The Japanese go press is fond of lists. Lists are normally regarded as bad journalism here, but there's a case to be made for niche topics like go. The journalists need to know what excites their readers. Paltry sales alone are not enough. One excusable list is "what were the top stories/themes of 2021?"

As an example, we have Go Weekly's "Newspaper Grand Prix".

The heartbeat of Japanese go as shown by this reader survey looks rather different from, say, the heartbeat of L19 (Is there one? The obituary columns for the death of go with AI-virus are constantly being kept updated in the back room, I suspect).

But back among the living. Iyama's 10th win in the Honinbo was top of the pile.

Second was Seki Kotaro's fastest ever route to a major title (Tengen at age 20, 4 years 8 months after turning pro).

In third place was Iyama again, this time for his 4-game winning streak in the Nongshim Cup. The shock of that international success may have killed more people in Japan that coronavirus.

4th was the explosive emergence of Ueno Asami. If only her calligraphy matched the beauty of her smile...

Nakamura Sumire came only in 5th place, but less for a specific achievement and more for just her name being on everyone's lips all year.

6th was Fujisawa Rina - four Women's Honinbo crowns, and just being a good egg all round.

The retirement of Otake Hideo was 7th. The passing of amateur legend Kikuchi Yasuro was 8th.

Ichiriki's barnstorming year was voted 9th.

I don't think anyone on L19 would ever guess the 10th place story. It was the marriage of Hirata Tomoya. Who he? Precisely. I thin we can safely say it was his partner voice actress (or actorine as the Beggar's Opera nicely has it) Terui Haruka who caught the readers' attention (Think anime).

Best of all. Did you notice there was not a single mention of AI in that whole list! We could be turning the corner in so many ways in 2022.


PS There was a similar list in Korea but that was basically Korea won this international title, Korea won that international title. Booooring.

L19 has a heartbeat but despite heartfelt intervention, it has been beating a few beats slower since August 2021.

Thanks for the update anyway!

> Hirata Tomoya. Who he? Precisely.

In his defence, he did win the 2019 Wakagoi and was a semifinalist in the Ryusei last year. He was also runner up in the 2015 Shinjin O and in a few other events. Not totally obscure.

No, not totally.

He is also appering quite a bit in the youtube channel of the Nihon Kiin, as a commentator, so I am familiar with him.
And because, after winning the 14th Wakakoi, Fujisawa beat him in the #15 and eventually won the tournament.

Looking at the list, I notice something:
Iyama was 3rd for his international streak (which, let's remember, might increase because he has still to lose). Meanwhile, Ichiriki, who is also an international star, and the biggest threat to Iyama in Japan, is 9th. I don't know... I feel like the public doesn't like him too much.

This is a choice of stories rather than players. Ichiriki is my favorite player of the current generation. However, I don't think he had a standout year in 2021. Let's see what stories he can create in 2022!

_________________
Dave Sigaty
"Short-lived are both the praiser and the praised, and rememberer and the remembered..."
- Marcus Aurelius; Meditations, VIII 21

I'm very excited for Seki Kotaro and happy to have different Japanese players holding titles.

I'll take a chance and presume that you don't just want different players, but also care the variety that each one brings to the party. Seki certainly seems to bring something special. For one thing he won his major title at the first attempt against a player (Ichiriki) who's been in form all year. For one thing, he just seems nerveless.

He's been around so little time that we have not yet heard much about him, but one thing stuck in my mind.

When he won one of the Tengen games, there was a comment about a particular move he played. It was prefaced by some remark stating that AI go theory was beginning to shine through in his play, but the killer comment (can't remember if he said direct, or if an answer of his was just being summarised) was that the move in question was notable because he was following AI guidance to make sure his groups "had a base, were settled, and could not be attacked."

It wasn't just the belt, braces, truss, chastity belt and suit of armour way of putting it that caught my eye.

What really hit home was a wider insight into the AI debate. As most people here know, I produce books of commentaries in which I collect as many pro commentaries as I can find. That can be a lot. For one game in Kamakura (which I just finished tonight) I had over 50 commentaries. When I splice all these comments together, I pay great attention to the terminology. In many cases I even produce a corpus, so that I can have some statistics to work with.

