I'm sorry if this is in the wrong category, as a lot of this post has to do with confusion about databases, but it's specifically in regard to a pro game, so I figured this would be a good place to start. Also this is my first time using diagrams, so sorry if any of them turn out badly!



Waltheri's Pattern Search, GoGoD, and GoBase all list different information about this game. I've attached an SGF from Waltheri. W lists komi as 5.5, but the other two databases list it as 0 komi. Neither of these quite line up with my understanding of the history of komi; I'd expect somewhere from 3.5-4.5. Furthermore, GoGoD lists this as an "insei game", while the other two list it as "Japan Promotion Tournament", which I'd assume refers to Oteai. However, as Chariot pointed out to me in Discord, Takemiya wasn't even a professional until 1965, according to Wikipedia and Sensei's Library, yet all three databases list Takemiya as 1p for this game; Kato, too, is listed as 5p for each of these, but was not a professional until 1964, according to Wikipedia. I just have no idea what to think at this point; does anybody have any idea about the circumstances of this event?

However, the most surprising and confusing thing about all of this (for me, anyway) is that GoGoD's record of the game ends at move 86.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c The position at the end of GoGoD's record.
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X . . X . . . . . . . X X . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . O . O X X X . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O O O . . . O . O X O X X X X . |
$$ | . O O X X X O . . . . O . O O X O . . |
$$ | . . . O X O X . . . . X O O . O O . . |
$$ | . . . X X O . . X . X . X X O O . . . |
$$ | . . W . O . . . . . . . X . X . . . . |
$$ | . . X . O . . . . . O . O . X O O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . X X . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . |
$$ | . . . , O O O . . , . . . X O , O . . |
$$ | . X . X X X O . . . X . . . X X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

White just played this marked stone, which captures the Black cutting stones. KataGo actually has quite a bit of trouble reading this sequence until several tens of thousands of playouts. Given that this is where the GoGoD game record ended, I assumed that Kato had misread and resigned at this point. I've been memorizing pro games using SmartGo and thought I knew this game inside and out, so you can imagine my surprise after uploading the Waltheri SGF to GoKibitz and seeing a totally unfamiliar ending position!

At 500,000 playouts and assuming 5.5 komi, KataGo evaluates this position as +20.9 points for White.

The rest of the game, as listed on GoBase and Waltheri, I did not have KataGo analyze to 500,000 playouts, since I didn't know those moves existed until today. I set the number of playouts for the rest of the moves to be anywhere from 10,000-100,000, depending on how large the spike in KataGo's initial evaluation of the score was. It seems that after move 86, the quality of the moves is generally not quite so high as the earlier moves (if KataGo's score chart is to be considered a metric for move quality), and the graph fluctuates considerably. This raises the question for me - are the moves after 86 perhaps a study/possible continuation rather than as part of the actual game?

So much confusion on my end.

Anyways, on to the actual game itself - I had a lot of fun going through and memorizing the moves that I did, though some things surprised me. Pre-AI games are pretty new to me, since I really only came to Go after the AI revolution, and primarily watch modern Korean games.

I thought the early sequence on the lower part of the board was pretty cool:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W Moves 6 to 15
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . |
$$ | . . . , 9 . . . . , . . . 4 3 , O . . |
$$ | . . . X 0 . . . . . 8 . . . 2 6 7 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

But I was surprised that White didn't add a move to the shape in the lower-right, since this seems to invite a Black pincer later that would make things uncomfortable. I was also surprised that Black played the splitting move rather than push again, since after White's turn, Black's marked move struck me as being a little painful to take in gote:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W Moves 16 to 20
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . X , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . |
$$ | . . . , O 1 3 . . , . . . X O , O . . |
$$ | . B . X X 2 5 . . . X . . . X X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

But I suppose Black is fully alive and has nothing to worry about, and can focus on attacking. The thing is, it really felt to me like Takemiya had sente for most of the game. Bugcat actually left a really interesting history of this move on GoKibitz - https://gokibitz.com/kifu/ryRc5V8Lt?path=21

The first move that really didn't make sense to me was Black's turn at 47:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Moves 47 to 47
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 X . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . O . . X . . O X . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . O . O X , X X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O B C O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X X O O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . X O O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . X X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . |
$$ | . . . , O O O . . , . . . X O , O . . |
$$ | . X . X X X O . . . X . . . X X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

It seems to me like the whole point of Black's marked stone was to keep the White groups separated, and B could very easily have played that sente circle move before the turn. But because Black turns first, White is able to capture Black's marked stone and become fully connected. From my perspective, it looks like Black ends up getting attacked in the center because of this.

