Re: SamT's Study Journal - A Beginner's Journey
Posted: Fri Oct 03, 2014 11:05 am
SamT wrote: Game 1: KGS
After that, though, the sequence on the right side seems to be mostly mistakes.
Life in 19x19. Go, Weiqi, Baduk... Thats the life.
https://www.lifein19x19.com/
SamT wrote: Game 1: KGS
I have long been a fan of overlearning, of going over corrections a number of times at different intervals to solidify them in memory. I now see that there is a non-technical reason for overlearning, which is to instill confidence. It is normal to be disappointed in yourself for making a mistake. Overlearning gives you opportunities to be proud of yourself for overcoming your errors.SamT wrote:Knotwilg:
That is a fair observation/comment.
I didn't interpret this as you trying to make me feel dumb, not at all. However, I was instinctively disappointed in my own reading abilities when I saw my error. I think this is natural, at least for me. Please do not hesitate to point out such reading errors/improvement opportunities in future in future; I may be disappointed in myself and my current skills, but at least I will learn.
I find that for joseki and the like, I am liable to have my mental projection shifted in one direction or other if I try to just envision it directly, and that I need to feel the flow of the stones to get everything in the right place. I don't necessarily think "move 1, then move 2, then move " as a plodding thing, it may appear mentally as a quick flow, but I'm much more likely to generate an accurate mental image this way. It also helps me notice if there are branches possible due to other stones, etc.SamT wrote: Mentally picking up a block of stones and moving them, or even projecting an end result (such as a joseki) onto the board is a different type of reading than what I've focused on. A separate skill. And I haven't trained it as much.
So... I currently find it easier to read the 51 moves than to try and mentally move the block of stones. Honestly, I have problems even judging if I've lined the sequence up right if I actually put stones on the board. Weird, huh?
I guess I should start practicing that type of reading as well; it is probably one of the extremely important components of "positional judgement".
skydyr wrote:I find that for joseki and the like, I am liable to have my mental projection shifted in one direction or other if I try to just envision it directly, and that I need to feel the flow of the stones to get everything in the right place. I don't necessarily think "move 1, then move 2, then move " as a plodding thing, it may appear mentally as a quick flow, but I'm much more likely to generate an accurate mental image this way. It also helps me notice if there are branches possible due to other stones, etc.SamT wrote: Mentally picking up a block of stones and moving them, or even projecting an end result (such as a joseki) onto the board is a different type of reading than what I've focused on. A separate skill. And I haven't trained it as much.
So... I currently find it easier to read the 51 moves than to try and mentally move the block of stones. Honestly, I have problems even judging if I've lined the sequence up right if I actually put stones on the board. Weird, huh?
I guess I should start practicing that type of reading as well; it is probably one of the extremely important components of "positional judgement".
The shifting technique for reading ladders works fine to simplify things if you have the position laid out on a board and put new stones down, but if it's all performed mentally, I too find it more difficult than following the ladder step by step. My usual technique is to follow the zigzag of the laddered stones and then start mentally placing the laddering stones as I approach other stones on the board.
As for positional judgement, I don't really superimpose things on the board. I'll look at possibilities for particular sequences, but also just feelings for things like "white should be able to invade here if he doesn't force black to solidify", counting territories and potential, and looking for forcing moves. Whole board problems often require the same sense of flow I described above to me, like "I play here so they have to respond here which threatens this so I play there, which makes them respond here, and now my two groups are strong, this one of theirs is strong, and I have sente to take that last big point." There's also consideration of whether a point is more important for one side than another, or if it's mutually important. By this I mean something like a checking extension that is only sente for one side, or is double-sente, or is miai with another big point.