This has provided many unusual insights. For example, Shusai produced a very large number of commentaries for Kido in its early days. He was commenting on weaker professionals, of course. What is noticeable is that he harps on and on (justifiably, as Meijin) about these players missing probes and tsumes (checking extensions). In general, other very strong players will mention probes, but no-one gets near Shusai when it comes to tsumes. But if you stand back for moment and say, "What's so special about tsumes?" (a question I'd venture next to no-one on L19 has ever asked themselves before), the answer is quite disconcerting.

Let's analyse together. It's an extension for you that also stops an extension by him. But because it's usually a narrow extension, it hugely strengthens your position. And because your position is now strong, you are now threatening safely to invade his position next door. So there you have it? A move with three or four functions? No! There's more. Because it abuts the opponent's position you can also regard your tsume as a probe. Because it is on the third line it makes some territory. For the same reason, it offers a subsequent safe jump out into the centre, which also would start sketching out a moyo. It also occupies the base area of a Go Seigen group. This is a real multi-tasker of a move.

So why don't people play tsumes more often? I can only guess, but in the case of amateurs I'd be pretty sure of the reason - a reason that quite possibly also applies to weaker pros: it is gote. But actually even that's a plus, because it's really a case of gote no sente. And guess what - that concept was introduced to the go world (from kendo) by the first Honinbo to follow Shusai: Sekiyama Riichi.

Now another of the many things I noticed when analysing go terminology was the massive emphasis on "settling" moves. In Kamakura alone, there were 38 mentions of settling groups in just 10 games. But if you instead create (as you should) a nexus of related words, such as bases, hontes, call & response moves, forcing moves that are reserved to settle groups and so on, you are getting into at least 70 mentions. If you add in also closely related concepts such as prophylaxis, you are quickly well over the 100 mark. In other words, a very strong pro typically can talk about settling in all its forms over 10 times in one game, and that's just the moves he deigns to comment on. And this is typical; not Kamakura-specific.

Let's be clear what this means. These comments derive from very strong players commenting on moves that, on the whole, could have been improved upon by following their advice for groups to have a base, be settled, and not be attackable. In other words, they are doing, and have been doing for decades, exactly what AI is purporting to tell us.

The obvious question is why did the players in the games (no weakies these: Go and Kitani) not play that way in the first place. Again it seems to be a problem of psychology. Base making and honte and mamori and so on are gote. Just as many people start with the premise that it's easier to ask forgiveness than permission, and to sort the mess out later, many go players like to be the most active one - bull in the china shop - and to sort the mess out afterwards. The lure of sente, sente, sente exists in pros just as in amateurs, even if not at the crudest level of atari, atari, atari. I have linguistic data on this, so it's not entirely speculation on my part.

Under normal circumstances before AI came along, young players like Seki (and Shibano Toramaru before him), would never get much of a chance to hear a very strong player berate them over and over again about the need to settle, make a base and build a castle. Indeed, it's a Catch 22 situation for most of them: you need to get to a title match to hear lots of commentators talk about your game, but you can't get to a title match until you have heard lots of such good advice.

That is really what AI has changed. Young players can do their go PhD at age 14 or so by using Katago as their very strong player. I'm not at all sure that it's of much help to amateurs because I think you need the knowledge database and the electron-microscope kind of view that a pro has, and not the mere magnifying glass and tsumego paperback that most amateurs possess. But for both sets of players, I think we can now safely say that settling moves should now be very firmly on the curriculum.

This thread started with a retrospective on the top stories in 2021. I would suggest students of go should start, for 2022, already looking to the future, a future in which their top theme could usefully be osamarigatachi.

That would be 収まり形, right?

_________________
A good system naturally covers all corner cases without further effort.

Not quite. That's possible, but tends to be reserved for cases where you settle the boundaries. The core meaning is harvesting, and the overall feeling is a one of sated satisfaction.

The more important go usage for 'settling' is 治まる and the overall feeling that produces is one of ease or relief. If you want a mnemonic, the phonetic 台　part refers also to a plateau or table-like surface. Allied to the water radical, this can be seen as conveying the idea of a water surface that has become flat, or settled. But with the nice connotation that still waters run deep.

Because of the various kanji and meanings for osamaru, the usual practice today is to write オサマリ形 - katakana being widely used as street furniture to signal: "Warning - technical term ahead!"

As I remarked in another recent thread, it is unwise to try to get bogged down in precise definitions. Open the mind, embrace the variety. Maybe we could add debogging to the 2022 wordlist?

Precise or not, the explanation is very interesting.

