It is hard for people who have not seen the above-mentioned encyclopaedia to realise how much depth there can be. I thought, therefore, that it would be useful to give a partial explanation of the book.

As to size, it has 715 large (not quite A4) pages with small type. It's so massive it took a panel of seven contributors, three of whom were pros (highest 7-dan, and all the type who write their own stuff).

As to depth, consider one portion of the middle-game section - the one on invasions and erasures. The first section is on types of invasion (six) and spreads over 51 diagrams. The next section is on selecting the invasion point - 95 diagrams. The section on standard invasions and how to reply covers 170 diagrams. Then come 59 diagrams on standard erasures, with finally 104 diagrams on invading and erasing moyos. That's a total of 479 diagrams over 74 pages. That's no record, of course, but these are quality explanation diagrams, not problems and their solutions. Actually, the encyclopaedia has separate sections for life and death, tesuji, etc that relate to this section. On top of that, this middle-game portion has equally extensive treatments of attack and defence, settling weak groups, the value of thickness, and sacrifice stones.

As to balance, overall, the middle-game portion gets 178 pages, compared to just 115 for josekis. I may have lost touch with the English literature but I suspect that, if anything, the ratio might be reversed here, and if you strip out the problem type format which tend to characterise many of our middle-game books (the encyclopaedia has its own problem sections, don't forget), I suspect that josekis get a bigger slice of the pie over here. If so, I suggest that's unbalanced.

As to quality, you will have to trust me on this, but Zhao Zhiyun's reputation is well deserved. Not being a Japanese 9-dan, he certainly knows more than western amateurs. Apart from the fact that the encyclopaedia focuses on proper explanations rather than problems, when you look at the diagrams you tend to recognise your own games. Japanese authors often focus on positions that are interesting because they are unusual and/or diagrams taken from the pro author's games, which are hardly likely to contain the errors that we make. The encyclopaedia, in contrast, is called "Practical" for good reason. For example, you know the situation where you get a two-space group on the third line between two enemy positions. You're never quite sure whether you should be knocking your knees as you anxiously await the attack or patting yourself on the back for having driven a wedge into the enemy's heart. Either way, you are usually even less sure how to play this sort of position. The encyclopaedia tells you. I can't recall seeing that in Japanese or Korean books, let alone western ones.

As to being systematic, you'll have seen a few lists of e.g. typical L shapes, with and without legs and hanes. Useful, aren't they? But where are these lists when you need them, and what about all the other standard shapes that have no name? The advantage of the encyclopaedia is that it gives all the shapes you've read about and many you haven't, and they are all together in one place, as a superb reference tool (and nicely laid out, BTW).

As to being holistic, apart from (of course) fuseki, joseki, middle game, endgame, tesujis, life and death, there are longish entries on famous players - Chinese, Japanese and Korean - and on famous books. What the book reminds me of is the annuals I used to get at Christmas time as a kid. They were such an Aladdin's cave of delights, especially through the dark winter nights. I don't mean that the present book is for kids, though. It's suitable for even dan players. It may be the only go book you ever need! As it covers the basics so well, I even think it's a shame that so much money was spent, with the best of intentions, by Oriental organisations on things like freebies to the WAGC for a handful of people. If they had spent some of that money on having this book translated (not by me, I hasten to add!), far more westerners would have seen the benefit of the money and we would have a much better grounding.

Finally, I'll give just one example of the insights in the book, for a special reason. The reason is that there was a little discussion some time back when I mentioned having seen "sector lines" mentioned in Oriental books independently of Bruce Wilcox's version of the theme. When challenged by Bruce, I was able to find a Japanese source to prove my claim, but I was unable to remember the others. However, looking at this encyclopaedia again to count the diagrams, etc. I was delighted to re-discover another example, this time from China. But there is a subtle difference, I'd forgotten. At least I think, lazily without referring back to the stimulating Instant Go, that I'm right in saying that Bruce had in mind drawing sector (his term, or boundary) lines in the open centre from the tip of one position to the tip of another for the same side, the idea being that you have to be very wary of crossing that line as an invader. The Encyclopaedia, though, does not use the tip of the position but rather the tip of the thickness in the position. I'm inclined to see the value of the pro's experience in that small but useful point.

The book is 围棋实用全典 and the ISBN is 7-8051-732-2. My copy is date 1998, so it may not be in print.

It sounds like an early medieval attempt to collect all knowledge of science known at that time in one book. Nowadays there is too much knowledge for one book. If one topic covers about 10% of the encyclopedia, then all go topics cannot fit in the same degree of detail in that book. So it is not as holistic as one would like it to be and not as detailed as research books on specific topics.

