much as it is your choice which contents you want to discuss, it is my (not your!) choice which contents I want to discuss. It is, of course, possible that you discuss something about my opinions I do not continue to discuss and possible that I discuss something about your opinions you do not continue to discuss.

But it might be the (I know there is no objective reason for this) polite thing to do to limit our discussion to things Tami wants to talk about _in her Study Journal_.

When I read your journal, I am impressed about your open-mindedness, and your fun with what you are doing. So, you own two basic, and very important, requirements for steady progress already.

I'm afraid that you will not reach professional level, but I think that this does not really matter. If you keep on, and work hard, and steadily, you will be able -- may be in a very small, very special field -- to gain insights in the game that are (far) beyond your rank (seen overall). And these insights will give you great personal satisfaction, independent of what your environment thinks (or says) about, especially about the "value" of what you are doing, or have found.

With over 10 years work, three amateurs (average 2 Kyu) passed beyond what is known as professional knowledge about Igo Hatsuyoron's problem 120 (= the most difficult problem ever). But we are still amateur players (average 2 Kyu).

Let me give you a Japan-related allegory, which you hopefully will enjoy.

In April this year, during a trip to Japan (a once-in-a-lifetime event), I was so very happy to visit the classical Japanese landscape garden at Katsura Imperial Villa in Kyoto, where even one lifespan does not seem to be sufficient to explore all of its beauty (by the way: Japanese people seemed to rush through). Igo Hatsuyoron 120 seems to me to resemble such a typical Japanese garden. Nothing can be added, nothing can be changed, and nothing can be taken away, without destroying the harmony of the garden (i.e. the solution).

No one but a genius will be able to construct such a garden and to find the primary path for walking through it. However, after enjoying the garden for several years, and walking on the pre-given path, we simply asked “Has this very special viewing line here ever been recognized before?” And, surprisingly enough, apparently nobody had seen it before.


PS: Please excuse the level of my German English, it's often not sooo understandable for native speakers.

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

I think that phpbb has an option for giving the first poster in all threads 'ownership' of the thread. IOW, he/she would have moderator powers in that thread.

Oh, dear, now I'm going off-topic in Tami's thread. See the corresponding thread appearing soon in the 'suggestions and bugs' forum. If you want to reply to this idea, please do it there.

_________________
Help make L19 more organized. Make an index: https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5207

I`m pretty tolerant, to be honest. If Robert and others want to discuss some topics at depth, even here, I don`t mind in principle. The problem for me is that I find it difficult to ignore a sincere post, because it feels rude to do so if somebody has queries. So, when somebody like Robert queries just about everything, and perhaps overlooks things that I`ve already attempted to explain, or does not seem to get the main point, it becomes a little bit frustrating and exasperating. I really don`t want to turn my back, but at the same time I simply cannot spend hour after hour debating.

Again, I wish Robert would not describe the principles taught by top professionals as "weak" and his own as "mighty". Granted, many of the principles he has published look very useful, but it would not be difficult to quote some of them, and to find instances of "begging the question" and of being vague. I feel, however, no need to attack his work, because I am already satisfied with what the top professionals teach.



I`m not aiming at professional strength. I will become high dan. However, if you intend to provoke me into proving you wrong, you`re pressing the right buttons!

My insight, I believe, is to realise that an attempt to improve at go could be based on cognitive pyschology. I would like to research this more, and write seriously about it, but at the moment I do not have credibility.

If learning depends on brain plasticity, then there is still hope for people of any age, provided they are not suffering from a terrible degenerative condition. After all, there are reports of people who have suffered terrible injuries and gone on to achieve great things. The brain can change and adapt if the will and effort are present. After all, there are people who have had up to 50% of their brains destroyed by bullet wounds who have gone on to live full and successful lives, people who have lost limbs who have worked out new ways to perform tasks (there are several guitarists who play at a professional standard, despite having only one hand).

The trouble is, changing your mind requires effort, and the older you become, the harder it can be to tear down what you have constructed and to build again. But if somebody can commit to that effort, or is committed to that effort (by a horrific injury that compels them to change in order to function and succeed), then who knows what heights are possible?

Strangely, my suspicion is that among the people who will find it hardest to learn will be people who are already ackowledged for their expertise or their intelligence. When I was awarded the title "Doctor" over ten years ago, I became arrogant and convinced that I was naturally more expert than others about just about everything. I must have been a real bore. Circumstances have forced me to change over the years, and while it has not exactly been enjoyable, I am truly grateful.

Without naming names, I note that some of the most stubborn people are those who have gained high achievments, in go or other fields, and they will not be persuaded, no matter what. If only they could accept the possibility of being wrong, they might unlock the doors to much better things. The need to be right, the need to be the cleverest person, is the very thing that turns a person`s mind into cast iron, rigid and easy to break.

Anyway, all I can say is that I`m gaining pleasure from my go studies, and that my methods have worked well for other pursuits. Moreover, my methods have worked very well for my language students - lots of exams passed and obvious improvements in listening and fluency.

So, if I have an insight, it is that there is a body of research into how skills are learned, and it could well be worth taking some hours to understand the main points, and to base your go studies on that, rather than common sense.

I have just noticed lemmata`s question. At the moment, I don`t have a go teacher. There is, however, a top amateur living in Hiroshima (his name is Mr Yomo), and he owns a go salon and gives lessons. The only snags are that the location is a bit awkward, and at the moment I`m very busy. Maybe I shall see what he can teach me during my "hardcore" period, if I do decide to do that.

_________________
Learn the "tea-stealing" tesuji! Cho Chikun demonstrates here: