Trying hard is a problem?

_________________
be immersed

It can be.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

I think what Charles may be getting at, and I think Magicwand (maybe?) has actually articulated in the past is that Kirby sometimes seems to be trying too hard with his moves, being overly complicated, trying to get more than deserved (greedy) and so on when the stronger player reviewing the game would quickly see an alternative simpler "normal" move than is better. However, it's a bit facile to tell Kirby to just play the simple good move, as it is only simple for them because they are stronger and their greater experience and intuition means the moves is simple and easy to see for them, but it's not for Kirby. So how can Kirby improve to play these moves? Probably the usual diet of playing and reviewing, studying pro games and some psychological training.

Good explanation, Uberdude.

Regarding psychological training, do you have experience in this? The other items you mentioned (playing, reviewing, going over pro games) are easy to understand, but what do you mean by this "psychological training"?

_________________
be immersed

I expect in some situations you will consider the good simple move but dismiss it for some reason. Perhaps you are angry with some previous perceived overplay from your opponent and want to punish him too much. Or you think you are behind so don't play the calm patient move. Or you panic in byo yomi and make retarded decisions. I'm probably not the best to tell you how to fix them as I'm pretty weak psychologically.

This is perhaps the typical 1 kyu error, IMX. "I knew I should play there, but I thought I would just play somewhere else instead" is one version. Many years ago someone explained that he got to 1 dan by realising that if he didn't have to play a move, he shouldn't. Which is a helpful explanation of "onus", I think. It suggests that a steadier style, minimalist on clever stuff, can also be a bit stronger.

The italics on "kyu" and "dan" are a nice touch.

_________________
be immersed

I am not sold on the general idea. It may make for a steadier style, but I think this mindset may also bring you to a more passive and slack style.

Being around the same level, I often find myself with the feeling that playing a solid shape move looks like the "bookstyle" play - the place I should play - but I can't find a good answer for my opponent if I played a much thinner move, or say a cut. I usually take the thinner path. My mindset is: first, I have to trust my reading, always; second, I will learn something if I'm punished, but with the more solid play I will be no wiser than before.

My point is - what is solid and what is slack? what is overplay and what is severe? Maybe if I try to focus on never playing overplays, I'll end up losing the severe moves as well - is it really good for my progress as a player? I see the situation as similar to the famous joseki advice - learn joseki, lose two stones - but isn't losing these two stones necessary to go further, and isn't playing clever stuff necessary to learn how to, and when not to, play clever stuff? In the end, don't you think it is all about better reading?

You are better players than I am, so I don't want to disregard your advice, but I would appreciate if you could lear up the confusion it gives me when I am faced to this type of situation in a game.

_________________
La victoire est un hasard, la défaite une nécessité.

Personally, I think we are looking for generalizations too much.

Play a game. Review it. Sometimes, maybe I tried to make things too complicated, and the simple way was better. Other times, maybe I needed to do some tesuji, but I missed the chance.

Anyway, game by game, case by case, it can be different. The tricky part is to recognize the better way in the review.

Personally, I often try to be too fancy. I have been told this many times. So I should think about that during the game and review.

IIRC, you are a bit more passive, I think, Jhyn. Maybe you can be aware of this, too.

Both passive and aggressive are correct some of the time. Case by case, we need to double check ourselves.

Just the opinion of some guy not playing much go these days.

_________________
be immersed

Since I'm actually looking at this site, I guess I'll post the last game I played.

I didn't really have time to play last week, so I didn't. But my car broke down on Saturday, so while I was waiting in the waiting room to get it checked out, I played a game. I guess it was the time of day, but it took some time to get someone to accept a game offer.

I played against KGS 6k, and gave 6 stones.



As you can see, I messed up in the middle, and had to give up some stones. Regrettably, I didn't think as deeply as I should have.

Anyway, I don't really have time to review. I'm just posting it for your entertainment.

_________________
be immersed

As you probably know, I am generally in the same camp. This question is an example, I think, of the exploitation vs. exploration dilemma. IMO, many kyu players, particularly SDKs, tend to err on the exploitation side, making plays that they think are right, without doing enough exploration. You can't make the right play if you never even consider it.



