It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 1:31 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #1 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 1:44 am 
Lives in gote

Posts: 617
Liked others: 154
Was liked: 117
Rank: OGS ddk
KGS: Ferran
IGS: Ferran
OGS: Ferran
I hope this is the section to post this. It doesn't quite feel to belong to Beginners. I'll be using the 6th printing of the book, 2007.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$c Now... on dia 10, page 31
$$ ------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . O . . . . |
$$ . O . O X X . . |
$$ . . O X O . c . |
$$ . . . X O . d . |
$$ . . . X a b . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |[/go]


Kageyama (and my handheld Leela) recommends 'a'. Then 'c' answered by 'd'. As far as can see, this gives White the NE corner in exchange for his stones, influence and sente. However, Black at 'b' settles the matter (Leela doesn't want to play anywhere close; like, really doesn't wanna) and doesn't surrender, BUT losses sente. With the game prepared so that I could evaluate the position (stones of same color on opossite hoshi, a high 2-space pincer on NW White), the difference was about 10%, IIRC, in favor of closing at 'a'.

My question is... is that difference due only to sente (and maybe the lack of defects facing South) or am I missing a lot more?

Thank you. Take care.

_________________
一碁一会


This post by Ferran was liked by: sorin
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #2 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 1:53 am 
Judan

Posts: 6725
Location: Cambridge, UK
Liked others: 436
Was liked: 3719
Rank: UK 4 dan
KGS: Uberdude 4d
OGS: Uberdude 7d
Is there supposed to be a black stone at n17? Also if white plays c, black doesn't need to play the "slapping tesuji" at d but can just block at s16 if he doesn't want to let white get the corner benefit as white still dies if he gets to bamboo.

As to why thick turn instead of net, it is "firmer": it takes liberties away from white's stone and gives liberties to black. The net also leaves white a potentially useful peep at q12, or probably more useful the potential to exploit the p13 stones only having 4 liberties (with the turn they have 5), for example white attach at o13.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #3 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 2:49 am 
Oza
User avatar

Posts: 2401
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Liked others: 2338
Was liked: 1332
Rank: Jp 6 dan
KGS: ez4u
I think Kageyama just constructed this position to discuss the difference between playing a and b in terms of how we grasp the two White stones. I find nothing like it in real world positions in GoGoD. Hence we need to be careful about reading too much into the situation as a whole.

_________________
Dave Sigaty
"Short-lived are both the praiser and the praised, and rememberer and the remembered..."
- Marcus Aurelius; Meditations, VIII 21


This post by ez4u was liked by: Bill Spight
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #4 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 3:10 am 
Judan

Posts: 6087
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 786
See https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?p=256582#p256582

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #5 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 3:50 am 
Honinbo

Posts: 10905
Liked others: 3651
Was liked: 3374
Ferran, I don't see any sente difference.

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #6 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 5:43 am 
Oza

Posts: 3647
Liked others: 20
Was liked: 4626
Robert Jasiek said:

Quote:
Kageyama meant to explain what is explained explicitly in Joseki 1 Fundamentals, p.245:

"12.4.2 How to Play Nets

A net must take a firm grip on the captured string. It should leave the least aji. This means that the opponent has the fewest number of forcing moves related to the captured string.


This implied criticism of Kageyama - highlighted by being parked in another thread -is quite unfounded.

What Kageyama said (in Japanese) was "The answer is 'a'. If White tries to escape at 'c', Black stops him at 'c'. By now, I probably don't have to keep explaining the reason."

What James Davies wrote was ""The answer is 'a', If White tries to escape at 'c', Black stops him at 'c'."

So Kageyama was quite explicit. He had no intention of explaining again what he had already spent 11 pages explaining (entertainingly, too , be it noted). He didn't mess up.

I suspect the reason Davies (or Bozulich) omitted the last portion was to make the text fit the page - this was on the last line.


Quote:
Is there supposed to be a black stone at n17?


No.

