Apparently a terrible source of information -- they warn you of that. First it completely misses the question on board dimensions (addressing number of grid points), then goes on to give a diameter for go stones about 1/4 - 1/3 their size.

What are the preferred dimensions for a go board and for go stones?

The dimensions of a go board and the size of the go stones can vary depending on the preferences of the players and the size of the playing space. However, in general, a go board should be large enough to allow for a comfortable playing experience, with enough space for the stones to be placed and moved around the board. The standard size for a go board is 19x19 lines , which is the size used in most professional and competitive games.

As for the size of the go stones, they should be small enough to be easily handled by the players and placed on the board, but not so small that they are difficult to see or pick up. The standard size for go stones is around 5mm to 7mm in diameter, although some players may prefer larger or smaller stones depending on their preference. It is important to note that the size of the go stones should be consistent throughout the game, so that the players are able to accurately gauge the size of the board and the position of the stones.

I guess in the AI world lines are their freedom units

Elom "So should there be separate pro associations or one unified pro association?"

ChatGPT "It is not necessary or advisable to have separate pro associations for baduk players from different countries. Instead, there should be a single, unified pro association that is open to all players, regardless of their nationality. This would ensure that all players have equal access to opportunities for professional advancement, and that the best players from around the world can compete against and learn from one another. A unified pro association would also help to promote the growth and popularity of baduk, and would ensure that the game is governed by a consistent set of rules and standards."

LOL I'm sorry I asked

Elom Which ruleset is the best?

ChatGPT There is no definitive answer to this question, as different rulesets for baduk can have their own strengths and weaknesses. Baduk, also known as Go, is a game that has been played for centuries, and over time, a variety of different rulesets have been developed. Some rulesets may be more popular in certain regions or among certain groups of players, while others may be less commonly used. Ultimately, the best ruleset is one that is fair, balanced, and allows for a high level of skill and strategy. It is also important for the ruleset to be well-defined and consistently applied, in order to ensure a fair and enjoyable game for all players.

All awfully Orphic.

How can I build a go set with 361 identical tokens, a paintbrush, black paint, white paint and a large piece of cardboard?



(The text above is almost normal, except for 2-3 details...)

how do you get better at go? the same way you get to carnagy hall, practice, practice, practice.

To get to Carnegie Hall, buy a ticket.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eW6Eagr9XA

In this video, the popular scientific channel Veritasium discusses what it takes to become an expert at something. He distinguishes - allegedly based on scientific research - 4 characteristics.

1. the domain needs to lend itself to expertise, i.e. have a low degree of randomness
2. you need to spend the proverbial 10 000 hours, i.e. a lot of dedicated time
3. you need to push yourself and acquire skills in the domain you didn't previously have, aka "deliberate practice"
4. you need to get frequent, meaningful feedback on your performance, to understand if the invested effort leads to actual improvement and if not, adapt your schedule

#1 looks trivial: no one tries to become an expert at throwing dice; however, some domains present themselves as allowing for expertise, while they are essentially random, e.g the stockmarket
#2 and #3 are well documented
#4 is particularly interesting: some types of practice include immediate feedback, while others don't

Go is a competitive game, so regardless of the practice you have put in, your next match depends on the strength of your opponent. Also, it is not always easy to understand what the main issue is holding you from victory. Is it knowledge? Is it the reading ability? Is it the mental part?

One solution is to choose another success criterium than the outcome of the next matches or your rank. When you do tsumego, measure your success at that. The problem here is that eventually, most players will want to improve their overall match performance and rank, being the ultimate measure of your level of expertise. So you want to practice what matters most. But what is that?

Go in my experience also has a certain degree of randomness. You can play a good game but make one big mistake and all is lost. You can play a good game and make no big mistakes but so did the opponent and you lose by half a point. You can play a good game but felt like you needed to go into that big fight and you lost it by one liberty.

With this degree of uncertainty and the loose coupling between investment and outcome, Go is a very tough domain to become an expert at, or at least to realize why exactly you are not becoming an expert. I have been a 2 dan for 20 years now. Regardless of my investment, I keep playing as one. Is this my final plateau? Or do I have a 3-4d in me, given the right kind of practice? I find that very hard to tell.

One thing I do know is that I felt the biggest leap forward, intrinsically and also proven by a sudden rise from 2k to 2d, when I played a number of serious games in a row, without time limits, in a rivalry of sorts where we kept changing the handicap depending on the outcome, which I then replayed from memory and reviewed for myself. I also read a book at that time: Kato's killer of Go, which made a big impression on me. Reflecting on that, perhaps today's habits of playing 5+5x30 online games (i/o no time limits), reviewing thme with KataGo (i/o for myself), using the ready made sgf (i/o reconstructing the game by heart) finding patterns of mistakes and then taking these as a theme in the next batch of games (i/o more subconscious learnings), and watching youtube lectures by Michael Redmond (i/o reading a book) is more convenient than effective.

I like your text much better, than the ChatGPT text