Life In 19x19

He announced that after losing an exhibition game to Ke Jie. I would say he was very comprehensively beaten in that game. Ke Jie's opening was like a ruthless robot (following Fine Art's suggestions pretty closely, including some strange-looking second-line moves) while Lee Sedol apparently were not familiar with AI plays.

Yes, I thought the game was rather apt as a retirement game, with the younger generation playing the new AI style (kick and 2nd line invasion) beating the old guard playing what we used to think was a good enough answer to these once unfamiliar moves. I even seem to recall some thread here about what does white do if black separates the 2nd line invasion in the same shape from an AlphaGo game and Ke Jie did exactly what I thought with the jump and the 3rd line extend/armpit hit (same idea as this pre-AI middlegame joseki from 3-4).

Recap from the article below ([1])... When asked about this year's plan's, he noted that:

올해는 정말 느낌이 다르다. 바둑을 6살 때 시작했고, 1995년에 입단을 했다. 승부사로서 활약은 올해가 마지막인 것 같다. 그래서 더욱 커제9단과의 대국이 의미가 있지 않았나 싶다

Roughly translated:

This year feels really different. I started playing go when I was 6, and in 1995 I became a pro. It looks like this year is the last year that I'll be active as a competitor. On top of that, more and more, it seems that my matches with Ke Jie 9d haven't had any meaning.

In my opinion, Lee Sedol has always been a bit dramatic and unpredictable when it comes to his career, but it seems like a good time to stop. He's had a very good run, and has had a commendable career. Bravo!

[1] http://cyberoro.com/news/news_view.oro? ... num=525211

Anyone got a link to the kifu?

go4go has a record. It requires registration, but it's free.

macelee wrote:Ke Jie's opening was like a ruthless robot (following Fine Art's suggestions pretty closely, including some strange-looking second-line moves)

He was rumoured to have personal access to Fine Art, wasn't he? I guess humans can learn to do many things efficiently, not just playing go but also predicting a certain player's moves.

Thanks, Kirby, for that sgf.
Ke Jie does play very strangely and he is the example of a pro taking up the AI style of play.
I see Lee Sedol as someone who doesn't, and in a way I'm also glad to see those people!

I wish Lee Sedol the best in his life, he's had a wonderful, wonderful career and I think he'll be remembered for a while, mostly for his interesting Go playing style. Perhaps also for his famous Broken Ladder game.

Hopefully he'll write another book of commented games, now!

macelee wrote:He announced that after losing an exhibition game to Ke Jie. I would say he was very comprehensively beaten in that game. Ke Jie's opening was like a ruthless robot (following Fine Art's suggestions pretty closely, including some strange-looking second-line moves) while Lee Sedol apparently were not familiar with AI plays.

I see only one move of Ke Jie that may qualify as "strange looking", the O2 move (instead of the more standard looking O3) at move 34. Were there other strange moves highlighted in pro comments maybe?

E3 wasn't on LZ's radar, but the win rate after the joseki is complete is comparable anyway. But the more Lee Sedol plays the more Leelaz hates his position.

I wonder why the AI style is considered aesthetically less pleasing than the conventional human style. Is it objective aesthetics? Or is it pure conventionalism? I think that the "new fuseki" by Go Seigen was similarly received as ugly or brutal, with its too symmetrical opening moves at the expense of the beautifully skewed 3-4's.

Knotwilg wrote:I wonder why the AI style is considered aesthetically less pleasing than the conventional human style. Is it objective aesthetics? Or is it pure conventionalism? I think that the "new fuseki" by Go Seigen was similarly received as ugly or brutal, with its too symmetrical opening moves at the expense of the beautifully skewed 3-4's.

It's purely subjective, of course.
And New Fuseki is uglier than Old Fuseki.

The old games flow so beautifully. Aaah... Peace and quiet, 3-4 fun!

New Fuseki wants to move so quickly across the board. Take it easy, there, tiger!


Well. It's a matter of conventionalism, I suppose. Why do we cringe when we see an empty triangle? Doesn't it look so ugly? Is it ugly because we've associated it with less liberties etc...? Has it always been ugly?

Knotwilg wrote:I wonder why the AI style is considered aesthetically less pleasing than the conventional human style. Is it objective aesthetics? Or is it pure conventionalism? I think that the "new fuseki" by Go Seigen was similarly received as ugly or brutal, with its too symmetrical opening moves at the expense of the beautifully skewed 3-4's.

I think the matter is quite arbitrary. However, the same process as you described - where people get accustomed to formations produced by bots and find them more harmonious - may occur in this case as well. I have my own doubts about this, as I find AI moves to be quite erratic and lacking said harmony. When humans play, the stones seem to flow, the formations are built; when bots play, the formations emerge as if from vast depths of the goban.

yakcyll wrote:

Knotwilg wrote:I wonder why the AI style is considered aesthetically less pleasing than the conventional human style. Is it objective aesthetics? Or is it pure conventionalism? I think that the "new fuseki" by Go Seigen was similarly received as ugly or brutal, with its too symmetrical opening moves at the expense of the beautifully skewed 3-4's.

I think the matter is quite arbitrary. However, the same process as you described - where people get accustomed to formations produced by bots and find them more harmonious - may occur in this case as well. I have my own doubts about this, as I find AI moves to be quite erratic and lacking said harmony. When humans play, the stones seem to flow, the formations are built; when bots play, the formations emerge as if from vast depths of the goban.

Hm, yes. It probably also has something to do with understanding the moves. When we see pros play a move, we don't understand half of what that move is doing, but most of the time we have some idea, we can see what it does.
With bots, you often stare at the board and go like: 'huh?'

It's so alien. And then that move comes into play dozens of moves later and you see why it was played.
It's unnatural to us. Most of us don't get it. Not that we get professional moves, either, but we believe we do, and that's what makes it beautiful

yakcyll wrote:

Knotwilg wrote:I wonder why the AI style is considered aesthetically less pleasing than the conventional human style. Is it objective aesthetics? Or is it pure conventionalism? I think that the "new fuseki" by Go Seigen was similarly received as ugly or brutal, with its too symmetrical opening moves at the expense of the beautifully skewed 3-4's.

I think the matter is quite arbitrary. However, the same process as you described - where people get accustomed to formations produced by bots and find them more harmonious - may occur in this case as well. I have my own doubts about this, as I find AI moves to be quite erratic and lacking said harmony. When humans play, the stones seem to flow, the formations are built; when bots play, the formations emerge as if from vast depths of the goban.

I don't have that experience. I've found the bots play surprisingly intuitive. Sure, there has been a paradigm shift, with more tenuki, even more "coners; sides; centre", more territory, less influence ... But not the kind of constant "ear reddening moves" I had expected. In fact, I have found bot play easier to interpret than games of Go Seigen or Lee Sedol