Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

When to resign as a beginner.

4 views
Skip to first unread message

Coyote

unread,
Dec 22, 2005, 6:29:30 AM12/22/05
to
I'm a beginner Go player. I estimated myself at 16-14 kyu after a
number of games against someone at the local Go club who claimed he was
10 kyu. However, I dropped out of playing Go for lack of opponents and
I'm intimidated by internet Go(my job didn't allow me to regularily
attend club sessions). Now, I know I'm a lot weaker from lack of
practice and mostly playing 5 stone handicap games against new players
as I try to teach them the game.

Anyway, my question is, when is it too early for a beginner to resign a
game. Saying "when you know you've lost" leads to the cheekily
defeatist resignation after the first play. Not that I have.

Often times on a 19x19 board I find the opening very interesting. I try
different plays against the corners, and as each attempt leads to weak
groups and mistakes I learn. It often makes me want to just start all
over and try the different plays that I think may have been better. Is
this too early to resign, when you have nothing but heavy and weak
groups with poor shape after the opening?

As I said, I'm a bit intimidated by playing with strangers, either in
the club or online. It's funny, I know on one hand that people like to
win, so why would I be afraid of annoying someone by loosing to them?

So, to conclude. Is it appropriate or expected that a really novice
player should resign after the opening if it is obvious all his groups
are ruined.

Thanks

Bill

unread,
Dec 22, 2005, 8:20:13 AM12/22/05
to

Coyote wrote:
> I'm a beginner Go player. I estimated myself at 16-14 kyu after a
> number of games against someone at the local Go club who claimed he was
> 10 kyu. However, I dropped out of playing Go for lack of opponents and
> I'm intimidated by internet Go(my job didn't allow me to regularily
> attend club sessions). Now, I know I'm a lot weaker from lack of
> practice and mostly playing 5 stone handicap games against new players
> as I try to teach them the game.
>
> Anyway, my question is, when is it too early for a beginner to resign a
> game. Saying "when you know you've lost" leads to the cheekily
> defeatist resignation after the first play. Not that I have.

I think that you should resign when *you* think you have no chance to
win. The only way to learn when this occurs is to play out a lot of
lost-looking positions. As you gain experience, your view of what
constitutes a hopelessly lost game will evolve.

You say you are intimidated by internet Go. Have you tried the Dragon
Go Server? It is a turn-based server, which means that you just drop
in and make a move when it's your turn. There is no pressure to move
fast, and no need to play a game all at once. Also you can have
several games running at once, if you wish. There are lots of players
in your strength range, almost everyone is very friendly, and it all
works through your web browser - no downloads. Give it a try, you
might like it.

Good luck with your game. I hope you stick with it - we would love to
add another member to the community.

Regards,
Bill

Coyote

unread,
Dec 22, 2005, 10:43:28 AM12/22/05
to
I guess my question is a little unfair.

How about: If both players think the result is pretty settled, is it
acceptable and or expected/wanted to resign during the opening, or is
it preferred that the game be continued a little bit longer so that the
stronger player gets more enjoyment out of it?

Thanks for the suggestion on the server, I will try it and try to get
over my intimidation in the meantime. As for loving to have me as a new
member, well, I'll let that go because you don't know me. However, when
you change your mind, just remember, I warned you. :P

Bill

unread,
Dec 22, 2005, 11:28:29 AM12/22/05
to
>>
How about: If both players think the result is pretty settled, is it
acceptable and or expected/wanted to resign during the opening, or is
it preferred that the game be continued a little bit longer so that the

stronger player gets more enjoyment out of it?
>>

I think that in most cases, the stronger player will not be highly
interested in playing out a game which he is winning in a rout. In
this case, resigning is fine.

If the weaker player wants to play on, when he is losing in a rout,
that may be a different matter. There is a discussion of this on
Sensei's Library, with differing opinions, I believe under "continue
while dozens of points behind" or something close to that.
Unfortunately I can't paste the link, as SL seems to be down right now.
Anyway the discussion is worth a read, and may help you reach a
conclusion about this.

Regards,
Bill

Reinhold Burger

unread,
Dec 22, 2005, 12:02:19 PM12/22/05
to

On Thu, 22 Dec 2005, Bill wrote:

> You say you are intimidated by internet Go. Have you tried the Dragon
> Go Server? It is a turn-based server, which means that you just drop
> in and make a move when it's your turn. There is no pressure to move
> fast, and no need to play a game all at once. Also you can have
> several games running at once, if you wish. There are lots of players
> in your strength range, almost everyone is very friendly, and it all
> works through your web browser - no downloads. Give it a try, you
> might like it.