Thank you though for pointing out the book; it might be a nice xmas present!:) You emphasise that it was a practical book; does this mean that it does not contain lots of abstract, general knowledge? Is the book worth reading without understanding the text?

How, by which kind of value(s) does the book assess the value of thickness?

Sector lines: I have heard about half a dozen of people (incl. me) who have invented or presented the concept pretty much independently from others. The English phrase sector line is Wilcox's invention, I'd guess. I am not happy with it though because the term suggests something more general than what it means. I prefer to say something like "line of an outer moyo boundary / hull".

I am guessing that you take issue with Robert's comments on Asian go literature, when he does not yet (I suppose) have a sufficient reading knowledge of Chinese, Korean, or Japanese to read the primary sources directly?

Fair enough, I suppose. And it would apply to many of us. But it still leaves the obvious question: if the "Practical Encyclopaedia of Go" is as good as John Fairbairn says it is (and really, I do trust his opinion), why not try to get permission to translate and publish it? It could be a grateful readership, given that not everyone has the time and talent for languages.

_________________
And the go-fever which is more real than many doctors’ diseases, waked and raged...
- Rudyard Kipling, "The Light That Failed" (1891)

Rather I think he refers to my comments on comments on books I have not had in my hands. My comments sometimes point out apparent inconsistencies in others' comments and TMark seems to doubt that I could meaningfully detect such without have seen those books myself.

From John's description, it sounds like you'd need a team of fairly good Go players to translate it. I imagine John's not up to taking on the task by himself, because it would likely take years to do it justice.

Thanks for these details by the way John. It sounds like a fascinating book!

Regarding the idea of holistic Go knowledge... It's not in the same league, but the translation of Shuko's four tesuji dictionaries (translated by Steven Bretherik and published by Slate and Shell) is excellent in my opinion.

The value isn't in the tesuji themselves, which can be found in plenty of books, but Shuko's comments about each problem. The way he discusses different possible moves, ideas for resistance or trades, large scale ideas for attack and defense, when a particular move could be good or bad in the whole board context, how and when you could tenuki and so many other topics, is really educational. The funny thing is that often it seems like an off-hand remark on his part, but there is a lot of wisdom to be mined from Shuko's words (especially for Western Go players).

I feel that (while not being exhaustive) it's a holistic approach to tesuji that helps you connect strategy with tactics, and really rewards serious study.

_________________
David

Go Game Guru: Learn Go | How to Get Better at Go | Go Game Shop | Go Boards | Baduk TV

There is a scanned PDF on the web. If plug the name into Google, you will see one of the links has PDF in the title. I can't see the black move numbers when I view the file but it does allow you to see what the book content looks like.

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

Not a question of time so much as money. Translation of this book would cost around US$100,000 at my normal commercial rates. Since go book sales would recover only about 1% of that, no publisher would touch it. It would have to be a sponsored effort. That is the sort of fee, pro rata, incidentally, that is being donated essentially free by people like John Power when they translate books like 21st Century Joseki. That is part of what makes the (admittedly occasional) snotty comments so galling.



Whilst I can hardly disagree since I first brought the book to western attention (on r.g.g.), and raved about it so much that S&S decided to publish it, I didn't have the foresight then to see it as a holistic book. I was astonished that Steve Bretherick agreed to take on such a massively underpaid job - he's another the go world probably doesn't appreciate enough. However, my biggest astonishment came a few years later when I read here that there are people who don't like this book. Even with the sometimes jokey and sometimes serious splits here between, say, numbers people and non-numbers people and so being aware you can't please all the people all the time, I was still taken aback by those who dismissed the book. I felt it was one of those that arched over any differences, and part of the reason - as I'd put it now - is that it is holistic.

The more I've thought about holism the past few days, the more I'm convinced we have lacked it here, and to a large degree simply because it has been ignored. Saying joseki, joseki, joseki all the time is one example of why. Another part of the reason it's ignored may be the idiotic notion expressed elsewhere in the thread that holism about completeness. Obviously we all know we have a far from complete library in the west, but I still think there's enough here for parts to be put together to form some sort of synergy.

As to practical steps forward, putting together a good grouping of books that help each other rather than the usual lists of the ten best may be one, but I'm inclined to think that simply more attempts to talk holistically here on L19 could also be a powerful impetus for change.

Is this aiding piracy?

I don't like Shuko's tesuji books. As a "number person", it may surprise you that one of the reasons is the number stone symbols in the text; it makes the text appearance hectic. Shuko's book has the advantage of identifying some (by far not all) types of tesujis and grouping them. If the books had only headings (to provide the structure of the presented tesuji types) and diagrams, I would like the books. Regardless of how well the translation may have been done, the text accompaying the diagrams does not read well because it hides interesting aspects among the obvious. It is like the Ishida: besides explaining josekis, it offers and buries a lot of details of fundemantal theory in the diagram comments. It should not be the reader's task to find easter eggs but they should be presented at prominent places.



