Why is it advised for players 25k-10k to never read books?

[Jeansburger]

I have been going to a go club and have been on another online forum and was told by both places to stop reading books (by a 2d and a 3d player) to supplement playing. I was told they do nothing as "you can't understand it, so don't waste your time". I was reading In the Beginning and Way of the Moving Horse but stopped after because while I got some of the concepts and I could see some improvement; however it could just be I'm 22k and getting better just from the games alone. I want to find a way to fit in more go in the day, I have been playing tournaments online to force myself to play/review more games. Sometimes I don't have time to play a full game and would like to just like to read a chapter or two of a book. I have been trying to do problems but I have never gotten them correct on my first try and I don't think brute forcing them does me any good either. I keep getting contradicting guidance and want to know a well trodden path that will allow me to keep moving forward. I don't want to stagnate at ~20k but people I have talked to have said reading won't do me any good.

I'm torn and I'm not sure where to go and what to do.

[dfan]

Do what you like. I got to 10k pretty much just by reading books (there wasn't anyone to play with back then), and I believe Robert Jasiek credits mostly reading books for getting to dan level. That said, at the 20k level, an hour spent playing is probably more useful than an hour spent reading. I do sometimes see beginners talking about reading lots of books that indeed are well over their head. If the positions in a book don't look anything like the positions in your games, it's probably a little early to read it.

[sparky314]

Tsumego and tesuji books are always worth it, regardless of level. Especially if you don't have time to play.

That said, if you have the time to play, playing is better.

And if you enjoy reading, then some books certainly can't hurt.

There's only a few theory books I'd recommend though:

10-20k: Opening Theory Made Easy
5-15k: In the Beginning (maybe...kind of optional)
5-15k: Attack and Defense
1-5k: Reducing Territorial Frameworks


Everything else would be just tsumego/tesuji (Graded Go Problems, 1001 Life and Death, Tesuji, Get Strong at Tesuji). Of course, do whatever keeps you interested. Even if it won't make you stronger, reading books are enjoyable for their own sake.

I will say that playing games, reviews by others, and tsumego/tesuji helped me the most. Everything else was just new ideas to try during playing games.

[Bill Spight]

Because people like to give advice.

[Kirby]

I'm trying to think of a non-go related example. Maybe math works.

Doing a lot of math problems might be an efficient way to get good at math, because you practice a lot and learn how things work. There are also math books about various mathematical theories, etc., which may be somewhat advanced. But if those books make sense to you, or even if you're slightly interested in them, I don't see how it can hurt to read them.

It might not be the most efficient way to study go, but who can say that they've studied in the most efficient way?

FWIW, I read a lot of math books in elementary school because I thought they were interesting. They were probably above my level, but when I learned more math later on, I think that those books were probably helpful in my learning.

[alphaville]

I have been going to a go club and have been on another online forum and was told by both places to stop reading books (by a 2d and a 3d player) to supplement playing.

That is very bad advice. Ignore it.

[jeromie]

If you like reading books, read books. The Way of the Moving Horse was the first go book I read, and it helped me make sense of the game when I was starting out. I haven't rocketed up the ranks as quickly as some, but my improvement has been steady and I don't think it's books that are holding me back.

[RobertJasiek]

Answer: viewtopic.php?f=17&t=14550

[John Fairbairn]

I'm a book fan but I'm not certain it was bad advice. We don't have the full context. Maybe what the dan teachers really said was something like, "Just for the moment don't read books." And if you compare say, learning to play the piano by reading books, there's something to be said for keeping the books beyond arm's length for a while.

And maybe the student was asking questions about, say, fuseki, which is not really amenable to 22-kyu book treatment.

What does seem to work at every level, though, from 22-kyu up to pro, is playing over pro games (or if you are a pro, AlphaGo games ).

There are several benefits but the commonest one is seeing things you would not usually think of for yourself, especially under the constraints of playing at normal social time limits. Here is an example I saw this morning:

(;AB[co][do][eo][dq][hk][fk][dk][dl][cj][ci][ch]AW[dj][cg][df][dh][di][em][gm][fp]
[dn][cn]SZ[19]

(;W[bl];B[bk];W[cl];B[ck])
(;W[bm];B[bk];W[cl];B[ck];W[bo];B[bp]))

White 1 and the rest is almost a knee-jerk reaction for most amateurs. It's sente and you get right in the face of the opponent. But it's not just a great feeling - it's very often a good move. And so you get into the habit of becoming a Pavlovian K9.

But if you look at pro games you will see that you can consider White 2 instead. This has essentially the same threat to cut the upper Black group but a very different impact on the corner and on the White group's eye shape. Many amateurs overlook such more restrained moves.

In general, I think I'd be tempted to combine the two strands of advice and tell neophytes to play over lots of pro games but don't pay much attention to the commentaries (just yet). Just fill up your ideas bank.

[Knotwilg]

If you want to improve, vary your diet.

If you want to read books, read books.

[moha]

I'm not sure why exactly they said that, but I'd recommend not to do anything that you do not enjoy by itself, just for the hope of getting "stronger". Most newcomers will become disillusioned in the game sooner or later, and when looking back you probably don't want to feel like you wasted your time. Just try to have fun, whether you play or study.

[Calvin Clark]

I think Robert Jasiek's post is spot on about the reasons people say this.

There is knowledge and then there is conditioning. Playing, replaying pro games, and doing problems provide conditioning.

Knowledge comes from books, videos, teachers, etc.

There is balance, and it varies from player to player.

Signs you need more conditioning:

• You make a lot of blunders such as missing ataris or simple tesuji that you can easily see when told to look for them outside of a game.
• You are surprised when the game situation changes. (Hey, when did my opponent make that moyo?)
• You lose on time a lot.
• Your opponents play a lot of moves you know are wrong, especially in the opening, yet you still lose badly.
• You win more when taking handicap than giving it.

Signs you need more knowledge:

• You are constantly behind in the opening, even in games you win.
• In reviews, your opponents ask why you didn't just the play the joseki, and you have no idea what they are talking about.
• When you lose, you don't know why, escpecially since your opponents can't seem to read anything.
• You win more when giving handicap than taking it.

Those are just my suspicions and I can't prove any of it. What I do know is we all need both and there is more than one way to work on both.

[djhbrown]

I can't prove any of it.

maybe you can, at least beyond reasonable doubt, by looking at Go as you might look at, say medicine.

an amateur 3d brain surgeon might have learned his craft by trial and error, but that only took him to the top 10% of other egomaniacal twits that also didn't realise that thousands of years of study and effort by millions of players before him had produced some principles of brain surgery that it is wise to adopt: eg look before you cut - don't just cut and see what happens.

if those 3d amateurs were right, there would be no books, no internet, no need for anyone to ever listen to anyone else.

therefore, their "advice" is, in the words of Steven Weinberg, so bad that's it's not even wrong.

[dfan]

in the words of Steven Weinberg, so bad that's it's not even wrong.

If Weinberg said this, he was quoting Pauli.

[djhbrown]

If Weinberg said this, he was quoting Pauli.

he did, and he was. i didn't remember because i never read Pauli - more fool me!