Quote:
As to why thick turn instead of net, it is "firmer"


If this conjunction of thick and "firmer" is meant to imply these words overlap here, well, maybe they do to some degree, but that's not really what Kageyama had in mind. He used the negative of the verb yurumu = to be loose. He was saying choosing the less loose = firmer option is better.


This post by John Fairbairn was liked by: Bill Spight
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #7 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 6:01 am 
Judan

Posts: 6087
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 786
John Fairbairn wrote:
This implied criticism of Kageyama


Indeed. I needed years to figure out what he should have said explicitly so that then I could know for arbitrary nets how to identify nets as firmer.

Quote:
- highlighted by being parked in another thread -


This is a consequence of the forum rules.

Quote:
is quite unfounded.


Quite contrarily. Kageyama did not only show an example but his intention was to explain in general to choose the firmer net. Therefore, also his example should have explained it so that application could become general instead of being restricted to the example.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #8 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 6:21 am 
Judan

Posts: 6725
Location: Cambridge, UK
Liked others: 436
Was liked: 3719
Rank: UK 4 dan
KGS: Uberdude 4d
OGS: Uberdude 7d
John, I suppose my focus when I used the adjective thick was on Black's shape towards the outside, whereas firmer focuses more on restricting White's liberties and scope for shenanigans inside.

Robert, I can't agree with your attempt to creative a rule for deciding which net is better that you could plug into djhbrown's attempt to create a rules based bot "This means that the opponent has the fewest number of forcing moves related to the captured string.". Simply counting the number of forcing moves is not sufficient, they also need to be weighted by how useful they are: move A which leaves the opponent 3 fairly useless forcing moves is better than move B which leaves them 2 useful ones. Imagine if that only 1 forcing move it leaves happens to be a ladder breaker for some really big ladder on the other side of the board. Of course judging what is useful is difficult and can change as the game progresses.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #9 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 6:48 am 
Judan

Posts: 6087
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 786
Uberdude, there is nothing wrong with further improving my principles by a global context of possibly playing elsewhere, assessing eventual points, assessing efficiency etc. My principles are designed for the assumption of not currently playing elsewhere. As such, my principles fall in the 90%+ category whereas Kageyama's less precise advice I found in the 60%+ category, often not knowing what "firmer" was sopposed to be.

I hope you do not misinterpret numbers of available forcing moves. We do not count the number of alternative forcing moves but we count the number of forcing moves a player can still get and are not bad exchanges (except for preliminary elimination of aji or ko threats if played prematurely).

The net A currently leaves 0 forcing moves that should be played. The net B leaves 1 forcing move that can become good at an appropriate time. 1 too many.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #10 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 7:23 am 
Oza

Posts: 3647
Liked others: 20
Was liked: 4626
Quote:
Therefore, also his example should have explained it so that application could become general instead of being restricted to the example.


But the point is, he did. He was talking to humans, not writing a computer program. Just because you choose to apply a non-fuzzy filter to a fuzzy world doesn't mean the rest of us have to.

Quote:
A net must take a firm grip on the captured string. It should leave the least aji. This means that the opponent has the fewest number of forcing moves related to the captured string.


There's an example of why anti-fuzziness fails. Your definition talks about aji and forcing moves. That means you get to see only part of the image. Writers like Kageyama, and readers who follow them, understand there's a lot more. Apart from different kinds of forcing moves, consideration has to be given (as in any geta case) to related concepts such as fukimi, aya and "te ga aru". And, of course to different concepts such as liberties and thickness, and the possibility of sacrificing. Here, for example, a White move at S17 is more like te ga aru than kikashi. And that could matter big time. I acknowledge that you said your own definition is not watertight, but I think a claim of 90+% for you and 60% for Kageyama is totally the wrong way round. You are measuring a small portion of a bigger picture (and almost certainly invoking the uncertainty principle :)). Kageyama is measuring almost the whole picture, down to its fuzzy edges. "Fuzzy-wuzzy was a bear, Fuzzy-wuzzy wasn't fussy wuzzy" is a good adage for most go players to follow. It's one way our human brains can work best in complicated situations. Stay flexible, head up; not preoccupied, head down, with fussy definitions. And remember what Lao Zi taught: what is not given substance is often more important than what is. Otherwise, where would we be without doors and windows? Stuck forever in lockdown!


