Note to myself: I should stop playing blitz games.

Why not?

More generally, how many people have (with any regularity) played that 3-3 move in blitz games?

_________________
Occupy Babel!

blitz is purely for kicks and giggles, you don't play at your best, and partly because your not reading. I consider blitz low quality games(this is coming from the same guy who 5 months ago never took his time to read, and took 10 or less seconds a move in 30 min 5x:30 games.) Reading is a valuable asset to improving; I have a friend who is having trouble getting past 6 kyu on kgs, because he doesn't have a good reading ability (before he used to not take time to read, now he is taking his time and learning to read efficently.)

_________________
“I’m here to play go and chew bubble gum, and I’m all out of gum”- misquoted duke nukem

So... people keep saying this. Not just in this thread, but in many similar threads. My response is: yes and no.

We play timed games because we have a specific amount of time that we want to devote to go. Past that time we need to do something else, or we'll lose focus, or whatever. (Timed games also build character by preventing us from self-indulgently thinking in circles.) Once you have a timed game, you need to use every second you've got thoroughly, effectively, and flexibly. In that sense, the clock is definitely part of the game.

But that doesn't mean that any possible way in which having a clock affects the possibility of winning or losing is part of the game. This is as true of long games as short games. Annoying long game timesuji: you make a nasty mistake with twenty minutes left on the clock. You quickly play three or four poorly thought-out moves trying to salvage things, and then you... wait out the clock, and don't start playing again until you enter byo-yomi.

Now, this is using the clock to the max. I'm sure RJ would heartily approve of this strategy. If your opponent wants the win, he has to keep his eyes on the game for twenty minutes. If he doesn't want to do that, he shouldn't have chosen long time settings, huh? And there might even be some self-serving justification you could offer - "I needed that 20 minutes to calm down". Whatever. The purpose of the clock is to set the length of the game, not to waste your opponent's time and ruin his focus with miserable shenanigans.

The same goes with blitz tactics. Playing weird moves to get your opponent out of his comfort zone is a perfectly valid strategy, but playing weird moves because you already know how to play and you doubt your opponent can come up with a reasonable response quickly enough under blitz conditions is kinda sad. There's a continuum to this sort of behavior, of course, that goes somewhere from "pointless but tricky invasions at the bitter end of sudden death" at one end to "playing really complex joseki just because you've memorized them" at the other end. We can argue about where on the continuum an ultra-territorial game falls, but just because a tactic works well with the clock doesn't make it fun, interesting, sporting, or anything other a cheap way to win.

Tournament games would prohibit this, but most of our informal games have no "rules" against blowing an airhorn during the opponent's thinking time. We rely on a shared sense of what is decent and what is shameful for that.

Edit: "opponent's", not "opponents'". Me and apostrophes haven't been getting along lately.

_________________
Occupy Babel!

I think we basically agree. My point is just that different people draw the line in different places, and one should not be surprised when one's opponent seems oblivious of one's own line.

_________________
That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.
--
My (sadly neglected, but not forgotten) project: http://dailyjoseki.com

Hmmmmm. I lost my last game at EGC 2010 because my opponent shouted "Woo hoo!" and punched the air, so I believed that his tesuji worked when it didn't really and resigned by leaving the board in a huff and letting my byo yomi run out.

I was reminded of this thread by a professional game that was broadcast on IGS last night. Black ignores pretty much everything we "know" about fuseki and joseki, and wins by a few points. C16 in particular is something that would make me cringe if an opponent played it against me.

Weird.

Thanks for the game. I'm glad to see there is still some crazy stuff out there that people are playing.

I think black was playing five-in-a-row at first.

_________________
That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.
--
My (sadly neglected, but not forgotten) project: http://dailyjoseki.com

I love the 3,3 4,4 5,5 opening. Must try that one day. Haha

Actually, I think C16 is brilliant. It's trading the corner for a large scale attack on the two stones on the left side

(Of course I would never come up with that move myself, I would probably have played C14 or something like that )

although white is a professional...i feel that black is much stronger than white.
white played the game like playing a handycapped game with stronger player.

_________________
"The more we think we know about
The greater the unknown"
Words by neil peart, music by geddy lee and alex lifeson

I had to look up the players...

Black: http://www.kansaikiin.jp/profile/cgi/pr ... nodatakuya

White: http://www.kansaikiin.jp/profile/cgi/pr ... toutadashi

20 year old vs 42 year old. I was curious if black was younger and willing to try a new style.

