Life In 19x19

Dusk Eagle wrote:Has any pro other than Cho Chikun said that they don't like / hate Go?

Not to my knowledge.
lee chang ho once said that he sometimes hate playing go. does that count?

palapiku wrote:So ideally you should just want to play and study, not improve.

Simplified statement: Studying is not fun, it is kinda work. You will only do it if you want to improve. Improve what? Your rank, of course.

So you want to improve? Then you probably care about your rank. Be honest about it, nothing wrong with it.

SpongeBob wrote:

palapiku wrote:So ideally you should just want to play and study, not improve.

Simplified statement: Studying is not fun, it is kinda work. You will only do it if you want to improve. Improve what? Your rank, of course.

So you want to improve? Then you probably care about your rank. Be honest about it, nothing wrong with it.

Lets look at it from another perspective. You don't improve your rank. You improve your skill. Rank is a by-product of skill. That way, you can study in order to improve your skill. I like being skillful, studying doesn't feel like work to me. It's quite enjoyable. I like to learn new things. (I do it quite seldom though due to too many other commitments.)

If you see rank as the ultimate goal I could see that studying would be work and not very enjoyable though.

CarlJung wrote:Lets look at it from another perspective. You don't improve your rank. You improve your skill. Rank is a by-product of skill. That way, you can study in order to improve your skill.

Well, my point was that there's not really a difference between those two perspectives. Skill is reflected in rank and vice versa. So if you say you want to improve your skill, you can as well say you want to get your rank up.

And if you say 'I want to improve my skill but I do not really care about my rank' then that might sound nice, but imo it does not make much sense.

SpongeBob wrote:

CarlJung wrote:Lets look at it from another perspective. You don't improve your rank. You improve your skill. Rank is a by-product of skill. That way, you can study in order to improve your skill.

Well, my point was that there's not really a difference between those two perspectives. Skill is reflected in rank and vice versa. So if you say you want to improve your skill, you can as well say you want to get your rank up.

And if you say 'I want to improve my skill but I do not really care about my rank' then that might sound nice, but imo it does not make much sense.

Well, you can learn things without increase in rank.
And you can increase in rank without learning new stuff...
I know, I've done both.

If you equate these two, then you will stop studying and learning when you reach a saturation point at which your rank does not improve much. And you WILL reach such point, everybody does. According to some people here, you will then not only stop studying the game, but stop enjoying it as well, and thus stop playing it. Which is a pity... And this is all because you chose to motivate yourself with a shiny little number by your name. To me that means that you do not really enjoy the game, but enjoy the chase after the next higher rank. And this makes the game you play meaningless, might as well be chess or renju or tic-tac-toe.

Wise people don't do that.

Bantari wrote:To me that means that you do not really enjoy the game, but enjoy the chase after the next higher rank. And this makes the game you play meaningless, might as well be chess or renju or tic-tac-toe.

Whatever rocks your boat, friend.

Bantari wrote:
Well, you can learn things without increase in rank.
And you can increase in rank without learning new stuff...
I know, I've done both.
...

The thing is, to me it seems difficult to have confidence that you are really learning new things if it is not reflected in your rank.

Let's say that I didn't know anything about sabaki. Then I read some material on sabaki, and study up on the "right way" to play in certain situations.

And after that study, it doesn't affect the results of any of my games.

I have to wonder at that point, did I really learn anything? Maybe I misunderstood this new thing that I thought that I had learned.

If I have truly come to know something better, shouldn't I win more against the same level of people because of it?

If not, it makes me wonder if I am really learning anything at all.

After all, if I won just as much before I "learned" X, then is what I have learned about X really useful to the game? I must have not learned it properly.

Kirby wrote:The thing is, to me it seems difficult to have confidence that you are really learning new things if it is not reflected in your rank.

Let's say that I didn't know anything about sabaki. Then I read some material on sabaki, and study up on the "right way" to play in certain situations.

And after that study, it doesn't affect the results of any of my games.

I have to wonder at that point, did I really learn anything? Maybe I misunderstood this new thing that I thought that I had learned.

If I have truly come to know something better, shouldn't I win more against the same level of people because of it?

If not, it makes me wonder if I am really learning anything at all.

After all, if I won just as much before I "learned" X, then is what I have learned about X really useful to the game? I must have not learned it properly.

Looked at a different way: Did you enjoy learning about Sabaki? Has it added an element of fun that wasn't there before into invading people's territories? Do you feel you have some fun tricks up your sleeves to play when you feel like it?

If so, who cares if you win more - you're making your Go games into richer experiences

topazg wrote:Looked at a different way: Did you enjoy learning about Sabaki? Has it added an element of fun that wasn't there before into invading people's territories? Do you feel you have some fun tricks up your sleeves to play when you feel like it?

If so, who cares if you win more - you're making your Go games into richer experiences

It's a pretty convincing point... I still have to wonder if I truly learned anything in the first place... But I suppose that, even if I hadn't really learned anything, I might have more fun in my ignorance.

Kirby wrote:It's a pretty convincing point... I still have to wonder if I truly learned anything in the first place... But I suppose that, even if I hadn't really learned anything, I might have more fun in my ignorance.

