What are the fundamentals?

[RobertJasiek]

"How do I remember to apply what I already know?": This is insufficient. Although everybody knows much more than he recalls immediately, by far the most players do not have a comprehensive knowledge of the fundamentals. Acquiring it from scratch requires VERY much study. Nowadays (in contrast to 10 years ago), it is possible to acquire it from sources.

Minue's "stability": strength is a more appropriate word for what he describes.

"Lists": Again: I did not only use lists but also structure, methods, examples, comments etc. Formalised annotation of contents is related to density of information. A book conveying 10 major ideas can use one chapter per idea - a book containing 200 major ideas needs some kind of dense presentation. Alternatively, the contents would be distributed over 20 books. This is not about being or not being dry but about having thin or dense contents. Maybe you, John, consider texts with as little contents as possible the ideal. I prefer texts with enough contents to learn a lot about a topic so that one must not, after reading the text, read 19 further texts on the same topic. Of course, I do not go to your ideal.

[RobertJasiek]

If we add the 1500 pages of Elementary Go Series with

This series is not "the fundamentals above absolute beginner level". The series covers only a small part and overlooks most. Just a number of pages does not provide completeness.

[Bill Spight]

"How do I remember to apply what I already know?": This is insufficient.

Yes. You also have to apply what you do not know. Consciously, that is.

[Bill Spight]

Obviously I can strictly only offer my own view, but in journalism we have a saying, "Lists make bad journalism." Whenever a journalist got himself into a bind and up against a deadline to write a feature, if he resorted to an article of the type "Ten Reasons Why ..." or "Ten Best ..." laughter and scorn would ring round the newsroom all day long. The point there is that journalists have learned from very long experience that their readers don't really like lists.

The culture has changed, John. Those phrases are clickbait now.

Edit: I agree that it's bad journalism. But not because readers don't like it.

[RobertJasiek]

Yes. You also have to apply what you do not know. Consciously

Exactly, and therefore you have to learn / discover this knowledge.

[John Fairbairn]

The culture has changed, John. Those phrases are clickbait now.

Edit: I agree that it's bad journalism. But not because readers don't like it.

Well, if you want to talk about dumbing down, I suppose a thread on fundamentals might seem like one possible rubbish bin, but I hope for higher standards, not least among go players.

I know I'm a different generation from the inveterate clickers who can rotate their thumbs 360 degrees around the top knuckle (Darwinian evolution in action?), but actually, by staying away from social media (which is not journalism), I find the world still seems a decently sane place. I say that even with your presidential election looming. Being overseas last week, I was able to watch CNN, and see there are some American journalists still keeping standards up. Most with grey hair or crow's feet, admittedly...

[Bill Spight]

Yes. You also have to apply what you do not know. Consciously

Exactly, and therefore you have to learn / discover this knowledge.

Right. Books are good for conscious learning. To learn unconsciously, the tried and true way is to play against stronger players.

[Bill Spight]

but actually, by staying away from social media (which is not journalism), I find the world still seems a decently sane place.

Projection, John, projection.

[Knotwilg]

I will here summarize the teachings of Minue, in a few posts. If that body of knowledge remains ignored, I will at least have attempted to bring it to the attention:

Since you seem perplexed at the lack of reaction, I will offer a view. Lists.

Obviously I can strictly only offer my own view, but in journalism we have a saying, "Lists make bad journalism."

Minue's list presentation offers a "tutorial". What we get is a reference list. If you went for a tutorial with a professor, would you really expect him to spend the time just giving you a list of things?

Did you read the article or only my summary of it? I think Minue's tutorial is far above the 'ten ways to ...' level you refer to. I at least found it extremely thorough piece of pedagogy (rather than journalism).

The way to promote Minue's work, therefore, would be to rewrite it. Then it may get the attention you (probably rightly) believe it deserves.

That's just my opinion - not something to fight about.

Well, I still want to answer I think you're right: it deserves to be rewritten, if only for the fact that Minue is not a native English speaker. And though I disagree on it being list-centered (or perhaps disagree on the extent to which lists are detrimental) I do agree it is somewhat dry in its presentation.

Thanks for the answer!

[Knotwilg]

In the second part of chapter 1, Minue highlights one fundamental principle.

In Go, all stones want to develop along straight lines if possible. When they are aligned in straight lines, they are stronger and more powerful than stones aligned in diagonal lines.

(...)

This is a very fundamental and important principle in haeng-ma, so I will provide more specific explanations and examples about this principle over and over again in later chapters.