Onto the events leading up to move 86:
Black finds life in the corner, then starts a cutting sequence:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W Moves 66 to 75
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . 6 . . 4 . . . . . . . X X . . . . . |
$$ | . . 2 . . . O . O X X X . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O . 5 . . . O . O X O X X X X . |
$$ | . 3 1 8 0 . . . . . . O . O O X O . . |
$$ | . . . 9 . . . . . . . X O O . O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . X . X . X X O O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X . X . . . . |
$$ | . . X . 7 . . . . . O . O . X O O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . X X . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . |
$$ | . . . , O O O . . , . . . X O , O . . |
$$ | . X . X X X O . . . X . . . X X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

This is about where KataGo struggles before being allowed a copious amount of playouts.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W Moves 76 to 85
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X . . X . . . . . . . X X . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . O . O X X X . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O 1 O . . . O . O X O X X X X . |
$$ | . O O X X 2 3 . . . . O . O O X O . . |
$$ | . . . O 8 7 6 . . . . X O O . O O . . |
$$ | . . . 0 4 5 . . X . X . X X O O . . . |
$$ | . . . . 9 . . . . . . . X . X . . . . |
$$ | . . X . O . . . . . O . O . X O O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . X X . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . |
$$ | . . . , O O O . . , . . . X O , O . . |
$$ | . X . X X X O . . . X . . . X X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

From here, it took me a lot of reading to figure out why these stones are captured, but after Takemiya's attachment/1-point jump, the capture sequence is basically forced if Black tries to escape:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W Moves 86 to 95 (8 at 1)
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X . . X . . . . . . . X X . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . O . O X X X . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O O O . . . O . O X O X X X X . |
$$ | . O O X X X O . . . . O . O O X O . . |
$$ | . . 7 O X O X . . . . X O O . O O . . |
$$ | 0 5 4 X X O . . X . X . X X O O . . . |
$$ | . 6 1 2 O . . . . . . . X . X . . . . |
$$ | . . X 3 O . . . . . O . O . X O O . . |
$$ | . . 9 , . . . . . , . . . . X X . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . |
$$ | . . . , O O O . . , . . . X O , O . . |
$$ | . X . X X X O . . . X . . . X X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W Moves 96 to 98
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X . . X . . . . . . . X X . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . O . O X X X . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O O O . . . O . O X O X X X X . |
$$ | . O O X X X O . . . . O . O O X O . . |
$$ | . 1 O O X O X . . . . X O O . O O . . |
$$ | X O X X X O . . X . X . X X O O . . . |
$$ | . X X X O . . . . . . . X . X . . . . |
$$ | 3 . X O O . . . . . O . O . X O O . . |
$$ | . 2 O , . . . . . , . . . . X X . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . |
$$ | . . . , O O O . . , . . . X O , O . . |
$$ | . X . X X X O . . . X . . . X X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

I'm just getting started looking at the rest of the game, but I thought I'd drop in here and see if anybody has any ideas regarding the discrepancies between records.

Full disclosure - I'm planning to make a YouTube video of an analysis of this game, so if you'd rather not have your thoughts heard in that context, please specify as much in your responses.

Thanks so much for your time!

I'm no expert, so don't quote me. But I can comment a bit. By the way, you can see their profiles on the Nihon Kiin website for a few more details:
https://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/htm/ki000003.html
https://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/htm/ki000002.htm

As you said, this must not an Oteai game because that is for professionals. Though an "insei game" could be construed as a "promotion tournament" because the inseis are vying to be promoted to professional level. The GoGoD file (1963-00-00ac) just says that the moves are not known and that White won by resignation. In fact there must be moves after 86 because GoGoD specifically states "moves beyond 86 not known". I assume that GoBase (https://gobase.org/replay/?gam=/games/b ... ki6462.sgf) has a different source and is correct.

If you look at the GoGoD game spreadsheet, it seems like most Insei games are played without komi. Though I saw a game with 4.5, another with 5, and one with reverse komi of 7. So my guess is that GoGoD's record of no komi is correct. Also, the opening looks like a no-komi game to me.

Just my own comment as someone who mostly reviews games from the 19th century, this sequence looks pretty normal (for the time) to me. I've seen similar opening play in Shuho's book Hoen Shinpo. Though maybe the 3-4 attachment joseki is usually played in response to another play by the opponent in the area. Here the 3-4 attachment is played as a tsukenobi similar to the 4-4 joseki, though warikomi instead of hane is another (more typical?) response to the tsuke.