My €0.02 on this debate:

Go is not the same game that it used to be - especially now that the majority of games (I would guess) happen over the internet. The ritual and habits associated with the game are vanishing now that it's perfectly possible to learn to play without ever sitting down with a Goban and a teacher. It is this 'old' approach which used to set Go apart from other games, giving it the tradition, the etiquette and air of 'respect'. In most other games, I think it's fairly rare for anyone to consider any legal play as 'rude'*. I think that this kind of detachment is the sort of attitude that will develop towards Go, and much as it might frustrate you, I don't think you'll be able to change it - just as I won't be able to get people to stop playing za, aa, ag, oi and oy in scrabble. I will just have to learn to live with it.

Here's a question: When you are playing online as black, do you still commence play in the top right hand corner of the board? It is both pointless to do this online, and irrelevant to the origin of the custom which (as I understand it) is designed to make it physically more comfortable for your opponent to play their first move with their right hand. Would you consider it impolite if another player didn't play there as black? Another example: In a face-to-face game with me, would you play in my near left corner, even though I am left handed, and my stones are there? Ought I to consider that impolite?

Blindly following custom without understanding is not respectful - and nor is it always harmless, hence the proverb about learning joseki and dropping two stones. People playing moves without understanding the rationale behind them are liable to run in to trouble. This leads on to another thing which frustrates me - people's dislike of "trick" moves. If you learn a certain joseki, but neglect to learn possible 'trick' moves associated with it, who are you to dictate what moves should and shouldn't be played? If your opponent does not have the skill to refute a hamete, then it was the correct move for you - and if they do have the skill, then you judged the situation wrongly, and you will lose out through playing an incorrect move. I can't see any rudeness there.

Would anybody consider it rude if black played like this? http://gobase.org/studying/articles/miyamoto/

Would you avoid playing in an opponent's territory or group if you were pretty sure it was safe? Why? Perhaps it's different at my level (ddk) than for a dan player, but there are too many permutations inside large groups or on long disjointed walls for the players to be able to see them all - so what's the harm in trying? Blindly expecting your opponent to match your ability and/or defend correctly is one way to concede a game before you have started-if they can read as well as you, and do everything else as well as you, then you won't win, will you? Any handicap game requires overplay from white or mistakes from black, and it's hard to think of a way to win a game that doesn't involve wrong moves from the loser at some point.

There are many ways to win games - run out of time, killing your opponent's group, invading their moyo, making better use of enclosing moves, making tactical use of combinations of attacks to build territory while reducing your opponent's - or making fewer mistakes than your opponent. There is always the possibility that a player will make mistakes - trying to deny that is futile, and NOT giving your opponent as many opportunities as possible to make mistakes is, I would suggest, one way to play badly.

If you are not comfortable with the clock being a factor, then don't play blitz or sudden death games, and play unlimited time instead. If you play blitz, I think it's quite inconsiderate and unrealistic to expect (your opponent) to play exactly as you (they) would without the time constraint. You can't spend time reading life and death, so you go for something more secure, at the expense of sente or slightly bigger moves. Just as one strives to play less complicated situations with one's own groups, it's perfectly reasonable to pressure your opponent in to more complex situations, in the dual hope that they will either a) make a mistake or b) run out of time. It's not part of Go per se, but it is part of the game

While trying to actually think of what I would find rude, I decided that I would find it rude (although quite amusing) if my opponent's only goal was to draw rude pictures with go stones; other than that, there is no way I would consider a legal move to be rude. If they started licking all the black stones in my set while muttering "Mmmmm, Minstrels", I'd probably be offended. Once, at my local club, someone managed to cop off with a rather drunken lady during a game. I think that was a bit rude to his opponent.

*The closest analogy I can think of in football is for your opponent to start doing kick-ups in the corner during a match. In a way it's disrespectful, but it's a perfectly valid tactic, and by getting worked up about it or not being able to get the ball, you are simply showing your own deficiencies.
Football also has valid tactics for time-wasting, which are regularly employed as every game is time-limited. It is perfectly reasonable to use most of these tactics - and those that aren't legal will be punished. Simple as. It's frustrating, but it's not rude.

_________________
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man got bullied for being a freak, but went on a voyage of self-discovery and realised that it was okay to be different, then came back in disguise and became a highly successful private investigator.