I haven't tried this kind of server, but have wondered about it:
True, there is no pressure to play fast; but if you have so much
more time (hours, days?) to play your next move, isn't there some
expectation (even pressure) that your moves should be very, very good?

And yet in practice, I doubt that I would play that much better than
in a normal game.

I was just wondering how your games compare, say DGS vs. other internet
servers, and face-to-face games across a board.

Thanks,
Reinhold

ro...@telus.net

unread,
Dec 22, 2005, 11:56:13 AM12/22/05
to
On 22 Dec 2005 03:29:30 -0800, "Coyote" <tpro...@rogers.com> wrote:

>Often times on a 19x19 board I find the opening very interesting. I try
>different plays against the corners, and as each attempt leads to weak
>groups and mistakes I learn. It often makes me want to just start all
>over and try the different plays that I think may have been better. Is
>this too early to resign, when you have nothing but heavy and weak
>groups with poor shape after the opening?
>

>So, to conclude. Is it appropriate or expected that a really novice
>player should resign after the opening if it is obvious all his groups
>are ruined.

It sounds to me like you should be playing on a smaller board for a
while longer. 13x13 should be OK.

-- Roy L

ChiyoDad

unread,
Dec 22, 2005, 12:50:33 PM12/22/05
to
Even though other Go players and teachers might recommend immediately
starting with 19x19s, I tend to agree with Roy about playing 13x13s for
a while on the servers if only to get rid of "online play anxiety". It
seems rather common and I had to get over it when I started back in
June. I must have stuck to a 13x13 board for about a month-and-a half.

I've found KGS to be more beginner-friendly since the ranks start at
30k. Its client software seems also better-suited to reviewing games
afterwards. There seems to be no shortage to friendly senior players
who are willing to help beginners review their games (if you ask).

As for resigning, there's no easy answer. Unless it's blatantly obvious
that a game is lost, I tend to play on (mostly because I haven't
developed the skill of estimating the score during the game). You can
always ask your opponent if this is alright.

I've observed that players do not uniformly develop their skill sets.
You could find someone good at fuseki but who is weak in their middle
and endgame. As long as it's done in good spirits, it's probably not
that bad to play out a game to the end to mutually improve all of your
skills.


Best Regards,
- ChiyoDad
http://chiyodad.blogspot.com

Shawn McHorse

unread,
Dec 22, 2005, 12:50:40 PM12/22/05
to
> I was just wondering how your games compare, say DGS vs. other internet
> servers, and face-to-face games across a board.

The main downside to in person games tends to be the uncertainty about
ranks and handicaps, which can result in lop sided games (whereas
Internet servers tend to have fairly accurate relative rankings). The
downside to real-time Internet servers is that you tend to have very
limited clock time, such that if anything happens in real life that
requires you to step away from the computer for even a couple of
minutes it can easily be a forfeit of the game. So I tend to play
real-time online games only at times when I'm fairly certain I won't be
interrupted by anything. The downside to DGS is that it is easy to
forget where you are in a game and what your plans were. If your
opponent has not made a move in a week or so (due to vacation time for
instance), you may need to spend time going over the last part of the
game to refresh your memory of what was going on. Each has their
strengths also though of course, so it's just a matter of what you
want.

As far as resigning (in the double digit kyu range at least), I'd only
do it when you feel that there are sufficiently small chances of the
game swinging back into your favor. Remember that oftentimes the
winner is the player who made the second to last big mistake in the
game. Immediately after the opening is probably not the time to
resign, as just about anything could still happen in the middle game.
Once you start to get to the point where you would start counting
endgame points though, if the game is obviously lopsided enough that
nothing in the endgame could possibly make up for it then you should do
your opponent a favor and resign. Intense thinking about differences
of a couple of stones in the endgame is rather silly when you're forty
points behind.

Ted S.

unread,
Dec 22, 2005, 3:16:43 PM12/22/05
to
Somebody claiming to be Reinhold Burger <rfbu...@cs.uwaterloo.ca> wrote
in news:Pine.GSO.4.64.05...@fe02.math.uwaterloo.ca:

> I haven't tried this kind of server, but have wondered about it:
> True, there is no pressure to play fast; but if you have so much
> more time (hours, days?) to play your next move, isn't there some
> expectation (even pressure) that your moves should be very, very good?

