Alexander Dinerchtein's First Book

Adrian Ghioc · Post by **Adrian Ghioc** » Tue Aug 24, 2010 12:58 pm

CarlJung wrote:I also believe Alex comment about Saijo sensei was tounge in cheek.

There is a huge difference between "I am not sure that Saijo-sensei explained it correctly" and "I am not sure that Saijo-sensei explained it correctly :roll:

". Just one smiley (that one or a similar one) but a huge difference... Sorry but I commented what was posted there, not what was in Alex's mind. I'm not that good like you are :sad:

Adrian Ghioc · Post by **Adrian Ghioc** » Tue Aug 24, 2010 2:02 pm

John Fairbairn wrote:Now, if you have a played hamete (a trick move), that is your given position. The moves from there are liable to lead to a well recognised result - either you fall into the trap or you learn to avoid it. The moves leading to the well recognised result are going to be fixed, or regularly played. In other words, part of the hamete line can be considered joseki.

Conclusion :arrow:

falling into the trap is satisfactory for both sides

Nice! OK, it seems that the things changed a lot after all ...

Adrian

P.S. Good ... Everything was clarified except for one thing mentioned in the P.S. from my second post. Who is gonna explain me that black is white? I'm waiting ... ;-)

Alakazam · Post by **Alakazam** » Mon Aug 30, 2010 11:16 am

I don't think Alex is as touchy about the word "Joseki" as some of you. Whether it's a Joseki or a Hamete, I belive he said "Joseki" casually. He probably meant "corner variation" or something... I don't think we need to be so strict about it. Personally, I could argue my defense on his bahalf a lot better if the image would display for me, so I could know which sequence we're talking about ;p Especially since I read New Moves (and liked it, very useful). You know Shusaku no Kosumi was not invented by Shusaku, it was merely a technique which he used often, and sort of standardized, but it was used far before he ever used it once. This sequence can be Alex's because perhaps he's the only one who has used it a lot. Even I (weak amateur player) have at least one or two corner inventions that I consider almost like my own. Not only that, you all know Micro Chinese Opening, right? How about Micro Chinese without the approach move first, straight to the Micro Chinese side placement? I invented that! or so I thought. It seems many people invented it, or so they thought...
Here's something I believe to have invented, and there's a good chance that no one has done this! Or so I think! :

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$c This is a label for the diagram. $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . a 4 b . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . X . . O . 1 . O . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . X . . . . . . 2 X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

If the conditions around are really favourable for black, and Black getting a Ponnuki by playing a forcing move Atari above two (forcing White to solidify connection) would be overconcentrated for black, or whatever justification you can think of for white exists, then next even if black takes a stone with A or B, White 2 will end protecting a cutting point of white after. For example:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$c This is a label for the diagram. $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 1 O 3 . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . X . . O 2 X 5 O . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . 4 6 . , X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . X . . . . . . O X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

At one point I even thought I invented this, a long time ago:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$c This is a label for the diagram. $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . 2 . 5 4 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . 1 6 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

breakfast · Post by **breakfast** » Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:56 am

One example, which can prove that my book can be very useful even on 9p level.

Kanda Ei, 9p got tricked (and almost lost his game in 30 moves) in trickmove, which was explained in the book in great details:
http://www.go4go.net/v2/modules/collection/sgfview.php?id=24299

He lost to 11 years old girl! Just because it was a very powerful trickmove!

Now we will read something from John, who can mention 10+ books example, where it was explained earlier

John Fairbairn · Post by **John Fairbairn** » Tue Sep 07, 2010 5:38 am

Now we will read something from John, who can mention 10+ books example, where it was explained earlier

I'm not certain I understand the English here, but if you mean do we have examples in GoGoD of the opening in the upper right, yes, a couple. The earliest is by Kim Myeong-wan against Song T'ae-kon in 2003, though this features only the waist cut and not the nose attachment. The next features your good self against Emil Nijhuis in 2004, and also has the nose attachment, but it is played by Emil, not you (though you won).

Somehow I don't think Rina read your book to discover this play, though

breakfast · Post by **breakfast** » Tue Sep 07, 2010 12:29 pm

We will translate it to Japanese one day, so Japanese pros will get a chance to learn something

Cassandra · Post by **Cassandra** » Tue Sep 07, 2010 12:56 pm

breakfast wrote:We will translate it to Japanese one day, so Japanese pros will get a chance to learn something

Do you really think, Japanese are unable to read Western diagrams ?

kgsbaduk · Post by **kgsbaduk** » Tue Sep 07, 2010 2:24 pm

and you really cant understand sarcasm ?

