Life In 19x19

you are interested in professionals who play a solid game with the intention to win in the endgame? (Or do they all do that to a certain degree?)

Lee Changho, definitely.

Kobayashi Koichi might be an interesting one, he played so territorially, I could see a lot of his games being won in the endgame.

Otake Hideo and Ishida Yoshio may be good choices.

Takagawa Kaku for good old fashioned Japanese honte.

Sakata Eio in 'Killer of Go' wrote:Among us professionals, the playing style of the late Takagawa Kaku was representative of this slow but steady method. Takagawa absolutely refused to resort to unsound play, and perfected the art of the long, drawn-out battle. In general, go differs from chess in that go is a game in which this kind of marathon-style strategy is appropriate.

For commented games of his I'd recommend John Fairbairn's "Final Summit" which covers a ten-game match of his against Go Seigen. I've not even got/read it myself yet (though I mean to one day), but if it's anything like his book Kamakura (Go vs Kitani) it will be excellent.

Maybe Yasui Chitoku?
http://tchan001.wordpress.com/2011/10/1 ... 4-volumes/

In addition to the good suggestions so far, consider Park Younghun as a modern player with this style. Lee Changho also exemplified this sort of play, but his games from the 90s and early 2000s would be better for what you want to study. Since most young pros these days have studied Lee's games extensively, Lee tried to change his style to remain competitive and he fights more now.

tapir wrote:you are interested in professionals who play a solid game with the intention to win in the endgame? (Or do they all do that to a certain degree?)

I am interested in why are you interested in such games/players? Personally I have always liked Takagawa (at least the image that I have of him, I never met him). However, I find it difficult to study his games; they are too subtle for me to understand.

ez4u wrote:

tapir wrote:you are interested in professionals who play a solid game with the intention to win in the endgame? (Or do they all do that to a certain degree?)

I am interested in why are you interested in such games/players? Personally I have always liked Takagawa (at least the image that I have of him, I never met him). However, I find it difficult to study his games; they are too subtle for me to understand.

Takagawa (or his ghost-writer) wrote very clearly, IMO. His Igo Reader ( 高川囲碁読本 ) in 5 vols. is aimed a kyu players, but it reveals a logical approach to the game. His Fuseki Jiten does, as well. I think that both sets of books are consistent with an approach that aims to gain and then preserve small advantages.

Bill Spight wrote:

ez4u wrote:

tapir wrote:you are interested in professionals who play a solid game with the intention to win in the endgame? (Or do they all do that to a certain degree?)

I am interested in why are you interested in such games/players? Personally I have always liked Takagawa (at least the image that I have of him, I never met him). However, I find it difficult to study his games; they are too subtle for me to understand.

Takagawa (or his ghost-writer) wrote very clearly, IMO. His Igo Reader ( 高川囲碁読本 ) in 5 vols. is aimed a kyu players, but it reveals a logical approach to the game. His Fuseki Jiten does, as well. I think that both sets of books are consistent with an approach that aims to gain and then preserve small advantages.

Sure, but applying those ideas requires an ability to confidently assess whether you have a small advantage versus, say, a big disadvantage. In addition, understanding when a calm play "here" is good enough, versus all those other choices there and over there, is very hard to grasp IMHO. This is particularly so in studying pro game records where you do not even know what were the other plays that he considered and rejected.

ez4u wrote:

tapir wrote:you are interested in professionals who play a solid game with the intention to win in the endgame? (Or do they all do that to a certain degree?)

I am interested in why are you interested in such games/players? Personally I have always liked Takagawa (at least the image that I have of him, I never met him). However, I find it difficult to study his games; they are too subtle for me to understand.

I started playing at OGS again, and I found I have enough time to count after each move on a turn based server. Also I was puzzled by a comment by Antti on his blog "endgame is the most fun part of the game". I want to have fun in the endgame too. Frequently I find myself winning games because the opponents lacks patience and tries to "optimize" where not warranted (at my level amateurs invariably play the "strongest resistance" move when they can't read the sequence, it is really amazing), I lost many games too where I tried to crush the opponent instead to go the long way. What better way to learn patience and stamina than to fight games until the end?

Lee Changho was on my list already before I asked, for obvious reasons Thanks for all suggestions. Are there Chinese players to suggest as well?

tapir wrote:Also I was puzzled by a comment by Antti on his blog "endgame is the most fun part of the game". I want to have fun in the endgame too.

It is indeed a fun feeling to win a game you were 10 points behind in the middle game after your opponents submits and lets you win the final "half" point ko as you have a surfeit of threats and then to make a defensive move inside his territory to prevent a 10-move long snapback sequence and then you win by half a point.

Takagawa (a positional judgement player) and the classics (in those times, the unlimited thinking times allowed good endgame).

Bill Spight wrote:Takagawa (or his ghost-writer) wrote very clearly

As clearly as dryly. But... I do not agree with "very clearly" for two reasons:

1) Hardly explicitly presented principles.

2) His ideas are over-simplifying. He pretends greater clarity than there is. IIRC, for example, he (besides lots of other Japanese pro authors) suggested the "Extend n+1 from a wall n high" but this is wrong too often. My explanation in Joseki 1 is right much more often.

However, I have seen only the (two?) English books of Takagawa. Maybe some of the not translated books were better?

ez4u wrote:

Bill Spight wrote:Takagawa (or his ghost-writer) wrote very clearly, IMO. His Igo Reader ( 高川囲碁読本 ) in 5 vols. is aimed a kyu players, but it reveals a logical approach to the game. His Fuseki Jiten does, as well. I think that both sets of books are consistent with an approach that aims to gain and then preserve small advantages.

Sure, but applying those ideas requires an ability to confidently assess whether you have a small advantage versus, say, a big disadvantage.

Quite so.

However, for those who wish to try such an approach, your judgment does improve from the exercise.

In addition, understanding when a calm play "here" is good enough, versus all those other choices there and over there, is very hard to grasp IMHO. This is particularly so in studying pro game records where you do not even know what were the other plays that he considered and rejected.

Indeed. I am reminded of a comment by Go Seigen about an opponent who was past his prime: "An old man who plays honte, honte is hard to beat."

Despite the fashion of fighting in professional go, I think the honte player has an advantage. If one player insists on provoking a fight it almost necessarily means making overplays or unreasonable moves. If your opponent is making honte and playing a solid game and you want to fight you have to make a move that tries for more than you are entitled to, i.e. an overplay, which requires a response from your opponent. Then the honte player has an opportunity to take advantage of your overplay. Of course this requires good positional judgment by the honte player. And this is one reason that faster time limits may lead to more fighting since it requires time to make the positional judgment and to determine how to take advantage of the overplay.

I just looked how many games I have in the database of the mentioned players. I guess I am busy for some years now. (Just Takagawa Kaku has >1100 and others many many more.)