Life In 19x19

jts wrote: As Bill says, hijacking the thread for discussion is probably a good thing,

Well, I was joking around, but this comment does make Bantari's point. My "good" comment is ambiguous, isn't it? Am I saying that it was good to hijack the threat, or good of Bantari to respond as he did?

jts wrote:Pedagogically, though, letting the student say what he needs explained can make the explanation more incisive.

I find that when I post a game for review, it's usually a move that it never even occurred to me to say much about winds up being the one that gives reviewers apoplectic fits as a horrible move.

In fact, I would suggest to the 18kyus that they go over the games and include their own comments when looking for reviews. I don't get that many requests for reviews from the GTL, but there's something I find irritating about a request with no annotations.

As a further aside, I do sometimes find when I'm going over my own games in thinking about whether to request a review that I'll come to a certain move of my own and realize that it was terrible and should have done something else that would have saved one of my groups and prevented me from losing right then and there. Now if only I could realize those moves are blunders while the clock is ticking....

Fedya wrote: I find that when I post a game for review, it's usually a move that it never even occurred to me to say much about winds up being the one that gives reviewers apoplectic fits as a horrible move.

In fact, I would suggest to the 18kyus that they go over the games and include their own comments when looking for reviews. I don't get that many requests for reviews from the GTL, but there's something I find irritating about a request with no annotations.

The first paragraph is why I think it's a good idea not to comment on a game you want reviewed. Reviewers have a tendency to focus on replying, when imho it's often more useful to see what they focus on unprompted. Depending on the format questions can be asked afterwards anyway.