While I can not say anything about Poker, I can sure say that tilting and geting people to Tilt is a thing in Magic (the trading card game) tournaments and something you need to handle.

It also can be applied in some other boardgames, I certanly have gotten the better of people by doing unawaited opening moves in Puerto Rico or Powergrid, but then it was against people I know are way to set in how they think. Of course in some cases it can be seen as on a grey scale of morality, and I guess in thoose cases it is about why and who you are playing. (Also nobody done Nuclear Tesjui, or table flip as it is called with thoose games over that. I seen it happen in a Powergrid game though)

However in Go, I assume you will lose to much on doing something like that. Though I guess mirror-go as a newish player against a newish player is close to that,

Actually, some people give handicaps and then do a weird, unreasonable and actually very bad opening, but because their weaker opponent has no idea what to do, they will founder and lose very badly.

It's not merely a trick play, it can really disrupt the weaker player.

Things like doing the 3-3 invasion in EVERY corner, playing 5-5 or 2-3, or 5-4 as first move at 4-4 stones.

Though, this sort of thing feels more like plain harassment to me. They're legal moves, but the only reason they are used is because the stronger player seeks to mess with the weaker player's head.

Uhm. I’m afraid I may be one of that “some people” whenever I play against HC.

Pardon me? IF I play that way, it doesn’t feel to me like “trick play”, it just seems to be a way to win even though I’m playing against an overwhelming number of B stones.

Okay, that’s probably rare for me …

… but 5-5 and 5-4 I have done before, usually because of my megalomaniac ambitions regarding a huge moyo in the centre and/or a side. (See? The “and” in “and/or” proves the megalomania, no? )

I know how it feels since I’ve also experienced it the other way ’round, but I do NOT take them personally, as in “the other player is evil person and has something against me personally”, but rather like “Oh, now I must fight to win. What a (not) surprise.”

This is merely an assumption, and IMHO it is tunnel vision: when I’m drowning deep down in the well, all I can see is that tiny circle of sky above me, and the high walls all around me.

Re: “only reason they are used is because the stronger player seeks to mess with the weaker player's head” — Couldn’t it just as well be that the other player is … desperate? There’s also this proverb that says “if you are behind, try to complicate the game”. And White is ALWAYS behind in the beginning when White plays against HC stones. The difference shrinks, of course, as the game progresses, but don’t ever believe that it is a cheesecake for a stronger W player to play a B player with appropriate HC settings.

_________________
“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 feel I need to play a deliberately inane opening to win a handicap game, though. If I spot a weak underbelly, I'll rend it apart, but in the first few moves I don't think I've ever been able to tell. Usually I can just wait for a joseki mistake, a reading error or a failure to realize it's time to tenuki. They're the same mistakes I make when taking handicap, or when playing an even game ...

Opening with desperate moves seems rather silly when the handicap stones are there because the weaker opponent could not win a fair fight. If the correct handicap has been set, there should be no need at all for any desperate antics.

There's still no "moral" reason to forbid it though, I'm not trying to make that argument at all. I'm just saying it works partially because it disrupts a player's state of mind.

1. Good for you that you don’t need it.

2. “deliberately inane” again is pure assumption. What may seem so through tunnel vision might completely different from the other side.

… to YOU.

Nevertheless there’s the psychological aspect of being confronted with Nine Black Ninjas.

“should be” … from your perspective, perhaps.

Well, “should be” is quite morally speaking, no? (I only know this because I all too often catch myself spilling moralinic acid. Which you are NOT doing here, BTW )

Mh… there’s this friend of mine who says “Bah, trick play again!” every time he loses a game, or even just when his opponent plays a move to which he doesn’t know the answer.

________________

And then I thought that the whole Go thing actually IS about the players’ state of mind — if it were about intelligence, I’d give it up

_________________
“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?

Even if your opponent plays a strange opening the same principles apply.

Don't play near thickness.
Play sente before defending.
Urgent before big.

By playing "questionable" moves you are giving the weaker opponent a chance to win a fair fight. Because if they are able to read through your overplays, they would gain a great advantage.

You could argue that by playing safe moves and taking all the big points you create an unfair advantage because a weaker opponent cannot see them. And the weaker opponent is unable to handle with invading a moyo.

It's all just different learning opportunities. If a player doesn't review I doubt they would be able to find their direction of play mistakes easier than they would find their fighting mistakes.

Now if the weaker player had a teacher I think the teacher would prefer "questionable" moves because those are like free tsumego problems with a more solid right answer. This move is wrong because you can cut here and black is in a bad position. Whereas the teacher might have a harder time explaining to the student more abstract concepts like this move was slow because you played too close to thickness, this move is the wrong direction because the other side is bigger.

Now, I talk big, but just now I lost one of those handicap games where I didn't open with trick moves.

So it's not like I have the perfect strategy, I just have a preferred one.

Everytime I review handicap games with pros they say the same thing.

"My opponent could've played this way to handle the situation, but then I wouldn't be giving them X amount of stones."

Although personally, I think it's best to play reasonably. But that reasonableness changes with how many stones we're giving right?

While there's nothing wrong with playing trick moves as a teaching mechanism, if you're playing a 9-stone game as white to win at all costs, you're doing it wrong.

Well, there exist online (handicap) tournaments where exactly this can happen, it’s not about games that should actually be teaching games.

_________________
“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 agree that those tournaments exist, but I don't see them as especially meaningful when they include such high handicap games.