And that feels like a pretty big success to me That's how I've been playing Go for the last 3 years, and some of it seems to have made a difference (not sure which bits, but that's part of the fun too - it's like playing mastermind and never knowing which of your guesses are the black pegs - eventually you get there!)

topazg wrote:
And that feels like a pretty big success to me That's how I've been playing Go for the last 3 years, and some of it seems to have made a difference (not sure which bits, but that's part of the fun too - it's like playing mastermind and never knowing which of your guesses are the black pegs - eventually you get there!)

Yes, I agree. Even as the original poster of this thread, I have to admit that it is often fun to study. Part of me feels some satisfaction with that alone, I think. I particularly enjoy go problems. It is very satisfying to find and be sure of the solution to a problem.

The other part of me really hates to lose, and forgets this sometimes, I think.

A question for those of you who feel you are overly concerned about rank -- Do you have any competitive hobbies other than go? And if you do, do you have comparable issues to "rank obsession"?

Personally, I enjoy playing tennis and golf when I can, however my approach to them is similar to my approach to go -- I enjoy playing, and want to improve (in fact, have even at times paid for lessons in both), however I do not worry about rigorous mathematical tracking of my progress (even though both have systems available to do so). For instance, if you are a golfer, do you track your own handicap and update it after every round, or do you just look at your score and decide whether or not you're happy with how you played? If you're in the first group, it may point to a larger issue (if you even consider it an issue!), and perhaps it is something about how you personally approach activities you are involved in. If you're like me and in that second group -- what is it that makes go different from your other hobbies? How could you make your approach to go similar to your approach to other tasks (Whatever they may be, I just used golf as a personal example).

I would imagine that many people who don't necessarily maintain the same concern with progress tracking in other hobbies do have this concern with go. I would venture a guess it's related to 3 factors:

1: The tracking is generally done automatically by a third party, so it takes less effort (would you track your rank so closely if you had to calculate it yourself after every game?).

2: Go has a built in handicap system where your progress directly affects the play / scoring of the game (to this end, with my original example I would predict more people track their golf handicap than tennis rating).

3: The culture of the community-- the more rank-obsessed people there are, the more it drives other people to rank obsession (Though this is almost a tautology, since keeping close track of one's own rank virtually requires playing opponents who also have accurate ranks).

Mef wrote:1: The tracking is generally done automatically by a third party, so it takes less effort (would you track your rank so closely if you had to calculate it yourself after every game?).

That's an excellent point.

I would add another question : do you also obsess about your irl rank, or only the various online ones ?

Mef makes a very good point. I think the automatic tracking systems available in Go can sometimes make it much more stressful on a competitive person like me than other hobbies of mine where my progress can not be tracked quite so closely. Back when I played AoE3, which also had automatic rank-keeping, I felt the same pressure. I like being ultra-competitive, but I do feel pressured by my rank a little too much.

Kirby wrote:

Bantari wrote:
Well, you can learn things without increase in rank.
And you can increase in rank without learning new stuff...
I know, I've done both.
...

The thing is, to me it seems difficult to have confidence that you are really learning new things if it is not reflected in your rank.

No offense, but...

Judging by people I have taught/worked with, in Go and other disciplines, this constant need to visible validation stems from the lack of inner strength and self-confidence. Its like the pupil who constantly needs to get praised by the teacher and loses interest in learning when the praise does not come soon enough... We all feel good when somebody pats us on the heads and says 'Good boy/girl'. Its the warm fuzzy feeling, rolling in puppies, and all that... Its all nice, but I don't think its a good candidate for your main motivator.

Examples? Sure:
1) I can gain at least 2 stones by playing in a different club (yes, this is how messed up the ranks are, which is another reason not to take them seriously). I remember, as a 4d I once played in another club with a guy who was 1d - and gave him 9 handi and beat him. So I made progress... I was 9d!! Yuppie!
2) I can lose or gain rank by switching servers (or countries, or whatever)
3) Look at all the escapers out there - I bet that the main motivator for their escaping is tied to too much worry about their rank.
etc...

There is another side to your statement above. And it is: What makes Go so inferior to other stuff in your mind?
Consider other disciplines. You learn math, there is no rank in math, do you still know you are learning? Same with almost everything you learn, including languages, cooking, manners, etc. Sure, there is some validation, but no rank. In Go there is also validation which is separate from rank if you look for it.

Why do you so desperately need rank in Go to have confidence, while I assume you can learn just fine without rank... everything else?
Think about it.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Worrying about rank makes sense for pros. They get paid and invited to events based on rank.
It also makes sense for some amateurs... Like Jasiek explained - rank is important to him because it might let him play in certain events which he would like to play in (the Supergroup of EC for example) - and I can sort-of feel it in his case. But, from what I understand, even he would put learning ahead of Rank as a motivator, and probably would not equate rank to skill (correct me if I am wrong, Robert.)

For a casual amateur playing on KGS, I'd say rank is not that important.
But it is what you make of it. Your slave? Or your master?
You decide.