Also, I think it was typical for white to wait to play the extension (move 24 here) back then (maybe even now if this joseki were played). White must play actively without komi. Also, lots of pros praise the keima press (back then as well as now). So it makes sense to me that White left the lower right to play the press.

I can't really comment on the middle game but good luck with your project.
----------
By the way, seeing Takamiya here reminds me of when I reviewed Go Seigen's early games. When these young players were playing, their games looked very much looked like Edo Go. But then you look their games from their peak and it is such a different game. Really amazing to see the progression.

I can't comment on the other sources but I can obviously comment on the GoGoD version as I have the definitive copy.

The file created in 2007 does NOT give any komi. It does NOT give any grade for Takemiya. It does NOT give any grade for Kato. It DOES give the creator of the file as GoGoD95. Most important of all, GoGoD NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER AND NEVER EVER will use the abomination of p for grades.

Owners of GoGoD should also have the names dictionary that comes with it. Details of the careers of Kato and Takemiya are given there. They show both were still inseis.

Therefore: "I just have no idea what to think at this point; does anybody have any idea about the circumstances of this event?"

Actually I do have some ideas about what to think.

Thank you for clearing that up, and I'm so sorry for putting out misinformation. I added a segment to my original post specifying that GoGoD does not give these ranks for these players. I'm not sure how I got it in my head that this was the case, since I just looked back at SmartGo on both my Windows computer and my iPhone, and of course neither of them show the mistaken information. I guess between looking at the other two databases and being generally confused, my wires somehow got crossed. I'll be more careful next time.



I'll admit I'm rather new to the Go world, so apparently I've never even heard that "p" for grades is controversial. It seemed so standard to me, since I see it everywhere on Fox Weiqi server and on the other go servers. Could I trouble you tell me more about that, or to point me in the direction of some literature that might enlighten me?



I'm struggling to find the names dictionary with either version of SmartGo that I have; is that something unique to buying the database directly from https://gogodonline.co.uk/? The main reason I bought SmartGo twice is because of its "guess the move" function and the fact that it's pre-loaded with so many games, but I didn't realize I might be missing out on other GoGoD features.

Thanks, that's an awesome resource that I did not know about!



Wow, you've given me some great ideas for where to look next. I'm pretty new to this, and I'm more or less hoping to learn by doing. A lot of my insecurities with that early position could probably be attributed to my being a meager OGS 4k (I have no official AGA rank yet, since tournaments haven't really been around since quarantine).



Ooh, did you share any of those analyses here? I'm still figuring out how to search the forums, as it's not a message board system with which I'm familiar. But yes, this is my feeling looking at early Takemiya, as well. The only of his games that I've been exposed to, when stronger players would help me review them, are ones where he had that distinctive style of his that seems completely absent in this early game. To be fair, he was 12 in 1963

Thanks so much for your response!

Oh no. I didn't analyze them haha. I just noticed when browsing GoGoD. I can probably find some... I'm not sure if SmartGo uses the same scheme as GoGoD but if you browse these games you might have fun. There was definitely a huge change in their play over time.


File White Player White's Rank White's Team Black Player Black's Rank Black's Team Event Round Date Place Handicap Old-style Handicap Komi Rules Time each Result No. of moves Game Comment Source

Here, the opening moves resemble 1860s Japanese Go.
1927-11-23a Inoue Kohei 5d - Go Seigen - - Visit to Chinese go circles by Inoue from Japan Game 3 of 5 with Go 1927-11-23 Qingyunzhuang, Beijing - - 0 - - Left unfinished 137 The first two games with Inoue, on 2 stones, were left unfinished and not published in the Collected Games. One has since been found. -

This game between Kitani and Go also has many opening moves resembling 1860s Go.
1931-02-01a Kitani Minoru 5d - Go Seigen 3d - Rising Stars Win & Continue Tournament sponsored by Tokyo Nichinichi Shinbun and Osaka Mainichi Shinbun Game 86 (Kitani on 2 wins) 1931-02-01~16 (Published) - - -B- 0 - 9h Jigo 284 - -

But then look at this game just a few years later. The opening resembles modern Go. To be fair, there are plenty of games that look more modern years before.
1933-02-21 Kitani Minoru 5d - Go Seigen 5d - Oteai, Autumn session, round-robin playoff series Game 3 1933-02-21~03-05 (Published) Nihon Ki-in - - 4 - - B+R 177 This series was a tournament for the top two players in the high-dan part of the main event and the top two players in the low-dan part, and was sponsored by Tokyo Asahi Shinbun and Osaka Asahi Shinbun. -

----------

In GoGoD the Names file is named something like "NamesOct2019XML.xml" or "NamesXML.xml." Look around in the Smart Go folder for something like this. I just open the XML directly as text.