This post by John Fairbairn was liked by: Harleqin
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #11 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 7:42 am 
Judan

Posts: 6087
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 786
Since he remained fuzzy, I tried every degree of fuzzy filter to possibly better understand him and it did not work. I saw many players with the same difficulties of not understanding this the fuzzy way but quickly understanding the explicit count of numbers of forcing moves.

Concerning my percentages, they have been my consistent experience from 1991 to 2020. The 90%+ is a modest estimate; for 95%+, I would need ro actually count instances to justify the pecentage.

Again, nothing is wrong with a broader picture of including more concepts to also get the last 10% right. However, just listing concept names does not do it.

For the non-Japanese readers, what are fujimi, aya, te ga aru? Even with fuzziness, I cannot decipher Linear A on such a small sample of phrases;)

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #12 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 8:41 am 
Oza

Posts: 3647
Liked others: 20
Was liked: 4626
Quote:
Since he remained fuzzy, I tried every degree of fuzzy filter to possibly better understand him and it did not work.


I repeat: there is always a bigger picture. I wholly accept that YOU didn't understand it (or, more accurately, didn't like it?). I wholly accept that some other like-minded people didn't understand it. But the bigger picture is that an awful lot of people (the vast majority in MY experience) did understand it. That's one reason the book sold over 100,000 copies, I imagine.

Quote:
For the non-Japanese readers, what are fujimi, aya, te ga aru? Even with fuzziness, I cannot decipher Linear A on such a small sample of phrases;)


There's a typo there: it should be fukumi. But I've talked about these things (and aji) before and they are discussed at length in Go Wisdom, so I'm not going into it again here - I'm taking a leaf out of Kageyama's book, in fact! もはや、理由をくどくどとは申しますまい。

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #13 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 9:14 am 
Lives in gote

Posts: 389
Liked others: 81
Was liked: 128
KGS: lepore
Reminds me of a problem from Sakata's book Tesuji and Anti-suji of Go:

Black to capture the right way:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . O O O O . |
$$ . . O X X X O . |
$$ . . O . . O X . |
$$ . . . . X . X . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |[/go]


Sakata says this is the cleanest, and correct way.
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . O O O O . |
$$ . . O X X X O . |
$$ . . O . . O X . |
$$ . . . . X 1 X . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |[/go]


This could be correct in special circumstances, but it does leave aji.
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . O O O O . |
$$ . . O X X X O . |
$$ . . O . . O X . |
$$ . . . 1 X . X . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |[/go]


A bad move,
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . O O O O . |
$$ . . O X X X O . |
$$ . . O . 1 O X . |
$$ . . . . X . X . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |[/go]

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #14 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 10:11 am 
Judan

Posts: 6725
Location: Cambridge, UK
Liked others: 436
Was liked: 3719
Rank: UK 4 dan
KGS: Uberdude 4d
OGS: Uberdude 7d
A reminder that sometimes Kageyama was wrong about nets:
https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?p=247929#p247929
https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?p=247941#p247941

Edit (with admin hat on): I have moved John's reply and subsequent discussion to a new thread: https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=17510, to avoid cluttering this one with 2 parallel discussions.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #15 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 10:47 am 
Judan

Posts: 6087
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 786
John Fairbairn wrote:
That's one reason the book sold over 100,000 copies


As I have often said, the book is a must-read but for a different reason: its great motivation to take the fundamentals seriously (and this might be called "the big picture"). It just does not go enough into the details of what are the fundamentals, especially not for dans. Kageyama should be praised for the former - not for the latter.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #16 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 12:15 pm 
Oza

Posts: 3647
Liked others: 20
Was liked: 4626
Quote:
It just does not go enough into the details of what are the fundamentals, especially not for dans.


