Page 3 of 4
Re: How many times did you "stall" in your learning?
Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2011 8:56 am
by jts
entropi wrote:When you read Kageyama or other theory books, what happens at kyu level is the following:
So you're saying that you would have better games on Tygem if you gave your opponent bigger corners, pushed him away from your thickness, took gote to make your groups safe instead of launching splitting attacks, and didn't bother trying to use your thickness to make a moyo?
Further, even though this were a valid critique of some books on the opening, I can't see it applying to Kageyama. Taking the first chapter alone (ladders and nets) seriously will hugely improve your fighting strength, which is why Kageyama stresses them so heavily. Ladders and nets are the first techniques most beginners learn, but they never bother to master them.
SoDesuNe wrote:I read the book twice and all I can say is, the chapter about nets and ladders is fine. The rest is just jibber-jabber.
Not jibber-jabber! Anything but that!
Re: How many times did you "stall" in your learning?
Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2011 1:03 pm
by entropi
jts wrote:entropi wrote:When you read Kageyama or other theory books, what happens at kyu level is the following:
So you're saying that you would have better games on Tygem if you gave your opponent bigger corners, pushed him away from your thickness, took gote to make your groups safe instead of launching splitting attacks, and didn't bother trying to use your thickness to make a moyo?
What I am saying is, it is better to spend your time on exercising fighting skills (maybe tsumego, maybe analyzing/memorizing pro games, maybe... whatever) rather than on reading theory books.
As kyu players we can discuss for hours whether chinese formation is suited against orthodox opening or where kobayashi formation has weaknesses, etc. But as soon as a dan player makes a "for us obviously wrong" move against kobayashi formation, all the theory becomes silent and we are alone with our fighting skills.
That is of course not to say that you should not read theory. If you enjoy it and study it as part of Go culture (like reading the life story of Shusaku), nobody can have anything against it. But do not expect much improvement from it, at least at kyu level.
jts wrote:Further, even though this were a valid critique of some books on the opening, I can't see it applying to Kageyama. Taking the first chapter alone (ladders and nets) seriously will hugely improve your fighting strength, which is why Kageyama stresses them so heavily. Ladders and nets are the first techniques most beginners learn, but they never bother to master them.
I refer to theory book, not specificly to Kageyama. Indeed Kageyama has some nice chapters too, even though I find to book way overrated.
Re: How many times did you "stall" in your learning?
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:32 am
by flOvermind
SoDesuNe wrote:I'm with the latter : D I read the book twice and all I can say is, the chapter about nets and ladders is fine. The rest is just jibber-jabber. But... that's my personal opinion and a lot of players - interesting enough, a lot of stronger players - will say the opposite.
(emphasis mine)
By "stronger players", you mean "stronger than you"? Wouldn't that mean that these stronger players see something in the book that you don't?
It could of course also mean that the book is simply aimed at stronger (dan?) players. The kyu-level explanations are a bit rare, and there are lots of examples of high-dan-level mistakes in the book, even though Kageyama makes it sound as if they were obvious
Re: How many times did you "stall" in your learning?
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:46 am
by p2501
flOvermind wrote:SoDesuNe wrote:I'm with the latter : D I read the book twice and all I can say is, the chapter about nets and ladders is fine. The rest is just jibber-jabber. But... that's my personal opinion and a lot of players - interesting enough, a lot of stronger players - will say the opposite.
(emphasis mine)
By "stronger players", you mean "stronger than you"? Wouldn't that mean that these stronger players see something in the book that you don't?
It could of course also mean that the book is simply aimed at stronger (dan?) players. The kyu-level explanations are a bit rare, and there are lots of examples of high-dan-level mistakes in the book, even though Kageyama makes it sound as if they were obvious
I read it at 18kyuish and was very happy with the advice. I got most to all tsumego wrong, but the guidance offered by the presented principles was invaluable. That is not to say that the book is aimed at DDK, but it still can provide more than enough. Later when you are stronger and read it again you get more out of it than the first time...
Re: How many times did you "stall" in your learning?
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:28 am
by SoDesuNe
flOvermind wrote:SoDesuNe wrote:I'm with the latter : D I read the book twice and all I can say is, the chapter about nets and ladders is fine. The rest is just jibber-jabber. But... that's my personal opinion and a lot of players - interesting enough, a lot of stronger players - will say the opposite.
