Greatest comeback win of all time?

[Pippen]

The title says it all already. Since pro's play so close and almost always resign with 10+ points behind I wonder if there are epic examples of when a guy pulled off a comeback.

[konfuzed]

There are many here far more knowledgeable than I am, but this was the first thing that came to mind for me.

http://gogameguru.com/baduk-tv-videos/b ... episode-5/

[logan]

You can look at any number of professional handicap games -- as the entire game is basically an exercise in comebacks move-by-move.

Of particular note is the Shinomiya Yonezo - Honinbo Jowa 10-game match. In game seven, Jowa loses a 21-stone group, but amazingly manages to claw his way back up to force a draw. As Yonezo remarked:

"Is Jowa really a Meijin? On two stones, I wasn't much of an opponent. In the seventh game, on the 110th move I captured 21 stones and thought I had won, but Jowa exerted himself, knocked everything topsy-turvy, and eked out a draw." (from Masterpieces of Handicap Go Vol. 2)

[lovelove]

A famous game from 2nd Ing cup final.

http://www.go4go.net/go/games/sgfview/7681

look at move 214 and 216.

This game is more famous because, Seo Bongsu was known for his typical "Korean style" and Otake Hideo was famous for his "Beautiful go". Zerg vs Protoss..??

I don't think the strength of the old masters are as much as modern pros. They just "look" strong for endless time and help from their pupils.

[SoDesuNe]

I don't think the strength of the old masters are as much as modern pros. They just "look" strong for endless time and help from their pupils.

There was only one of Shuei's pupils who could play him even (without Komi) and even he regulary lost, it was the next Honinbo. If in a hundred years Seo Bongsu is still regarded as an exeptional player from players as skillful as Go Seigen, Takagawa Kaku or Fujisawa Hideyuki, maybe we can talk about it again.

Not to mention players like Dosaku or Huang Longshi, who are even older masters and are still studied and admired.


Here is not a classical comeback but - in my opinion - a beautiful handicap game, which illustrates that although White has near to nothing in the opening but some center-facing shapes, he skillfully sacrifices unimportant stones to make shape for more important goals and in the end gets a very big side. And this was just a teaching game.



I always love those games. You don't need a buttload of testosterone to overcome your opponent. You just wait for him to struggle and then you win : )

[lovelove]

I don't think the strength of the old masters are as much as modern pros. They just "look" strong for endless time and help from their pupils.

There was only one of Shuei's pupils who could play him even (without Komi) and even he regulary lost, it was the next Honinbo. If in a hundred years Seo Bongsu is still regarded as an exeptional player from players as skillful as Go Seigen, Takagawa Kaku or Fujisawa Hideyuki, maybe we can talk about it again.

Not to mention players like Dosaku or Huang Longshi, who are even older masters and are still studied and admired.

I always love those games. You don't need a buttload of testosterone to overcome your opponent. You just wait for him to struggle and then you win : )

Classical masters will have hard time to win even Korean inseis both with endless time and blitz. They will need extra studies of modern go research to compete with high class modern pros.

When Dosaku plays a marvelous move with one month research with his genius pupils. Korean inseis will do the same thing in a higher quality and depth. (If they actually have chance to play this kind of game each other.)

[SoDesuNe]

Your claims are made out of thin air, but I think we both know that.

Of course classical masters - obviously - don't have the knowledge of modern-day research. But without arguing hypothetically wether or not they could learn all the new stuff (Hikaru no Go says Hello!), I still say your 08/15 korean pro let alone Insei will not be remembered in a hundred years (I'd even be surprised if Yi Se-tol will be remembered). Their games will not be studied and their Go will not be admired.

Time has proven the status of the classical masters. They are remembered, there are a lot of books about them, they have a lot of admirers (Shuei has especially strong ones) in modern-day Go.

Maybe I'm wrong but unlike your claims, mine will be proven in time ; )

[lovelove]

Your claims are made out of thin air, but I think we both know that.