Cassandra · Post by **Cassandra** » Tue Sep 07, 2010 10:36 pm

kgsbaduk wrote:and you really cant understand sarcasm ?

Perhaps my posting contains some ?

LokBuddha · Post by **LokBuddha** » Wed Sep 08, 2010 9:05 pm

This is totally off topic but Rina is awesome.

Stefany93 · Post by **Stefany93** » Tue Sep 28, 2010 10:28 am

deja wrote:Slate & Shell has just announced the publication of Alex's first book - New Moves - http://www.slateandshell.com/SSAD001.ht ... mv_pc=1264

Congratulations, Alex!

Yeah Alex, won't you give us a free copy?

Stefany93 · Post by **Stefany93** » Tue Nov 02, 2010 2:06 am

breakfast wrote:Thx!

My ideas are getting more and more popular

Don't you think you are starting to act a little too overproud? I thought you were a modest Go player. Seems I was wrong.

GoCat · Post by **GoCat** » Tue Nov 02, 2010 7:04 am

Stefany93 wrote:Yeah Alex, won't you give us a free copy?

Stefany93 wrote:Don't you think you are starting to act a little too overproud? I thought you were a modest Go player. Seems I was wrong.

@Stefany93
This thread was silent for about six weeks between these two posts. I truly don't understand the need for your latest post, unless it's that you're upset that Alex didn't give you a free copy of his book!

mattn · Post by **mattn** » Tue Nov 02, 2010 2:20 pm

GoCat wrote:
Stefany93 wrote:Yeah Alex, won't you give us a free copy?

Stefany93 wrote:Don't you think you are starting to act a little too overproud? I thought you were a modest Go player. Seems I was wrong.

@Stefany93
This thread was silent for about six weeks between these two posts. I truly don't understand the need for your latest post, unless it's that you're upset that Alex didn't give you a free copy of his book!

Well, then how about a review!

I've been reading this book on and off for the last couple of weeks and have really enjoyed it. The format is quite conversational, with the chapters organized as a discussion between Alex and An. I especially have enjoyed this glimpse into how two pros view the board. What aspects of a position do they focus on? What do they find interesting, and what am I drawn to which them immediately reject? Which points do they agree on, which points do they diverge on? Even ignoring the contents of the book (which are very interesting) you can get a feel for how pros see the board. It is all a little bit Malkovich, in a good way.

There is some question about how new a "New Move" is, I suppose. I've run into some of the new moves before in other contexts, and at least one of them is quite old. Move #12 is a classical Chinese joseki (http://senseis.xmp.net/?ChineseClassicalJoseki) which I first learned about while watching one of Aguilar's games (it resulted in a catastrophe for his opponent). But I don't think this is a negative thing at all --- even these old moves are new in the sense of "you and the people you play may have never seen them". Maybe more important, Alex and An analyze these moves in depth and from a modern perspective.

All in all, I have really enjoyed this book. I hope that there are more books written with this pro-pro conversational format.

SpongeBob · Post by **SpongeBob** » Tue Nov 02, 2010 3:55 pm

mattn wrote:All in all, I have really enjoyed this book. I hope that there are more books written with this pro-pro conversational format.

Sounds good ... might be something I will get myself for christmas. :study:

Life In 19x19

Alexander Dinerchtein's First Book

Re: Alexander Dinerchtein's First Book

Re: Alexander Dinerchtein's First Book

Re: Alexander Dinerchtein's First Book

Re: Alexander Dinerchtein's First Book

Re: Alexander Dinerchtein's First Book

Re: Alexander Dinerchtein's First Book

Re: Alexander Dinerchtein's First Book

Re: Alexander Dinerchtein's First Book

Re: Alexander Dinerchtein's First Book

Re: Alexander Dinerchtein's First Book

Re: Alexander Dinerchtein's First Book

Re: Alexander Dinerchtein's First Book

Re: Alexander Dinerchtein's First Book

Re: Alexander Dinerchtein's First Book

Re: Alexander Dinerchtein's First Book