(emphasis mine)
By "stronger players", you mean "stronger than you"? Wouldn't that mean that these stronger players see something in the book that you don't? :P
Obviously for some players there has to be some sense in it, otherwise there would be no dispute, right? : D
But if you are aiming at: Stronger players see something in this book, so, because they are stronger, they are right - this doesn't work for me.
Furthermore it seems that a lot of the stronger players, who are fond of this book, read and liked it when there were Kyus themselves. So... I don't know.
A little bit more off: I read Kageyama's "Secrets of Handicap Go" aswell and uhh... yeah, for me it almost fits in the same category as "Lessons in the fundamentals of Go". So, I think I really can't stand his style of writing or what he tries to sell as teaching.
Re: How many times did you "stall" in your learning?
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:58 am
by Bill Spight
entropi wrote:When you read Kageyama or other theory books, what happens at kyu level is the following:
You go to tygem, play a random guy at your level.
You play out some well known joseki at one corner, he gets the small corner you get strength.
You are better off because his corner is too small compared to your outside influence. At least that's what the theory says.
Then the guy plays very close to your wall. Wonderful, he plays wrong moves and asks for being punished. Attack from the other side, push him towards your thick wall. That's what theory says.
Then he escapes with his stone and on top of that pincers your attacking stone. Super, he overplays, he will end up with two weak groups to run while you have just one in the middle. You are better off, that's what the theory says.
He manages to live with both groups or even connect them. If you are lucky your single weak group survives. You end up with 2 useless walls which merely consists of dame stones bringing you no points.
But nevermind, now you are even stronger outside, build a moyo invite your opponent to invade and kill him. That's what the theory says.
He invades and .... he invades. You have yet another group consisting of dame stones.
Now he has 5 separate groups on board. The theory says "if you have 6 groups one of them is likely to die". So you are almost sure to win. Then guess what happens...
Moral of the story : Don't give theory too much credit until you have enough fighting strength to base it, i.e. until you are already at dan level.
This reminds me of a game I played as White years ago. In the early going my opponent got territory and I got a wall. In the early middle game I chased him towards my wall and, well, he killed my wall. But hey! I got a second wall. The middle game fighting continued, and he killed that one, too. But that was it. My third wall lived and I won by 5 pts.
IMNSHO, advice to ignore theory until you are strong is hogwash. Everybody is different, of course. There are many paths up the mountain. My own view is to take a balanced approach.
Re: How many times did you "stall" in your learning?
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 2:07 am
by entropi
Bill Spight wrote:entropi wrote:When you read Kageyama or other theory books, what happens at kyu level is the following:
You go to tygem, play a random guy at your level.
You play out some well known joseki at one corner, he gets the small corner you get strength.
You are better off because his corner is too small compared to your outside influence. At least that's what the theory says.
Then the guy plays very close to your wall. Wonderful, he plays wrong moves and asks for being punished. Attack from the other side, push him towards your thick wall. That's what theory says.
Then he escapes with his stone and on top of that pincers your attacking stone. Super, he overplays, he will end up with two weak groups to run while you have just one in the middle. You are better off, that's what the theory says.
He manages to live with both groups or even connect them. If you are lucky your single weak group survives. You end up with 2 useless walls which merely consists of dame stones bringing you no points.
But nevermind, now you are even stronger outside, build a moyo invite your opponent to invade and kill him. That's what the theory says.
He invades and .... he invades. You have yet another group consisting of dame stones.
Now he has 5 separate groups on board. The theory says "if you have 6 groups one of them is likely to die". So you are almost sure to win. Then guess what happens...
Moral of the story : Don't give theory too much credit until you have enough fighting strength to base it, i.e. until you are already at dan level.
This reminds me of a game I played as White years ago. In the early going my opponent got territory and I got a wall. In the early middle game I chased him towards my wall and, well, he killed my wall. But hey! I got a second wall. The middle game fighting continued, and he killed that one, too. But that was it. My third wall lived and I won by 5 pts.
IMNSHO, advice to ignore theory until you are strong is hogwash. Everybody is different, of course. There are many paths up the mountain. My own view is to take a balanced approach.
By saying "don't give too much credit..." I didn't mean "ignore...". But the weaker the player is, the less useful theory becomes. Meaning that the balance point shifts towards tactics.
For a ddk player, studying the strategic concepts of chinese opening is as useful as for a primary school pupil studying differential equations.
Maybe you don't see it at dan levels but at sdk levels, the style difference between kgs and tygem is striking. Very good sdk fighters at tygem are apparently totally ignorant about strategical concepts that westerners learn when they are ddk.
Re: How many times did you "stall" in your learning?