Again, you are criticising Kageyama for something he did not even attempt. He did not write for dans, even specially high kyus. He identified several "barriers" at various levels on the kyu skill, starting as I recall about 9 kyu. He said his book was meant to help his readers through those barriers.

But I suppose you criticised your maths teachers at primary school for not teaching you linear algebra.

And, again as far as I recall, he did not see he was teaching you details. He said he wanted to teach kyu players how to think about go. That seems a lot more useful than trying to learn taxonomical lists.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #17 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 12:29 pm 
Judan

Posts: 6087
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 786
This contributed to my (relative) difficulty as a kyu to become dan and improve as a low dan (from 10k to 3d in 17 months could have been faster with better information) and then to 4d when understanding the details of the fundamentals was ca. 40% of the task. Since the professionals teaching for dans hid details like Kageyama, I had to discover almost all of them on my own. You excuse that as teaching for kyus but I think that all players should learn the same correct information (although kyus may learn much less) instead of forcing kyus to unlearn much partially false information later, as I had to do.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #18 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 12:52 pm 
Honinbo

Posts: 10905
Liked others: 3651
Was liked: 3374
John Fairbairn wrote:
Again, you are criticising Kageyama for something he did not even attempt. He did not write for dans, even specially high kyus. He identified several "barriers" at various levels on the kyu skill, starting as I recall about 9 kyu. He said his book was meant to help his readers through those barriers.


Oh, so that's who propagated that BS about barriers.

To be sure, everybody runs into plateaus and barriers. Usually they are the result of learning bad habits that then have to be unlearned. But there is no barrier at X-kyu or shodan, etc. The belief in such barriers is itself an obstacle.

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #19 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 1:10 pm 
Oza

Posts: 3647
Liked others: 20
Was liked: 4626
You are still generalising from the very specific you to the majority of us. Most of us don't want or need the sort of fussy detail you like, and it hasn't hindered us in getting to dandom.

I am reminded of those earnest people who stand for election to parliament on a clear platform of (say) "testing cosmetics on bunny rabbits is cruel and should be banned", and can't understand why they don't get elected, even though most of us love bunny rabbits, too (especially in a stew). But we just think the fuzzy bigger picture is what we should use our vote for - (say) "da economy, stoopid."

You can continue, but there, for the sake of other readers, I shall leave it.

And for Bill: Well, I know what you're getting at about barriers, but it's journalistic persiflage rather than BS. It's meant just to indicate who the book is for, not to promote the latest psychobabble. It even does have some practical use for teachers like Kageyama, but ultimately it's all just part of what goes to entertain us. I do think there is a danger of forgetting that go for most amateurs is meant to be fun, with as little WORK as possible. And again speaking, I believe, for the silent majority, trying to turn go into a dry, academic subject is just a very, very convoluted way of uttering that dreaded four-letter word.

And since typing these posts is also becoming a little too much like work experience, I shall leave that strand, too.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Kageyama's Fundamentals, dia. Nets-10
Post #20 Posted: Sat May 16, 2020 2:48 pm 
Judan

Posts: 6087
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 786
You flood people with detailed Japanese terms while claiming wanting to avoid details.

You claim to know what the majority is but players are not sorted on an only linear scale.

You advertised great effort to improve - now you excuse laziness of avoiding effort for the sake of having fun.

Academic study is for those enjoying it. Applying the basic results of academic study is for those wishing to improve by less work than possible without those results. Applying the effortful results is for those wishing to reach high dan level.

Academic results and professional players' advice agree on what is the most important for becoming strong: great effort on tactical reading and endgame evaluation, which also uses the former. That is so because tactics is always relevant and can be deep; endgame affects most moves of a game and even small average losses amount to large total losses.

Who said that effort invested in improving cannot be rewarding when profiting by having fun as a stronger player? Climbing mountains creates joy of reaching peaks.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group