I was looking at some very-beginner materials for teaching go, and came across this (pandanet intro).

It is not very clear to me that this distinction can really exist, but I also have a sneaking suspicion that I'm an intuitive player and I have trouble believing logical players exist (or maybe the opposite).

I think this because people will talk about formulas for capturing races, I remember Bill Spight once mentioning something about ladders and symmetry (IIRC), and technical methods for analysing joseki results. I'm not consciously doing those things though I am of course reading, counting (as I can) and do evaluate results (in what I feel are obvious ways).


What do you see yourself as, and why?


Also, I invent all my proverbs post hoc

_________________
Revisiting Go - Study Journal
My Programming Blog - About the evolution of my go bot.

Considering some of the threads, I think RJ is definitely a logical player. I'm probably some combination of the two - I'm too lazy to be a logical player but I do try to be at times

Intuitive.

I'll never go past the level where you absolutely must count every option and take a decision based on the count alone.

And when I kill is not just to win, it's to avoid

My enjoyment of a go game starts at 100 and loses about 0.5 enjoyment points per move.

-> -> ->

I wouldn't say that I'm illogical (at least as regards playing go), but intuition comes before calculation.... at least for me.

_________________
Tactics yes, Tact no...

I'd say I'm an intuitive player.

The more I study Go and hence try to reason at each move the more maintime I'm idling and the more I fail because I either try to apply the wrong principle, apply the right principle badly or get overly concerned with whatever last thing I studied. If I stop studying and just play then suddenly everything over five to ten minutes maintime feels just sooo slow, I can't take it. I mainly play 1/5*20 these days and rated and most of all I play more than ever.

Of course I'd never have come this far without conscious effort to learn these basic things I now apply subconsciously, but still it tells me a lot about how I operate. If I try the logical approach, looking for several moves and pondering which of them is the best I - at least online - will waste a lot of time and I don't even get better results. (I blitz now with my second main account, which was 2k when I played 15/5*30 and is still 2k since starting to play 1/5*20 and now I blunder a lot due to blitzing ^^)

I experience the same with StarCraft 2 (yeah, I know, I'm way late to the party). Perfecting a build order takes so much conscious effort, it's almost painful since a lot of important stuff will just slip through because you concentrate so hard on building double gas at 35 supply. But as it sinks in, your view just broadens tremendously and it seems as everything else just comes natural.

_________________
My "guide" to become stronger in Go

Intuitive, to the point that I've a very bad habit of neglecting to read if I feel sure about a position.

For all I know, I could have that bad habit. The chance to apply it doesn't present itself very often so...

Yeah for a given 11k value of sure.

While I characterise myself as intuitive, I can't really agree that intuitive can mean not counting or reading.

Am I being particularly intuitive or logical in this example? (First hide is a fuseki (I lost), second is each of my really conscious thoughts/decisions in case you want to think about what you would think in my shoes before looking).

_________________
Revisiting Go - Study Journal
My Programming Blog - About the evolution of my go bot.

I'm not saying that intuitive is not counting or reading. I'm saying that sometimes strong intuition about a position can cause one to neglect to read if one is not careful.

Edit: Maybe disciplined is a better word than careful there.

i go with intuition here. i can watch a review by a player three stones weaker than me and he always sounds so much cleverer than me, with so good reasoning behind every move, while i would just occasionaly say: "i don't know, doesn't this look better?"

my moves have their purpose, of course, but i don't really feel being logical or analytical when deciding which to play

_________________
Spilling gasoline feels good.

I might be wrong, but probably not.

I think of myself as more intuitive. I also neglect reading a position if I feel very positive about it.

_________________
a1h1 [1d]: You just need to curse the gods and defend.
Good Go = Shape.
Associação Portuguesa de Go

I'm going to have to vote for Richard Nixon because my logic and intuition are both broken.

I wish I could ask the "intuitive" players how they learn, but, lacking logic, maybe they can't? I ask because I have also countless teaching by example books (with useless text if any) for intuitive players and want to learn more from them than I can so far. How? (Note: IMO, intuition does not exist. So advice of the kind "apply your intuition" won't work.)

What do you take "intuition" to mean? That is, what is the entity whose existence you deny?

It is a pretence for laziness not to perceive or explain things carefully.

E.g., a "one's best guess" wide moyo defense move is a matter of almost equal distances and possibly of a convex sector line etc. and, at a higher level of reasoning, of degrees of safety of connection, life, territory etc., i.e., of aspects that can be measured, determined or iteratively approximated. E.g., instead of making an extension feeling intuitively right, the possible extensions can be qualified according to their connectivity etc. E.g., a guess "I think Black leads" can be verified by counting in a careful positional judgement.

To me, “intuition” is something unconscious subconscious but based on (=trained with) experience and learning, therefore I don’t see the need to make it a contradiction to logic.



<edit>
Corrected “unconscious” to “subconscious”. I’m another German
</edit>

_________________
“The only difference between me and a madman is that I’m not mad.” — Salvador Dali ★ Play a slooooow correspondence game with me on OGS?

I don't think this distinction is valid or useful, so I voted Nixon. An emphasis on "logic" or "intuition" is just an indication of weakness in the opposing area. I expect that most people will vote for intuition - to justify being too lazy to read properly or think about the situation. And the ones who voted for logic probably feel that their sense of shape isn't good enough. I don't think any pro would put himself in either of these camps.

I'm intuitive when I play without thinking, and I'm logical when I start thinking and come up with something dumb.

So is it guesses that you don't exist, or the feeling of being right as divorced from an explanation of it?

intuition is that when you have to guess, you guess right.

if both methods arrive to correct results, neither is wrong. only one use precise reasoning in the conscious mind, the other leave this hard work to the subconscious and just collect the answers. but i am afraid i can't recommend you anything to get use of the intuition-oriented materials. i just read them, try to understand, learn something. repeat if needed. even though i think it could work for you, it would probably make you utterly dissatisfied

_________________
Spilling gasoline feels good.

I might be wrong, but probably not.