Then what is tsume? Is it an extension that prevents the opponents extension or can moves be tsumes simply because they prevent extensions? There are many contradictory statements on L19 and SL about tsumes, usually conflating what is tsume with what would be a good tsume. Maybe some examples of bad tsume are in order, moves that have little or no merit other than going by the same name.

For example are these tsume?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X X . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . O O . . . . 1 . O . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O X . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . 1 . O . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . 1 . O . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Yes, maybe, no. That's just not useful information. You are looking at it the wrong way round - searching for (getting obsessed with?) definitions. That way leads to bogs.

The correct starting point is the commentary. The game has reached a position where the commentator feels a comment is necessary. To make his point he searches for an apposite word. The one that comes to mind here is tsume. He is starting with two assumptions. One is that you will work with him, on the given position. You don't have to waste time trying to invent counterexamples. You eat the meal that's on the table, not the one that's still uncooked in the fridge.

Our commentator also assumes you will know what he means when he tells you to make a tsume (and when he actually demonstrates the play). That's not such a reliable assumption here as it is in Japan, though even in Japan it may not be entirely obvious, as it is a technical term, having accrued certain associations. With a complete Japanese go duffer, the meaning he would instantly attach once the move is shown is simply that you have approached the opponent closely (the underlying verb is tsumeyoru). But the connotation even for the duffer is likely to be that you are putting pressure on the opponent - the inelegant English phrase "getting in his face" is one way of expressing the feeling. There is nothing in the term at that level about checking or extending.

But in reality it is a technical term, and the connotations derive then from the fact that the move is nearly always on the third line and also from the fact that commentators will often expand the term to either hirakizume or tsumebiraki to make sure the extending idea is conveyed. As a result, when tsume is used on its own, the idea of an extension also perfumes the air.

The idea of checking (as in body checking) is really a western construct. I don't think that matters too much, but it can matter sometimes. For example, if we think of checking someone, I would guess that most often we'd see that as holding back an advancing opponent. We are on the back foot. We are in gote. But that sense is absent in the Japanese. You are in the opponent's face. You are advancing on him - and that is emphasised if hiraki is added to the term. You may not have sente but you have the initiative. That can lead to a different mindset.

Word associations and context are far, far more important than logic-chopping attempts at definitions. A commentary is simply about having a conversation and sharing ideas with the reader in an environment they both feel comfortable with.

If you want to then learn to make your own tsumes, that's a different matter, of course. But even there defining tsumes rigidly is not the way to go about it. The way is to train by looking at lots of actual examples. If you do that well enough, you will end up not caring what the move is called. You will do what Katago does, in fact.

I think it is necessary to have a clear idea of what such words mean. Especially if we purport to ask questions like why don't people do what some word entails.




It is idle contemplation if we don't know what it is. Besides "what is tsume?" this also raises questions like "how often do people play tsume?" and "how often do people miss out?". As far as I am concern this doesn't require exact definitions or exact answers, but considering the confusion at SL it appears to me that most people wouldn't know what it means to begin with.




I don't want to rant about the nonsense that fills the space between diagrams in most Go books, older translations are the worst, you are referring to something actually written by people like Shusai and others I presume. Still I think it is a bit odd to look at it from the perspective of when they comment on something rather than what they comment.

I am not one to explore the meaning of words too deeply but if you are claiming that using the words "tsume" is significant I either have to know what it means or simply not know what you are talking about. If I am now to understand that it is not what the comment says I can agree, but only if the author of the comment bothered to make a diagram. Marking something on a existing diagram is OK for me, maybe better because I suspect diagrams are often added by shadow writers.

That said, you didn't bother to make a diagram and you used a word "tsume" that I don't really understand. It is possible that I am breaking my rule of skipping until the next diagram. The point about pros writing (and thinking) more about "settling" groups is true. I think the rest of us would talk more about settling groups if we had the same skill as top pros. Often we don't even recognize the danger that concerns them.

Assuming a precise definition of "tsume" exists, it doesn't help to decide whether a tsume is better than all other moves on the board. But perhaps having a fuzzy idea of that concept may help to consider that move.

It's not that binary. Usually, you have to know what a word refers to, not what it means.

If I ask you what colour livid is, the odds are at least 6-to-1 that we will differ. But if I say "I was livid", you will assume instantly that I was angry. That is because with the simple word "I" I have defined the context. In the same way, a go commentator defines a context. You should then tune into his wavelength.