Go is the same game as it always has been, it's just the players that change. (Of course the rules have changed too, but that's not the point)

If you play on tygem you will soon learn to throw away your weak mentality of 'this should be my territory' 'I have won the game' etc. The players will often fight till the bitter end and test you on every life and death and tesuji problem to be found in the game. Can you really call that territory yours? They ask, as they try to invade, start big fights and confusion to try and turn the game around.

Jeetkunego, you are free to play as you wish, whether that means starting in the upper right corner as black or not. Who cares? The whole go board is yours to play on, the only thing limiting you is yourself. Respect for your opponent does not mean assuming he can make life or that he can keep his territory, but doing your utmost to play to the best of your ability. Try your hardest to win, it is disrespectful to go easy on them if it is not a teaching game. So I agree with you:)

Just don't get hung up on 'oooh we are losing the traditions, go is not the same as it once was'

It's the same game. The players have changed, and will continue to change and be diverse. Trends will emerge etc.

:=)

I agree with Marcus' comments. I remember going to the Calgary Go club in 2007. I really liked this club when it was at the math building at the U of C. I stopped going mostly because the internet is more accessible and Im too lazy to drive to Chinatown on sundays. I am glad however the club is still available, it provides mental comfort knowing there are others close by to learn from.

I find it ironic that anyone playing go would consider an offensive move from an opponent rude. Go is a battle. What do you expect in war, nice language and hugs? That is ridiculous. You should expect to be insulted, cut, and torn apart. It is actually a sign of disrespect if the opponent doesnt do everything to annoy you, try to distract you, and all the while try to crush you. If you cant understand the moves because they are outside "theory" then perhaps you should be playing checkers or chess with its more standard openings and tactics.

There is always something a person can learn from every game. And really unless you are making money from playing Go, dont worry about it. I remember playing on the Kiseido site as a learning game against some 3 kyu player. After the game he asked if I studied life and death problems. I said I did. He said then obviously you havent understood anything of what you have read. My reply was "wow." I couldnt believe it at the time that anyone could be so insulting. But I thought about it and still do. Go is also called the "forgetting game" and has a remarkable ability to release stress from my life and is very fatiguing. So this guy's comments while I didnt like them, have motivated me and given me energy to study Go problems, even when I am tired. I turned a deficit into an advantage.

I dont agree with some of the players at the Calgary Go club which seem to memorize josekis and have some type of scientific method of dissecting moves during a game. Perhaps I am quick to criticize this because I cant do it, I wish I could. I am more like Marcus, making moves according to what I think to be true in terms of areas of groups, influence vs. territory, moyos, and attack and defense and understanding shape. But Go to me I like largely because it trains instinct. There is a lot of right brain activity going on, and this isnt something anyone can analyze.

As far as the 3-3 point goes, I really like this article here. It got me thinking. It is a very solid move, but is really slow. It tends to build the opponents thickness right away, so I generally avoid doing it, but using it along with star points and then some tengen thrown in, as remarked on this forum would probably lead to really exciting games. I have a game that I played on the Dragon Go server, I play correspondence games mostly, where I played a player named Edna. This lady made so many mistakes, I invaded the 3-3 point and then in that same segment of the board also invaded her thickness, AND successfully escaped. This is a memorable game for me, it was basically like a hit and run and then I escaped. I barely won, and it was highly risky for me, but she made so many mistakes. I swear she shouldve had me like 10 times at least, but she kept screwing up. I was really prepared to resign most of the time, but I kept on. That being said, I didnt really like this game because she was so compliant and unresponsive. She didnt fight back or take risks. So some of the players may complain they dont like what their opponent is doing. If it is really lousy, quit, play someone else.

I like this thread and this forum. I can read at work when Im bored. (Someone will probably go on about how I shouldnt be doing this on company time, yada yada-well I dont want to hear it because I dont care-if all my work is done and they cant give me more Im going to use my time to educate myself-and Go IS highly applicable to me doing my job-so there)

I think too many western baduk players get caught up in the 'asian mysticism' hullabaloo when studying this game. A lot of players in Asia see the same amount of meaning or 'conversation' ( ) in the game as NY city blitz chess hustlers see in their game (or poolsharks for another example)

If people are hoodwinking you with moves you know are wrong, then study more. If you are beating them, then you might want to start wagering on games

Just noticed that.

I wouldn't play it because it's approximately opposite from my normal style. Giving such great thickness so early seems like a crime. So I thoroughly support the right of others to do it as much as they want!

_________________
That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.
--
My (sadly neglected, but not forgotten) project: http://dailyjoseki.com