This is a question for dan players as well as kyus. Dan players have better judgement, though.



I don't think so. See below.

As for not making a play unless it is necessary, that advice makes me think of this kind of thing. From the SDK game here: viewtopic.php?p=206219#p206219

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm5 Joseki
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . O . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , 4 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , 7 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Black played joseki, but is unnecessary.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm9 Twin approach
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . O . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . 9 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , 4 . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . 8 . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

One possibility for is to approach the bottom right corner. In this variation is more efficient than the low extension.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm9 Facing enclosures
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . 3 . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Another possibility for is to enclose the bottom left corner. In this variation is an ideal extension on the bottom side. Note that after the right side temperature has dropped.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wcm12 Actual game
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . |
$$ | . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . 3 . . 5 . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

In the actual game, White got the extension on the bottom side, although the large knight's enclosure is thin, so the extension is not ideal.

The proverb about learning joseki and losing two stones has to do with making "correct" plays without exploring other possibilities -- which might also be joseki, or might be situational plays.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

OK, once you are 1 dan, you have to be concerned about further improvement. Possibly getting beyond 2 dan means dumping a whole set of ideas, and starting over. But that is improving when you are already an expert, and should know that complacency is not the way, either.



Definitely trust your reading. Definitely fight any kind of over-concentration.



Yes, you are putting your finger on it. In my days as a tournament player, I was happy that I generally got interesting gameplay out of openings that were by no means extreme. You can do that with a tenuki-amashi-sabaki based style, as well as with an influence-based style. So I didn't mind being on the thin side, which is anyway easier to practice with White in handicap games.



That style of "advice" is fairly treacherous. Playing book moves is risky in a different way from non-book play. To get to 3 dan, I guess, you need an opening repertoire which makes you ready for anything. In other words you have a mental map of joseki-space which you have edited into "know what I'm doing" and "here be dragons" and "just don't go there".



Not for amateurs, if they want "sparring". If the point is to get interesting gameplay which at least gives a context for the types of fighting and techniques that the pros play, reading may be decisive. But access to that sort of context and content is a kind of self-cultivation.



No one should play for safety when it will leave them definitely behind in the game. Well, that's too absolute, perhaps, but positional judgement should inform your idea of what is steady.

Right, along with the qualification. Loses with gote.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

I'm currently 5k on KGS. It's humbling whenever I see a game where someone around my level played a stronger opponent, and I have to recognize that yes, I really do make those kind of moves.

Indeed, my advice to Kirby about trying too hard and not playing simpler normal moves was targeted at Kirby based on reviewing his games. It's also possible to play too bookishly normal moves, for example that was my main comment on this recent game posted by Marcel 4k: viewtopic.php?p=205802#p205802. Like many aspects of go, there is a spectrum from too bookish to too novel/complicated, too thin to too thick, too passive to too aggressive and so on. Often if you are too far one way you can try to address that aspect and overcompensate and go too far the other way. But that's not necessarily a problem if you learn things along the way. With enough practice you'll hopefully find some happy medium, though of course there is not only one 'correct' amount of bookishness/agressiveness etc and you can find your own personal style that works for you.

Thank you all for your answers. I take the point of my tendency to overgeneralise and apologise for barging into Kirby-directed advice. I guess my questions were coming from the teacher rather than the player. To put it another way, I found difficult during my growth to 1 dan to translate (what I call) "fuzzy advice", such as "try not to overplay" or "strive for balance", in terms of actually finding good moves over the board. As a consequence I became pretty much the complete opposite as a teacher, and I wanted to take this opportunity to question my underlying beliefs.

You made some good points and I am also wondering if there could be a threshold where your play has enough maturity - in terms of technique and hindsight - that directed fuzzy advice gains in usefulness.

Bill: I know that this tenuki exists but I never actually play it, so I must be in the kyu realm . More seriously, I believe that if I had not seen pros play this tenuki I would never consider it (regardless of joseki status): it is a large-scale cut that you can defend in sente! I grew to appreciate more dynamic openings, but my point is that this tenuki is something that I had to learn, that is, a joseki in itself.