We communicate by using probabilities, not definitions. Very few people can define "plastic" (in any of its senses) but we use probabilities to distinguish the various senses in a "plastic toy" and a "plastic face." We may even bring in associations: a favourite toy from childhood, or memories of mime artist Marcel Marceau. Communication is very definitely a bipolar process where we bring extra information to the discourse without sometimes even expressing all the elements present. If someone says to us, that's a "plastic material" our probability function can go haywire: made of a polymer material or something that's bendy - or breakable? We need more context. In normal discourse, we wouldn't then say: define plastic. We would just say (as you did), what do you mean? But as soon our interlocutor tells us, perhaps obliquely ("I mean it's a fire hazard") our brain latches instantly on to what is being referred to. And other parts of our brains also light up: where are the fire exits, have we got a fire extinguisher, or calm down and don't overreact.

Go commentaries work in just the same way. When Shusai says, "The tsume may be better" and plonks a stone on the board, we have a point of reference and our brain (subconsciously) takes note of all the associations elsewhere on the board, or remembering a previous game - or a discussion on L19 (if that's not too much of an oxymoron). Eventually, when we hear this word often enough, we will start to feel we know what it means without having any definitions, just as we think we know what plastic means without knowing what a polymer is. We will even, without conscious effort learn that Shusai's tsume has nothing to with tsume go.

Why can't L19 or SL operate with the same normal standard of communication? Is it something to do with how younger players have been learning about the game? They watch videos instead of reading books? They just play instead of studying? They get transfixed before the AI cobra instead of talking to humans? Are they trolling? I dunno.

This is a fascinating set of questions, and I have a few ideas about why you might experience a difference in communication standards on L19 and SL. I think there are good reasons for that standards gap to be accelerating, too, and I don't think it has anything to do with trolling. In my own experience, the vast majority of people participating in these conversations are doing so in good faith.

The proliferation of English language resources for learning the game means that most people never have to learn Japanese (or any other Asian language) to immerse themselves in the game. This is different from earlier generations of go players. Ishi Press was the first major publisher of English language go material, and they didn't exist until 1968. It took quite some time for an adequate English language library to be built up, and many of the early books required greater familiarity with the Japanese language than those published today. But there is more material than most go players are ever likely to get through, so fewer people are turning to the Japanese resources that aided the initial spread of go in the West.

This means, for many modern go players, Japanese terms aren't a part of natural language. They're jargon. And jargon usually is technical and specific in nature. You and I may use the term plastic casually with a "you know what I mean" type attitude, but a materials engineer working on a new project certainly will not. I think the use of language in the go community is often more like that of an engineer than friends holding an informal conversation. (I imagine this trend is probably accelerated by the disproportionate representation of technically minded folks in the go community.)

Furthermore, I would guess there is no one in the English speaking go community who has a greater familiarity with Japanese game commentaries than you. You have seen the words and patterns used in context over and over again; few of us have that depth of experience. You have, of course, shared a lot of your knowledge with us via your books and L19 posts (and I am extremely grateful for your generosity in doing so), but we still don't have the same experience with the material as you. Even those of us who try to understand the terms as they were originally used often lack the context to do so.

I'll also say that this isn't a problem unique to the go community. I'm a pastor, and it's not uncommon for people to want to define theological terms with a level of specificity that the works written in the original language simply don't allow (Or, worse, to attach their own definitions and modify their understanding of the original passage accordingly. I'm sure this happens in go, too.). I also preach (quite literally) the importance of looking at those terms in context rather than trying to form a stand-alone definition, but it's not always easy for people who have no experience of the original text or culture.

All of that to say, don't give up on us. Your insight into the Japanese culture and commentaries is extremely valuable to the go community.

To go back to the conversation on tsumes and group safety in general, I think this is something that's really important for my own development in go. Part of the reason I don't play those sorts of moves more often is not just a fear of gote, it's a lack of enough reading ability to determine when my groups (and my opponent's groups) are truly safe. I can understand that a lot better now than when I first started playing the game, but I still regularly become surprised during the course of a game at which groups come under severe attack. Strategic concepts always go hand in hand with tactical prowess, and I need to grow in both. Of course the commentaries by top professionals have that tactical depth behind them. But even if my reading needs to get better before I can adequately apply it, it's helpful to have the concept of a joint settling move/attack in mind so that I can be on the lookout for that sort of play.