Apparently SmartGo should have it, according to the GoGoD database "readme" file:


You can learn about Aoyama Miki, Japanese singer and co-artist with Takemiya Masaki on a go-song single.

鷺と烏のラブゲーム – 武宮正樹・青山みき

(女)誘う言葉も　名人ね
(女)読みが深いわ　あなたの石は
(男)甘い香りか　こわい罠
(男)それとも男の　見栄なのか
(女)入りたい　入りたいけど　入れない
(男)来てごらん　その目つぶって　さぁ　おいで
(女)そうね　でもね
(男)やってみなくちゃ　分からない
(男女)恋の碁盤で　誘い　誘われ
(男女)鷺と烏の　ラブゲーム
(女)ついて行きたい　でもこわい
(女)恋の予感ね　心がさわぐ
(男)攻めはしないさ　生きていい
(男)とってもかわいい　石だから
(女)入りたい　入りたいけど　入れない
(男)このままじゃ　君の負けだよ　さぁ　おいで
(女)そうね　でもね
(男)きっとなれるさ　しあわせに
(男女)恋の碁盤で　誘い　誘われ
(男女)鷺と烏の　ラブゲーム
(女)入りたい　入りたいけど　入れない
(男)来てごらん　その目つぶって　さぁ　おいで
(女)そうね　でもね
(男)やってみなくちゃ　分からない
(男女)恋の碁盤で　誘い　誘われ
(男女)鷺と烏の　ラブゲーム

Heron and Crow Love Game-Masaki Takemiya / Miki Aoyama

(Woman) The words you invite are also masters
(Woman) I have a deep reading. Your stone is
(Man) Sweet scent or scary trap
(Man) Or is it a man's appearance?
(Woman) I want to enter, but I can't
(Man) Come on, close your eyes, come on
(Woman) Yeah, but
(Man) I have to try it I don't know
(Men and women) Invited by the Go board of love
(Men and women) Heron and crow love game
(Woman) I want to follow you, but I'm scared
(Woman) Premonition of love, my heart is refreshing
(Man) I won't attack, you can live
(Man) Because it's a very cute stone
(Woman) I want to enter, but I can't
(Man) If you keep going like this, you'll lose. Come on.
(Woman) Yeah, but
(Man) I'm sure I can be happy
(Men and women) Invited by the Go board of love
(Men and women) Heron and crow love game
(Woman) I want to enter, but I can't
(Man) Come on, close your eyes, come on
(Woman) Yeah, but
(Man) I have to try it I don't know
(Men and women) Invited by the Go board of love
(Men and women) Heron and crow love game

I'm impressed you noticed this so cleanly. This old/new dichotomy is also precisely the major point of my upcoming Go Seigen book about his earliest games. But there is a more than a difference in style, as your last comment insightfully implies. The early Go Seigen made LOTS of mistakes. It is seeing what kind of mistakes he made and how he went about correcting them, in other words his progression, that makes his early games so fascinating.

The book has passed the halfway stage in proofreading I've been told, but while I've been waiting I got a post from Kindle Publishing to say they can now do hardback versions of my books. I'd like hardbacks for my own shelves, of course, but there does seem to be a lot of hassle associated with it, and for the likely sales it's probably not worth even any tiny effort. But an indication of the general feeling about this out there would not go amiss...

Well, I'm just noticing things. The books sounds interesting. Players earlier in history (that I've seen) did not have such a drastic change in their style.

Would the book have to be reformatted for a hardcover? I like the hardcovers because they are easier to lay flat. If everyone who said that they were looking for a copy of Kamakura (me included) buckled down and bought a hard cover, you might come out OK. But I guess we know what actually happens... Even Games of Shuei is pricey for a book. Maybe that's a good idea for a Christmas gift.

By the way, I just discovered 鷺と烏のラブゲーム – 武宮正樹・青山みき. Which I mentioned above. GoGoD is a rabbithole.

John F - I happily bought Shuei - as a paperback in the UK it cost £66.31 - which is getting expensive. Any idea how much a hardback might be?

The 420 pages (ignoring cover) on my hardback Invincible are 23mm thick, while the 538 pages on Shuei are 35mm thick.

What paper options do you have? - maybe a thinner paper and hardback?

Take Care

Not the answer you were looking for, but you can make a hardcover for about $5-10 in materials (chipboards and glue) if you don't mind picking up book binding as a hobby. It's a bit tedious but often relaxing once you get started.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADKyXu8ZnwQ