Such discussion arises as a consequence of statements like "covers every aspect of go in great detail" and "It may be the only go book you ever need!".



For sure.

It looks like the encyclopedia is available but purchasing from webpages with only Japanese / Chinese characters might be difficult:

http://bookd.bi3jia.com/bookcmp_421481.html
http://book.kongfz.com/6525/97754558/
http://www.google.de/search?sclient=psy ... btnG=Suche

I can't believe the prices though: 24 Yuan = 3 EUR or 52 Yen = 0.5 EUR? Probably I don't understand what is written... Plus shipping, of course.

On http://book.kongfz.com/6525/97754558/ that is the used book price, the original price was about 65, which seems reasonable back in 1993.

I found this an interesting remark:

I actually wonder of how much value such a "holistic" is to the average avidly-studying amateur. In fact, I feel that at my level, it would be really useful to spend some time (let's say, a couple of weeks) drilling just ONE topic regularly. For example, work on a book with exclusively semeai problems, and study it for an hour every day until it's finished, then repeat the same book a few weeks later to see if you can still do it. Then, you would hopefully firmly increase your knowledge on one subset of basic shapes, and then move on. Of course, you'd have to keep playing games as well while working on this.

Unfortunately, I personally don't have the time for that any more, and also not really the determination... Anyhow, my point is that I personally don't really see the benefits of the "holistic" approach. There is the danger of trying a little bit of everything but not really studying anything thoroughly. Of course, if a standard pattern has some remarkable endgame continuation or life-and-death aji, that's important to know. But, the joseki books or middle-game books that I know (for example the Ishida, and Yilun Yang's "Strategic Fundamentals") already háve the most important (tesuji) continuations and ajis!

Actually, there is a great holistic exercise available in any language, even for the illiterate: study professional games!

By the way, typing this made me wonder what would be the best way to improvement: a mixed study regime, working through a few problem books simultaneously, or the more focused approach of just finishing one book before moving on. As I've never managed to actually finish a problem book, my studying was always actually the mixed variation. But I'm now wondering what would've been best

_________________
My name is Gijs, from Utrecht, NL.

When in doubt, play the most aggressive move

At your current rank,

- absorb all knowledge you can find, in particular read all available good or better books, study at least 1500 problems and at least 1500 games (up to the late middle game, otherwise you never finish, but don't neglect the endgame topic entirely)
- find out (or take a teacher who finds out) what truely your greatest weaknesses are and concentrate study on those topics
- play a lot and attend tournaments

You indicate that you don't have enough time. Well, time is money: pay a teacher for doing part of your work. You also indicate that you are, eh, not optimally motivated at the moment. You need to overcome that. Finish the (easy enough but not dull) problem books instead of stopping in the middle!

Robert,

When providing this advice, does different methods of learning (or knowledge absorption, for that matter) factor in? You seem to have a solid plan in mind whenever someone asks advice on how to improve, and I'm curious if you believe there is one "superior" way that applies to everyone, or if you believe that the advice you give applies to the majority, with the caveat that some people may not be suited for such a method?

Perhaps I lack the discipline required, but I've never been able to study effectively (not even in school). I've somehow managed to do pretty well in academic endeavors, but I'd say my biggest weakness is my lack of study ability. Yet, I have still learned (and still learn) quickly, gaining in knowledge through using skills and refining my techniques endlessly. Perhaps a teacher would be best for me, since I run on a "show me the result" learning pattern.

Your thoughts, Robert?

I realize what I'm about to say is still a bit "Western" in it's approach, but ...

In other (non-go) areas of my life, I've found that holism is, in and of itself, is a separate skill.

One can learn to pour concrete, cut and nail boards, run wires, connect pipes, set windows, and apply roofing. But all of these skills together will not at all guarantee that you will be skilled at building an entire house. That is to say, you could certainly build a house, but it probably would not be one that was a "good" house in the larger sense that it met the needs of the people who lived it in.

In order to play a good game, there must be a synergy in the skills we learn, and this synergy is a skill as well, which we might call "holism". But it is one which we do not generally talk about studying, we acquire it through having a built-in aptitude, by reading between the lines in existing books where possible, by oral tradition (if we take lessons), by sink-or-swim, or not at all.

I feel like this is what John is saying about holism in English go literature.

Saying "I could benefit more from studying just one topic in depth, then moving to another, rather than from holism" sounds to me like saying "I could benefit more from studying one topic in depth, then moving to another, rather than from studying joseki". It misses the point and doesn't really make sense.

I know this oversimplifies the situation a tad, but I do think it's at least partly accurate.