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 2:22 am
by p2501
entropi wrote:
By saying "don't give too much credit..." I didn't mean "ignore...". But the weaker the player is, the less useful theory becomes. Meaning that the balance point shifts towards tactics.
For a ddk player, studying the strategic concepts of chinese opening is as useful as for a primary school pupil studying differential equations.
Maybe you don't see it at dan levels but at sdk levels, the style difference between kgs and tygem is striking. Very good sdk fighters at tygem are apparently totally ignorant about strategical concepts that westerners learn when they are ddk.
Well, strategic concepts of the chinese opening and fundamentals like staying away from thickness are really apples and oranges.
In my opinion these fundamentals benefit ddk greatly. Much like proverbs, they are not to be followed blindly, but it is good practice to keep them in mind while searching for the best next move. A ddk maybe not as able as a dan player to utilize them, bet that does not render them useless. Fighting/reading strength as theory knowledge and everything else are all variables that combined from the overall strength. Reading strength is a little more important I guess, as it scales with everything else. But that doesn't make theory knowledge useless.
Re: How many times did you "stall" in your learning?
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:50 am
by flOvermind
SoDesuNe wrote:But if you are aiming at: Stronger players see something in this book, so, because they are stronger, they are right - this doesn't work for me.
Not quite.
What I'm saying is the other way round: The players that say they got something valuable out of this book are stronger. So there seems to be at least a correlation between liking this book and being stronger. A possible explanation could be that the book contained some advice that, in hindsight, helped these players getting to the strength they are now.
But of course, we all know that correlation does not necessarily imply causation
Re: How many times did you "stall" in your learning?
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 5:33 am
by tapir
I found attitude much more important for improvement than knowledge. Kageyama tries to teach attitude, I believe this makes him look heavy handed or even offensive, as in his rant about people who never bother to read. But look, he makes no derisive remarks about you, when you fail to read his examples, but the emphasis is, that you should at least try. In the long run there isn't a shortcut.
I personally was most impressed with his review of his own masterpiece in the end. The willingness to criticize heavily his masterpiece, his best game, showed me not only that professionals make mistakes as well, but is a display of the necessary attitude in itself. How many of us prefer to review their won games, not their lost ones? Or to analyze the opponents mistakes and not their own?
Re: How many times did you "stall" in your learning?
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 6:38 am
by SoDesuNe
tapir wrote:But look, he makes no derisive remarks about you, when you fail to read his examples, but the emphasis is, that you should at least try.
"Anyone who cannot solve it at all has a doubtful future." ; )
flOvermind
I will definitely give the book a new reading when I make Shodan (at least on KGS), just to see, if it really makes any difference.
Re: How many times did you "stall" in your learning?
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 8:02 am
by Bill Spight
entropi wrote:By saying "don't give too much credit..." I didn't mean "ignore...". But the weaker the player is, the less useful theory becomes. Meaning that the balance point shifts towards tactics.
I agree, if we are talking 20+ kyu. If you don't see snapbacks, your game can fall apart at any time.
For a ddk player, studying the strategic concepts of chinese opening is as useful as for a primary school pupil studying differential equations.
The strategy of the chinese opening is not that advanced. And there are plenty of more general strategic concepts to learn.
Maybe you don't see it at dan levels but at sdk levels, the style difference between kgs and tygem is striking. Very good sdk fighters at tygem are apparently totally ignorant about strategical concepts that westerners learn when they are ddk.
When I was learning go in Japan, there were plenty of dan players whose strategy sucked. OC, they were good fighters.
That was less the case in the West, because, without good competition, the route to dan level involved book learning for most people.
Re: How many times did you "stall" in your learning?
Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 11:15 pm
by shapenaji
SoDesuNe wrote:[
"Anyone who cannot solve it at all has a doubtful future." ; )
Well, the answer is simple then
Don't have a doubtful future.
Re: How many times did you "stall" in your learning?
Posted: Sat Nov 12, 2011 7:27 am
by Signifier
I find Kageyama's writing style to be hilarious, but I agree, I don't gain as much from him (right now) as other books or studying.
"Become strong before worrying about theory." But how does one become strong?
Re: How many times did you "stall" in your learning?
Posted: Sat Nov 12, 2011 8:08 am
by Mef
Signifier wrote:I find Kageyama's writing style to be hilarious, but I agree, I don't gain as much from him (right now) as other books or studying.
"Become strong before worrying about theory." But how does one become strong?
The same way you get to Carnegie Hall.... (=