_________________
La victoire est un hasard, la défaite une nécessité.

Oh, I did not come up with the tenuki myself, either. It is only in the past few years that I understand it well enough to think that I could now find it myself. But when I was learning go one thing I did learn was that there was something wrong with the joseki as played through the extension on the side. That is, it is not equitable, but favorable for the player with the corner. So I tended to avoid the high approach unless circumstances favored the extension, or I could play an avalanche. It was only when I studied joseki as a 2 dan that I learned about the tenuki. (BTW, the tenuki has become more popular in pro play since then, I think. )

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

I don't know all of you in person.
Those of you that know my personal life know that a bad thing happened. I cancelled my attendance to the US Go Congress because of it.
It's the first time something like that has happened to me, so it put things into perspective. Studying go, going to work, studying language, ..., those things that I like to do. They seem meaningless. And they were meaningless to me for a little while.

But from any experience, good or bad, I want to learn something. And from this one, so far, I've learned two things:
1. Some things in life are not in my control. Some important things in life are not in my control. And that's pretty sad. But on the flip side, some things in life are in my control. At least I can impact them in some way. And if not being in control of something important is sad, then the things that I am in control of are precious. And I should be happy to have an impact on them. It would be more than sad if there were something important that I could control and impact, but I didn't - because of my own choice or laziness. So I hope that I can remember this in order to more highly value those things that are precious, which I can impact.

2. Life goes on. When something bad happens, I need to continue. In go, maybe things didn't go as I planned during the game. Maybe I lost my group. But I need to continue. In go, maybe I can resign and play another game. But in this life, there is but one game to play. And I don't want to resign.

---

Probably sounds vague, given the information I'm withholding. But nonetheless, I think I've learned these two things.

So. Life goes on.

I decided to read Haylee's "Outside the Board". I bought it awhile back, and had read the first little bit. It was OK, but not super exciting to me at the time, so I stopped for awhile. Well, I decided to finish the book. I'm glad that I did. It was amusing to hear about her experiences, but from this book, I also learned two things:

1. The importance of reviewing or summarizing what's been learned. After having some success in becoming a professional go player, Hajin decided to pursue a university degree. She ended up being valedictorian at her school. I'd never heard of the school she attended (SolBridge), but regardless - being a valedictorian at any university means that you know something about getting good grades. She explained in her book that, like reviewing a game of go, she would summarize the important aspects of the classes she took. This helped her to keep track of the important things. That's also partly why I've been making these numbered lists

2. The importance of *both* input and output when learning go or learning a foreign language. Hajin explained that, while studying go or studying language is important (input), practicing what you've learned is just as important (output). She outlined an example of a potential study routine: On Monday, study go and learn something new; On Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday, play games, ideally using what you learned; On Friday, review the games you played, and compare them to what you learned. See if there are areas that you missed. Personally, I'm also interested in language (Japanese, and these days, Korean). So I could do something similar there.

Through this journal, I haven't had a problem briefly reviewing games. But maybe I don't review them with high quality. Also, in general, both with language and go, I get a lot of "input" - I enjoy studying books and/or reading things. But I don't get much output. I don't always practice what I learned that much. So I'd like to get more output - both in go and in Korean for now.

---

So here is a game I played today. I didn't realize the time controls (I usually do 30 minute games, but this one was much faster), so at some point I just played several games pretty quickly to get all of the stones in (something like 19 stones in 1 minute).

Anyway, here's a brief review.



---

Now, based on Hajin's idea about studying, maybe I can review this game again in more detail after a few days. That way, I might be more objective. I haven't really studied any "input" that I wanted to apply this game. But maybe I can do that next week.

Anyway, that's all for now.

_________________
be immersed

I am sorry to hear that. But as you say, life goes on. Here is wishing you well.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Continuing my "output" for go (i.e. playing games)...

I played against a KGS 3k today. Of course, I am rusty, and KGS estimated my rank as 1k. So I gave 2 stones. This time, the time settings were as I expected.

But I almost threw the game away, again.

Here is the "immediate review", from my perspective. Since it's Saturday, later today, I'll give another review of all of the games from this week (only 2 games), reviewing from both sides.

_________________
be immersed