Then comes the second chapter, about "positions of single stones", which is a step up towards haengma. He starts by restating the goal of the game:

Go is not a game of making territory, but a game of survival of stones

For me this is the most important fundamental, which we amateurs should repeat over and over to ourselves in order to get rid of the flawed mental immage of "making territory" as "surrounding empty space".

After that paragraph, Minue comes up with two more principles

To build territory, wider areas are better than small ones

He somewhat jestingly suggests that the centre would hence come before the sides and the corners. But since the game is about survival of stones, it is the other way around:

For survival, corners are better than sides, sides are better than the center

This throws a surprising light on the well known principle "corners, sides, centre": it is not because territory is more easily surrounded, but because life (eyes) are more easily secured. Deep down it's the same thing but the perspective is different.

[John Fairbairn]

Did you read the article or only my summary of it? I think Minue's tutorial is far above the 'ten ways to ...' level you refer to. I at least found it extremely thorough piece of pedagogy (rather than journalism).

I have tried to read it in the past, but anything that includes a structure like 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 .. makes my eyes glaze over. You have to capture your audience before you can educate them.

It may be a "thorough piece of pedagogy" but that means precisely that it is a reference work. It may be great as something to mine for presenting the jewels in a tutorial, but it is not a tutorial as it stands (unless you are likewise a 1.2, 1.3 kind of person, perhaps).

Go is an elective hobby, not a compulsory school subject. People with choice will mostly choose entertainment (good writing) over "pedagogy" (lists).

I'm not sure that pedagogy is the appropriate word here anyway. It's not a subject I'm really familiar with, but I would imagine it covers the practice of teaching, and that must surely include the best ways of getting information from teacher to pupil.

People like Robert may prefer massive data dumps but I for one have never come across many people like that. And in any case, just because he wants that doesn't mean everyone else does. More importantly, I even think that pedagogically data dumps/list/etc can be dangerous. It like sucking up snot. You can't stop in the middle and digest bits of it. That means that what is at the start of the list (the fundamentals) gets passed over quickly and soon gets submerged and forgotten. The traditional method of going over just a few things at a time from various angles with lots of examples is universal for good reason. Reference books stay on the library shelves for good reason - people mostly borrow less dense text books. Both types of books are valuable, but which is best for pupils learning the fundamentals?

[Bill Spight]

In This 'n' that I have been exploring the idea of a base, one of the oldest opening concepts in go, and certainly one of the fundamentals of the opening. See http://www.lifein19x19.com/forum/viewto ... 17#p211817 and following notes. I am responding to Knotwilg with that in mind.

Then comes the second chapter, about "positions of single stones", which is a step up towards haengma. {Minue} starts by restating the goal of the game:

Go is not a game of making territory, but a game of survival of stones

For me this is the most important fundamental, which we amateurs should repeat over and over to ourselves in order to get rid of the flawed mental immage of "making territory" as "surrounding empty space".

A base is mainly about the survival of stones, but is a bit more general, as a player may allow a base to be divided, or even sacrificed.

For survival, corners are better than sides, sides are better than the center

This throws a surprising light on the well known principle "corners, sides, centre": it is not because territory is more easily surrounded, but because life (eyes) are more easily secured. Deep down it's the same thing but the perspective is different.

Takagawa makes the point that corners, sides, center is about making a base.

[RobertJasiek]

People like Robert may prefer massive data dumps [...]

These days I am too busy with teaching and writing to reply to every data dump meta-discussion.

[Kirby]

I would think that journalism has various rhetoric, and preferred style depends on the audience. If I don't have time to read a long article, I like lists - they quickly establish key points. On the other hand, if I'm looking to just enjoy reading a long article, I can see how lists might come off as too dry.

Either way, I don't think Minue is that active in maintaining his tutorial now, so we'll have to make due with what's out there to get value from it. Maybe someone could rewrite it if they'd like. I don't personally see it as that hard to read, though, the content is a little boring to me.

After that paragraph, Minue comes up with two more principles

To build territory, wider areas are better than small ones

He somewhat jestingly suggests that the centre would hence come before the sides and the corners.

Wider areas are better than small ones, but they take more moves to complete. Maybe I'm missing the point, but I'm not completely bought on this principle.

[Pio2001]

To build territory, wider areas are better than small ones

He somewhat jestingly suggests that the centre would hence come before the sides and the corners.

...Don't forget that the centre is smaller that the sides and corners (169 intersections only vs 192).