Life In 19x19

My copy arrived today, can't wait to dig in to updated joseki goodness.

Bigger than I expected:


Plenty of text too:

That's a pretty big book.

It looks, however, that the binding is similar to that of Invincible, and that it won't stay open flat very easily. I almost wish they did hardcovers of these, as they do of Invincible.

Reading the first chapter has already changed my Go immensely. In fact, the very first sentence in the chapter grabbed my attention:

$$
$$ ----------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . W . . . . |
$$ . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$
$$ ----------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . W . . . . |
$$ . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |[/go]

The small-knight approach move is the most severe approach move to the 3-4 stone.

I'm now a huge fan of the low approach (instead of despising it) and look forward to playing it much more often in my games with my newfound knowledge ready to be put into practice.

I haven't had time to read much of it, but I like the new binding/size. It lays flatter than almost any other go book I own (excluding my hardcover of Invincible and a large Chinese tsumego book).

kirkmc wrote:That's a pretty big book.

It looks, however, that the binding is similar to that of Invincible, and that it won't stay open flat very easily. I almost wish they did hardcovers of these, as they do of Invincible.

Correct. It doesn't lay open unless you're in the middle of the book. It fits great in a cook book holder though.

Can someone do a review for this book?

LokBuddha wrote:Can someone do a review for this book?

I thought Araban's review sounded pretty decisive.

Araban wrote:Reading the first chapter has already changed my Go immensely. In fact, the very first sentence in the chapter grabbed my attention:

$$
$$ ----------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . W . . . . |
$$ . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$
$$ ----------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . W . . . . |
$$ . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |[/go]

The small-knight approach move is the most severe approach move to the 3-4 stone.

I'm now a huge fan of the low approach (instead of despising it) and look forward to playing it much more often in my games with my newfound knowledge ready to be put into practice.

Interesting. In my old copy of Ishida, it says that's the most basic approach. It doesn't say anything about severity. Amazing how a little re-wording can change the meaning.

snorri wrote:

Araban wrote:Reading the first chapter has already changed my Go immensely. In fact, the very first sentence in the chapter grabbed my attention:

$$
$$ ----------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . W . . . . |
$$ . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$
$$ ----------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . W . . . . |
$$ . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |[/go]

The small-knight approach move is the most severe approach move to the 3-4 stone.

I'm now a huge fan of the low approach (instead of despising it) and look forward to playing it much more often in my games with my newfound knowledge ready to be put into practice.

Interesting. In my old copy of Ishida, it says that's the most basic approach. It doesn't say anything about severity. Amazing how a little re-wording can change the meaning.

If it were Bob Terry, it would be "the most severe attack"

Cheers,
Vesa

I am KGS 3k and have been very fortunate to have been asked by the British Go Association to review this book.

So far, I am immensely impressed by the information contained. It really looks in depth at joseki, explaining the meaning of the moves and why sub-joseki sequences fail.

But it could have had better diagram numbers. Rather than Diagram 1.2.4 for variation 4 of variation 2 of diagram 1, it simply uses consecutive numbers. So diagram 25 can follow from diagram 13, for example, but it would not be obvious.

There is also a diagram error as early as page 8.

But it could have had better diagram numbers. Rather than Diagram 1.2.4 for variation 4 of variation 2 of diagram 1, it simply uses consecutive numbers. So diagram 25 can follow from diagram 13, for example, but it would not be obvious.

I for one wouldn't see 1.2.4 as an improvement. I'd regard it as ugly, amateurish, an attempt to control my order of reading and an unwelcome reminder of certain types of writing. Such over-signposting may have a place on highways where safety is paramount (though there I'm sure it's overdone), but I think most of us have learned how to read books, and some of us enjoy doing so at our own leisurely pace, surrounded by words not numbers.

As for highlighting one diagram error (blindingly obvious to any reader, so it's hardly a discovery) in a huge book, would you shout out to the world that the nice new friend you just made has a pimple on his nose? A good new book can be like a good new friend. Just as a quiet word in your friend's ear may be more appropriate, an e-mail to the publisher seems more appropriate in this case, with the big added benefit that they'd probably tell you what the diagram was meant to be.

You see, there is an aggressive tone in "as early as page 8", implying there is a spate of errors to come (but there isn't, is there?). Earliness has no obvious relevance here. If the same mistake occurred on page 500 it would be of no different statistical significance.

CardiffGo wrote:So far, I am immensely impressed by the information contained. It really looks in depth at joseki, explaining the meaning of the moves and why sub-joseki sequences fail.

Interesting to compare this book with the previous edition. I'm only 1/3 of the way through the book, but, so far, there is only a small amount of material that is not in the earlier edition. Most of the positional evaluation has been copied word for word from the previous edition.

On the other hand, the in-depth positional evaluation given in the example game fuseki in the previous edition is completely missing from this edition because there are no example game fuseki.

For the serious kyu player, this is an essential book because the joseki and variations that are new are important. It is sad to think how much more valuable this book would be if it had been published as an update to the the previous edition. Surely there could have been better use for all the pages wasted in word-for-word repetition. One needs the previous edition anyway for the example games, and because the joseki that are omitted often occur in kyu-level games.

Since this book is written on a kyu-level, it is not clear that it is a useful investment for the dan player. Most of the joseki analyzed stop short of what the dan player needs in a reference dictionary. And there are many joseki in commmon use in 21st century dan-level play that are not even mentioned in this book imo.

As a 6-kyu, I am glad to have purchased it. It is a good review for me as I go through and compare the joseki given in this book with the joseki given in the previous edition. It fills in some of the holes in my kyu-level joseki reference books. The new joseki that it does have are in common use on the kyu level, so they are important to me.

Note: In this review, "new joseki" refers to joseki, or variations of joseki, that are in this edition but not in the previous edition.

I'm curious if the second volume will have more new joseki, since the 4-4 joseki have probably evolved more since the Ishida dictionary.

Gosh my post incited a lot of assertive responses.

If I am looking at diagram 63 and want to know what it relates to, it is far easier in a myriad of diagrams to have a clue. So I defend the numbering as supplying that. Of course, it will not suit everyone.

'As early as page 8' is in no way aggressive. It certainly was not meant to be aggressive. As to the relevance of such an early error (the diagram is copied from the previous unrelated diagram, so it is hard to work out any meaning) any proof reader failing to spot an error this early should feel a little uncomfortable. A certain tiredness sets in after a few hundred pages.

But I really do not understand why such an aggressive response was generated.

The book, I should add, aside from any minor technical shortcomings is excellent so far.

John and I had a joke about a rather testy monk at a Japanese temple, that perhaps he had been asked the same question too many times that day. The problem is that we and many other authors, book publishers and, my case, database compilers, see a posting made on a newsgroup like this rather than a note that an error has been spotted with the possible tone "Aren't I clever, I spotted this and the proof-readers and publishers didn't!" We do actually get told about our own errors quietly so that we can correct them as soon a possible and our thanks go out to eagle-eyed readers. Some seem a little embarrassed that they are showing us up as being still human, even though it may be an outside contributor's error, but I hope you will forgive two grumpy old men who snap a bit when prodded.

Best wishes.