Life In 19x19

oren wrote:

RobertJasiek wrote:In Japanese books by Takemiya, he explains...

How would you know if you couldn't read it?

1) I could, of course, read the diagrams and move number / diagram number related references to diagrams (such as move sequences in the text).

2) The texts are sparse. The books are teaching only / almost exclusively by examples. For such books, it is particularly easy to get almost all of the contents regardless of not being able to read the pure text bits.

3) When I starting learning from diagrams of Asian books as a 5k, I had problems because then I still had no confidence in distingushing "good for Black", "slightly better for Black", "equal" etc. positions. Already ca. 4 months later, as a 1k, I had almost overcome this problem. Therefore, it is much easier now to concentrate on finding out which contents the author appears to teach by a move sequence or a series of move sequence diagrams.

RobertJasiek wrote:3) When I starting learning from diagrams of Asian books as a 5k, I had problems because then I still had no confidence in distingushing "good for Black", "slightly better for Black", "equal" etc. positions. Already ca. 4 months later, as a 1k, I had almost overcome this problem. Therefore, it is much easier now to concentrate on finding out which contents the author appears to teach by a move sequence or a series of move sequence diagrams.

I think you may still be overestimating your ability of what you're getting out of diagrams without explanations.

oren wrote:I think you may still be overestimating your ability of what you're getting out of diagrams without explanations.

Probably I get something that the author did not intend to teach and do not get something else that the author wants to teach:)

RobertJasiek wrote:Probably I get something that the author did not intend to teach and do not get something else that the author wants to teach:)

Right, you're not commenting on the book but what you can come up with on your own. Since you're much weaker than the author, you won't get as much out of it.

oren wrote:Since you're much weaker than the author, you won't get as much out of it.

LOL. You are implying a book quality many times higher than is typically found! For the usual rather low quality relative to what a strong (pro) author could be able to teach (according to our dreams of principally possible pro teaching ability), it is reasonably easy to get much of what is taught from reading the diagrams but not the text. (Occasionally, this may happen to be not the case. But usually it is straightforward to interpret and learn from a diagram-heavy book by only their diagrams.)

RobertJasiek wrote:

hyperpape wrote:the evidence is that players stronger than you do not win on 3H against strong professionals.

I know.

This says nothing about my skill to use handicap stones well in real world games.

But more to the point: if you find some 9p professionals (or lower ranks of known 9p strength) who want to play serious handicap games against me during, say, the next European Go Congress (except during the main and 13x13 tournaments, which I would not skip for that purpose), then, of course, I am prepared to beat them! (That is, to find out who is right:) )

So would your claim be that you have the strength of someone who would need 4 handicap stones, but you believe that your ability to use those stones is such that you would not need them?

hyperpape wrote:So would your claim be

My claim is that I have a solid understanding of how to use handicap stones. (Even when taking or giving H9 against 130 komi:) Have you tried my little invention? It is good for practising dragon kills without being so unnatural as the fill all the first lines except 1-1 game. A necessary skill for cosmic go!)

robert: how many professional players have you played serious money game?
i have many many times.
i feel that i can win in 3 stone and lose....
and they offer 4 stone...and i still lose.
finally they offer 5 stone...but that is also hard to win..

you have not seen strong players yet.

This thread is starting to go way off topic.
It's not about whether RJ's games or skills is comparable to Takemiya's Cosmic Go or to other pros.
It's about offering suggestions for material which will help the starter of the thread understand Takemiya's style of play.
RJ suggests that his games may be useful and that is his suggestion.
Attacking his suggestion is not useful to the starter of the thread.
Why don't we offer more suggestions which are constructive rather than controversial and keep within the spirit of the forum rules.
Of course if you want to continue the tangent discussion, you are welcome to start a new thread as long as we stay away from personal attacks and keep within the spirit of the forum rules.

To disagree, RJ asserted facts from a book about Cosmic Go that he could not understand. We don't need a discussion on it, but it has to be stated after his opinions on the book, so people don't give them too much credence.

RJ is offering his understanding of Japanese books by Takemiya regarding Cosmic Go based on "contents the author appears to teach by a move sequence or a series of move sequence diagrams."

It is not fair to say that just because you don't understand the language, you can't gain some understanding from just the diagrams within Asian go books.

Of course if you can read Japanese and have read books by Takemiya regarding Cosmic Go, do by all means give us your understanding of Takemiya's thoughts which you have garnished from his explanations so we can enjoy a fuller picture of Takemiya's Cosmic Go.

You don't necessarily have to be fluent to understand most of the comments in a go book.

I have "Le go cosmique" in French, and notwithstanding the fact that I only studied French for two years over 20 years ago and was a rather indifferent student, I have no problem understanding the vast majority of the comments, e.g.:

"Le coup 49 est joue au point 5-5. Dans les livres de joseki, vous ne le trouverez jamais. Mais j'ai pense que ce coup est ici le meilleur pour exprimer mes ambitions au centre."

If you have GoGOD, JF has a good article called "Takemiya's Fuseki Ideas" which can be found in the section >> Essays on famous go players >> Big pro, little pro.

I'll quote the first paragraph to show what it's about.

Among the many books published on Takemiya's style in Japanese is a three-volume set called Takemiya Igo Waarudo (Takemiya's Go World). Volume 1 is subtitled Uchu-ryu Kihon Chishiki (Basic Knowledge for the Cosmic Style). Volume 2 is Uchu-ryu Daisakusen (Important Strategies in the Cosmic Style). Volume 3 is Uchu-ryu Kessaku-sen (Selection of Cosmic Style Masterpieces). The following is a digest of their main ideas. The books were written by Takemiya, and published by the Nihon Kiin in 1989. The ISBN number of Volume 1 is 4-8182-0246-0 C2376. Please refer to these volumes for full details and diagrams, but what follows may be a useful summary of his main themes.

A version of this article was once available at the now defunct msoworld mindzine site. Unfortunately I have no idea how to find a version of this even via web.archive.org

After reading the article, one suggestion I find immediately applicable is to do a lot of tsumego which deal with the sides rather than the corners if you plan to play cosmic style go.

Furthermore, I'd summarize the main point I got from the article in my own words as follows:

Takemiya doesn't purposely makes large moyos to win. Rather he wins by emphasizing strong fighting with a natural thick style which develops into the center and leads to the making of moyos naturally.

oren wrote:RJ asserted facts from a book about Cosmic Go that he could not understand.

1) Two books.

2) Do not make arbitrary claims about what I understand.

3) tchan001, continued OT discussion in a new thread is a good idea.

RobertJasiek wrote:

oren wrote:RJ asserted facts from a book about Cosmic Go that he could not understand.

1) Two books.

2) Do not make arbitrary claims about what I understand.

3) tchan001, continued OT discussion in a new thread is a good idea.

1) a book two book same difference.
2) it is not arbitary but based on you skill which direct reflect your knowledge of go.
3) everything you post on L19 is an advertisment of your worthless books. it is not a discussion.