Hello again community!

Since I joined this thread I've been studying really hard and playing every so often and now the next step I feel is necessary is to study shapes along with Life & Death (which I figured my best bet is the Elementary Go Series' edition) as well as Attack & Defense.


If anyone has any useful resources that they would be willing to share for these topics of study that would be most appreciated!

_________________

It seems you want to study shapes, life+death and fighting (since you mention Attack&Defense). These are three topics. Is this right or are you interested only in the shape aspects on these topics? For your info, it seems that you are 15 kyu, so surely you need something for this level. What kind of ressources are you looking for? If books, please ask in the books forum. If just shapes, you need a) the shape of the shapes, b) the meanings and functions and reasons of the shapes in the positional context, c) the possible move sequences within the shapes or changed them for further development.

Here are some resources -

Videos:
http://www.youtube.com/user/nicksibicky - Nick Sibicky is a teacher at the Seattle Go Association and offers Go Lectures on a wide range of topics (most about an hour long). He has a two part series specifically about shape.
http://www.youtube.com/user/clossius - Shawn Ray (Clossius) is a KGS 3 dan who has a lot of videos ranging from game reviews to discussions on basic topics
http://www.youtube.com/user/Masterman535 - Joshua Lee (Starstrom 3) is a KGS 4 dan who posts his KGS lectures to YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/user/tokinonagare27 - rjm is a KGS 2 dan who posts lectures reviewing the games of Shusaku

Books:
Elementary Go Series from Kisedo
*Life and Death by James Davies
*Attack and Defense by Ishida Akira and James Davies
*Tesuji by James Davies - good for learning fighting tactics

_________________
"You have to walk before you can run. Black 1 was a walking move.
I blushed inwardly to recall the ignorant thoughts that had gone through
my mind before, when I had not realized the true worth of Black 1."
-Kageyama Toshiro on proper moves

Let's not forget Charles Matthews & Kim Seong-June's "Shape Up!" and Richard Bozulich & Rob van Zeijst's "Making Good Shape."

My rank has gone up by two on KGS since the last time I updated (I apologize) and I also should have mentioned that I've studied opening theory in depth as well as Tesuji. The replies that have been added are exactly what I was looking for though. Also websites or books that have life & Death problems to solve would be helpful as well.

I have also been using this app called "Gobanroid" to study tsumego problems throughout my days but I've plateau'ed at about the 30's problems in the intermediate category so I think I need to look for more studying resources. The videos should do nicely as well.

Thank you for all your help guys!

_________________

Honestly, for now I would focus on tsumego and tesuji problems. Anything else (other than playing and reviewing, of course) will probably be too soon as an explicit focus of study, before you've trained your reading a bit. Oh, and have you seen Lamedugo?

This is not to discourage you from tackling advanced shape theory head on, but just to warn you that the normal ways people approach it assume you know a lot already, and it's easy to misunderstand what you are supposed to be getting out of it. (Very comparable to joseki, actually.)

Also, without sufficient reading ability it's very hard to understand what they're talking about regarding shape quite often and to implement it in your games beyond the most basic stuff.

I've never studied shape as such (doesn't mean I won't in the future..), although I feel working through 'Get strong at Tesuji' has helped in that regard. But maybe a lot of that book would be difficult at 13k KGS?... a lot of that book is difficult at 7-8k KGS i.e. for me- but still very worthwhile.
Actually I think studying L&D (through solving problems) has helped in that regard also. There I also get the added benefit of improving my reading in general.

I think, as with many things in go, if your reading is not strong enough to be able to support the theory you 'know' then it doesn't count for much. When I started playing on Tygem I was severely disappointed to find that my 'strong positions' that were in 'good shape' weren't actually so strong if I couldn't read out responses to invasions/cuts etc. I guess this is true of playing against stronger opponents anywhere. Maybe the best way to learn about shape, L&D, opening, endgame, everything is to play only against much stronger opponents

All that being said I would never really discourage anyone from reading theory if they feel they benefit from it, and also importantly if they enjoy doing it. The caveat being that time must, of course, be spent on playing games and reviewing them.

As for your other question on books/websites for problems, I cannot recommend the Graded Go Problems for Beginners series of books enough. There you'll not just get L&D problems (of various kind, e.g. capturing races, seki, ko) but also opening, middle game and endgame problems as well. Vol. 2 is probably the best place to start as you're not a complete beginner. Once you've worked through Vol. 2, 1001 L&D Problems is also great. I can't encourage beginners (myself included) enough to start solving problems regularly as soon as possible.

What is this even?

The only "special" shape I know is the table shape, which is a very flexible shape for getting eyes (or an eye) in the center:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$
$$ . . . . .
$$ . X X . .
$$ . . . . .
$$ . X . X .
$$ . . . . .[/go]

Maybe also the "horse head"

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$
$$ . . . . .
$$ . . 1 . .
$$ . . . . .
$$ . X . X .
$$ . . . . .[/go]

for running away. And then there's some vital points in certain shapes, for example three stones have the obvious one

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$
$$ . . . . .
$$ . X X X .
$$ . . . . .
$$ . . O . .
$$ . . . . .[/go]

and as the opponent we'd like to "hane at the edges" of the empty triangle

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$
$$ . . O . .
$$ . X X O .
$$ O X a . .
$$ . O . . .
$$ . . . . .[/go]

for shortage of liberties (this basically falsifies the potential eye at "a");

or the typical snap-back/wedge shape

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ . . . . .
$$ O X 1 X .
$$ O X . O .
$$ . O O O .
$$ . . . . .[/go]

Are there any other magical shapes that one aught to know about? As far as I know shapes should be flexible and not heavy and all will be good (apart from that it's just raw reading). Also there was once a lecture from dsaun on KGS on shapes. Maybe someone still has it and could upload it (the sgf at least) for the OP?