_________________
RedPoney Carpenter
kgs/igs/ogs/dgs: redponey
igolocal.net

I agree. Especially if you take your time.



I have not kept up with the latest learning research, but as far as I know, it does not matter whether you concentrate on one thing at a time or mix them up.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

One of the best advices I read was by Bill: study what you like. It's also what Antti Törmänen, now insei, says elsewhere on this forum, interviewed by Hushfield, that he would have wanted to take his study less seriously and enjoy it more. Indeed, only when one aspires to become a professional, as Antti is presumably doing, it becomes serious business. We amateurs play Go for fun and in our quest to get better, we should also have fun.

That said and agreeing that pro games are out there abundantly for "holistic" study, I still think that there's a gap between oriental books and western books, after having taken lessons with Minue 6d Korean amateur. I cannot publish his study material, out of courtesy (although I'm more than a little worried about his current state, since he has vanished from any scene and used to be very talkative and sociable). Many of his haengma exercises were precisely about the positions that come up in your games all the time and you always have the feeling you apply some mediocre 'suji' whereas the 5d-6d deal with it swiftly to their convenience. John related to that very eloquently in an earlier reply.

Pro games never have these sequences because the pros will never leave such occasions for the opponent, or resist heavily when they occur. These middle game joseki are under the surface all the time and to infer them from pro game study, well honestly that's beyond my capacity. The haengma exercises were real eye-openers to me. I doubt I would recognize them hidden under a pro sequence, let alone solve them correctly all the time.

There's a reason for go books. There IS a gap between the East and the West. Robert will not suffice with his single lifetime to cover all the analytically deconstructed aspects of the game "in full detail". Therefore, having translated "holistic" material will already be very helpful. More importantly, I will enjoy studying it.

I don't really have the impression that joseki are overrepresented in the Western literature. However, it is probably the case that joseki are overrepresented in amateur discussions. I suspect that this has little to do with what books are available and a lot to do with most of us amateurs being insecure about our ability to judge moves. It's a whole lot easier to say "This move is good because the joseki book says so" than to find an explanation (which also runs the risk of being wrong.) Also, my impression is that overreliance on joseki is not a purely Western disease.

I do agree, though, that it would be nice to have an integrated reference work in English.


There are people who don't like the translation of Shuko's Dictionary?!

Actually, I can understand where Herr Jasiek is coming from -- it would have been nice to have a section with just the problem diagrams, organized -- but I can't see this as anything but a minor criticism of a book with a high level of overall awesomeness.

65 yuan in 1998 (and 24 rmb for a used copy is about right) is actually relatively expensive for a Chinese go book, even after taking into account its size. In the saturated market of Chinese go books, the high price is a likely indicator of quality...



This is true, of course.


This is neither here nor there, but I sometimes wish some of this money were spent on putting copies of the Elementary Go Series and similar books in public libraries. When you think about it, there are already a lot of really excellent books in English. As great as it would be to have more books translated (especially the very good Chinese encyclopedias) I wonder if we would do more good by making these existing books more widely and easily available. Having used copies of Attack and Defense on Amazon for $93 each doesn't count.

Yes. Different people learn differently. As an extreme example, some players learn by playing only.



I take my own experience of jumping from 10k to 3d in "no time", see what someone says when he asks and his rank and use my teaching experience. Altogether give me a good idea of suggesting a "solid plan".



As soon as one knows some more details about a particular player's knowledge backgroup, ability and learning style, the more specific ways can be found. The superior common requirements remain the same though: much spent time helps much, motivation is necessary, the greatest weaknesses must be overcome, knowledge / reading ability etc. should cover every field. (Everybody else would state problem solving here but I think that emphasising this too much could lead to overlooking the other aspects, as if one could become pro by leaning nothing but problem solving.)



Basically yes. Of course, if somebody has already done 1000 problems, then I do not suggest 1500 but 500 more from 1d to 3d or 4d. Note though that my advice in the earlier message was for a Dutch 1d! Kyu players need less.



Surely there are people that cannot learn well from books but might learn from, say, verbal hints. In that case, they need to get the book knowledge from sources suitable for them: clubs.

If you ask me if fewer than 1500 problems and games each will do - maybe, maybe not. Maybe someone needs 1000, someone else 2000. With such a number, I do not feed any 10,000 myth but it is more a minimal source of mid dan reading ability and representative ideas of what strategically can happen in games at all. Therefore it is not necessary to make it too strict. E.g., 500 games, 500 openings, 500 commented games, 500 middle game studies would also do it.



Isn't this a contradiction?



Do you think you improve fast enough?:)

That is ok as long as one improves and knows all one's major weaknesses. Otherwise it becomes necessary to study (also) what one does not like.



I am more optimistic:)