Of course classical masters - obviously - don't have the knowledge of modern-day research. But without arguing hypothetically wether or not they could learn all the new stuff (Hikaru no Go says Hello!), I still say your 08/15 korean pro let alone Insei will not be remembered in a hundred years (I'd even be surprised if Yi Se-tol will be remembered). Their games will not be studied and their Go will not be admired.

Time has proven the status of the classical masters. They are remembered, there are a lot of books about them, they have a lot of admirers (Shuei has especially strong ones) in modern-day Go.

Maybe I'm wrong but unlike your claims, mine will be proven in time ; )

Because there aren't many people as today playing go seriously as a job, so very few are the very best. Something few are usually more recognized.

[mhlepore]

I think the premise of the question is flawed, for several reasons.

1) Look at old Lee Changho games, where he is what some may call slow, but super solid, at the beginning of games. He looks like he is behind, but his solid play is setting him up for a good endgame. Do you call his wins come from behind wins? I am not sure it would be accurate to do so.

2) Then there is the question of winning games most knowledgeable people thought you should have lost if the other side played properly. There are many ways this can happen. You can find a brilliant tesuji to turn the tables, but more often than not (at least in my games), the true comeback occurs because the player in the lead makes a mistake. Perhaps these are more appropriately labeled as great collapses, as opposed to great comebacks.

[msgreg]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_fallacy
Just because it is hard to distinguish in some cases, doesn't mean the difference never exists.

I usually don't participate in these types of debates on L19, but I just was reading about this as the "fallacy of the beard". Interesting (to me)!

[mhlepore]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_fallacy
Just because it is hard to distinguish in some cases, doesn't mean the difference never exists.

I usually don't participate in these types of debates on L19, but I just was reading about this as the "fallacy of the beard". Interesting (to me)!

OK - good point. So maybe those who believe that "great comebacks" exist can firm up what they mean by the term so the rest of us can know what we are looking for.

The problem I have with this concept is that Go is a long game. Having a lead at one point in the game doesn't mean you deserve to win.

[lemmata]

I don't think the strength of the old masters are as much as modern pros. They just "look" strong for endless time and help from their pupils.

And I don't think that Archimedes' mathematical aptitude can match that of some modern high school students.

What is the point of statements like this? Classical go masters are admired for their innovations and contributions to go knowledge, rather than for their skills in comparison to current players. Dosaku's impact on go is felt through tewari analysis and the notion of local moves as part of whole-board strategy (w/r/t three-space pincer).

Yes, a Korean yeonguseng has greater go strength today than Dosaku did in his prime. However, two can play this time travel game. What if we took a random yeonguseng at birth back into Dosaku's time and made him a Honinbo disciple? Are we confident that he could dominate the Castle Games as an adult? (Level of difficulty: No creepy genetic superiority arguments allowed)

To put it into different terms, Dosaku was a producer of new go knowledge. Consumers of go knowledge who are born many generations later may exceed Dosaku in strength but they are beneficiaries of Dosaku's past production. Dismissing notable innovators like Dosaku seems unnecessarily---dare I say it?---disrespectful to the people who made today possible and lacking in perspective. Furthermore, the knowledge produced by old masters is still relevant to the training of modern pros. Tewari is still used. Insei still study problems from Igo Hatsuyoron.

Mathematicians today don't dismiss Archimedes as a second-rate dilettante. Instead, they marvel at how he came up with many of the ideas that form the foundations of modern mathematics many centuries before even the frameworks and language for discussing such notions were available. Genius is about context, too.

The Seo Bongsoo Ing Cup game is an awesome one and one of great historical significance. It is a clash of background, ideologies, styles, and spirit. Seo Bongsoo was a self-taught genius who trained by playing go for money on the streets and valued practicality above all else. Otake was a prince in comparison, having trained formally in the world famous Kitani dojo, and valued aesthetics highly. The two could not have been any more different. It is also a demarcation point for the fall Japanese go in some sense. That game will be remembered for a long time. That said, I don't see the point of putting down games of past masters. Such put-downs don't do anything to elevate the Seo-Otake game.