Anywho, I'd also recommend just doing tsumego/tesuji problems and maybe watch stronger players' games once in a while to see examples of nice shapes. Imho no further need to study "shapes" in isolation exists.

Maybe.

In many ways my reading has to catch up to my go theory, however, I've found that in games where I make good shape, I tend to win. In games where I try to read out and then make a move that I know is questionable from a theory perspective, but feel it should work from my reading, I often have made a mistake - not right away, but about 20-30 moves down the road beyond what I had read.

Good shape seems to be something that, if you use the shapes in the correct situations, you actually cannot go wrong.

I recently played a game where I used my knowledge of connection shapes to maintain my victory. The bamboo joint in particular featured prominently in my game and I used it because I know it is good shape and I know that solid connection moves are pretty much never correct. I didn't even bother reading what the solid connection would do, because I knew it was wrong in 99.9% of cases and mine didn't feel like they were exceptional.

_________________
"You have to walk before you can run. Black 1 was a walking move.
I blushed inwardly to recall the ignorant thoughts that had gone through
my mind before, when I had not realized the true worth of Black 1."
-Kageyama Toshiro on proper moves

Excellent question! I started by just saying "shape theory", by which I meant "anything about shape that is more complex than recognizing the difference between a cross-cut and a broken shape", but I wanted to head off any misunderstanding ("No, shape is fundamental!"), so I threw in the "advanced". You're right that was an error. It makes it sound like there is Shape 101, 201, and 301.

So what I had in mind was:
* The approach of "Shape Up!" and "Making Good Shape", which take an approach to shape similar to that of a joseki dictionary to joseki.
* Memorizing professional games
* Getting tutored on shape, asking for advice on shapes in games, studying some other area of Go specifically as it relates to shape.

These are all valuable things but (if I'm understanding Akaios correctly) the logical next step is to cultivate his mastery of other areas of the game. Specifically,

*As with joseki and fuseki, studying a shape-move means evaluating whether it is good shape, bad shape, or conditionally good in light of (a) sequences that can follow from it, immediately or later and (b) sequences that can follow from alternative shapes. The closer you are to being able to read out the sequences unprompted, the less you'll be fighting with diagrams and the more you'll be absorbing the lesson.
*Similarly, a lot of shapes are ways to avoid being hit with a tesuji, so shape-concepts that seem really difficult to beginners come naturally after they are comfortable with tesuji.
*One reason "shape" is so confusing is that shapes are good or bad for specific purposes. This makes critiquing beginner's shapes a bit sisyphean. You say, "that's bad shape," and they say, "no, my 10k sensei says this is a good shape". Well, maybe it's good for attacking, but it's bad for defending. Or it's good for endgame, but it's bad for liberties. Or it's good if you add one more stone, but horrible if your goal is to take sente. So it makes sense to be aware of what strategic goals you can have before focusing on shape.

I agree with both the previous posts. Moyoaji's preference for shape over reading makes sense, because the reading has already been done, that is why it's a known good shape.

jts is also 100% right that context is critical in shape. For example in one game I was building a moyo and strengthened a side with the table shape.

"Too slow!" Said my teacher.

"But, but, it's good shape, now he can't cut off those two stones," I replied meekly.

"You have a moyo. There is little you would like better than for your opponent to try to capture those two stones. You just let him do it, and grow the outside even more in sente."

So yeah, my shape move was little better than a pass. Context matters.

_________________
- Brady
Want to see videos of low-dan mistakes and what to learn from them? Brady's Blunders

Actually I believe that's called the dog's head (http://senseis.xmp.net/?SakeBottleShape)

The Horse's head is slightly longer in the face...
(http://senseis.xmp.net/?HorseHead)

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$
$$ . . . . .
$$ . . 1 . .
$$ . . . . .
$$ . . . . .
$$ . X . X .
$$ . . . . .[/go]

Here is a thread I made on a shape. It's a common, small, local shape with almost no branching in variations and with less than 10 moves to read out. And yet people from 30 kyu up to 1 dan have misplayed this shape against me, either by misreading or by thinking it was hard to read; and I've taught this to middling DDK players who have understood it effortlessly within 10 seconds, and read it out every time since. A very large part of 'raw reading' is shape recognition, I'd say.


I seem to remember he didn't like people putting his lectures online.

A few comments on this opening.

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

As has been pointed out, neither of these is necessarily good. In fact, the second shape is often bad.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ . 1 . . .
$$ O X 2 X .
$$ O X . O .
$$ . O O O .
$$ . . . . .[/go]

is the typical shape play here, since makes an empty triangle.




Indeed, shape is efficient play in context.

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.