No, there's only the expectation that the moves you play will be the best
ones you can think of. Having a day to think over a move doesn't help if
you can't realize that a group is weak and needs defending, or that your
opponent has a weakness which can be exploited. :-)

> And yet in practice, I doubt that I would play that much better than
> in a normal game.

I doubt I play that much better on DGS than I do any place else -- I
recognize that I'm woefully weak when it comes to whole-board thinking.
No amount of extra time to play one's moves is going to solve that
problem....

--
Ted <fedya at bestweb dot net>
Oh Marge, anyone can miss Canada, all tucked away down there....
--Homer Simpson

xed_over

unread,
Dec 22, 2005, 4:04:19 PM12/22/05
to

Shawn McHorse wrote:
> > I was just wondering how your games compare, say DGS vs. other internet
> > servers, and face-to-face games across a board.
>
> . The downside to DGS is that it is easy to
> forget where you are in a game and what your plans were. If your
> opponent has not made a move in a week or so (due to vacation time for
> instance), you may need to spend time going over the last part of the
> game to refresh your memory of what was going on. Each has their
> strengths also though of course, so it's just a matter of what you
> want.
>

Turn-based servers seem best suited to study -- using the time you have
to dig out your joseki books, and your analyzing programs, searching
for the best move. But some people feel that's cheating (especially if
you don't inform your opponent beforehand).

For myself, if I have that much free time to devote to studing my games
(completed, or in-progress), I'd much rather spend that time playing a
real-time game. Instead, given my 5 minutes here and there throughout
the day, my moves on turn-based servers end up being rushed and aren't
usually the best.

Given that, and probably more importantly, considering how long it
takes to complete a game (on average) on turn-based servers, my on-line
rating tends to be at least 2-4 stones weaker than my in-person or
real-time games. In the begining, I would sometimes gain 2-3 or more
stones in strength in the middle of a 6-month game, crushing my
opponent who was clearly crushing me when we started.

> As far as resigning (in the double digit kyu range at least), I'd only
> do it when you feel that there are sufficiently small chances of the
> game swinging back into your favor.

If your unsure, you should at least ask. Often your opponent may still
be willing to play it out as long as you're polite enough to ask.
Otherwise, they may just consider you to be rude (rather than ignorant
of the situation)

> Remember that oftentimes the
> winner is the player who made the second to last big mistake in the
> game.

Some of my biggest mistakes are in the endgame. I should write a book,
"How to lose a won game."

However, it was interesting recently reading an excerpt from "The
Treasure Chest Enigma" where a woman professional, very early in her
career, was scolded by her mother for not resigning a game that she had
managed to turn into a win, because it was such a bad game.

x

olczyk

unread,
Dec 23, 2005, 11:06:42 PM12/23/05
to
On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 12:02:19 -0500, Reinhold Burger wrote:

>
>> You say you are intimidated by internet Go. Have you tried the Dragon
>> Go Server? It is a turn-based server, which means that you just drop
>> in and make a move when it's your turn. There is no pressure to move
>> fast, and no need to play a game all at once. Also you can have
>> several games running at once, if you wish. There are lots of players
>> in your strength range, almost everyone is very friendly, and it all
>> works through your web browser - no downloads. Give it a try, you
>> might like it.
>
>
> I haven't tried this kind of server, but have wondered about it:
> True, there is no pressure to play fast; but if you have so much
> more time (hours, days?) to play your next move, isn't there some
> expectation (even pressure) that your moves should be very, very good?

Anytime I play I expect my opponent to make the best move. unfortunately
this is not the case. Many people I play are quite serious and try hard to
win, but others just slam down stones anywhere.

One thing I would like to point out is that the next version of KGS is
supposed to have some sort of sealed movew feature so that you can adjourn
games.

BEAR

unread,
Dec 24, 2005, 11:34:47 AM12/24/05
to
Coyote wrote:

> I'm a beginner Go player. I estimated myself at 16-14 kyu after a
> number of games against someone at the local Go club who claimed he was
> 10 kyu. However, I dropped out of playing Go for lack of opponents and
> I'm intimidated by internet Go(my job didn't allow me to regularily
> attend club sessions). Now, I know I'm a lot weaker from lack of
> practice and mostly playing 5 stone handicap games against new players
> as I try to teach them the game.

Your opponent was optimistic? :- )
Don't be intimidated by the internet servers.

They are a fabulous resource. Just observe if you feel unready to play.
You will learn by watching stronger players.
At your level, I suggest spending the most time on mid level single
digit kyu games - like 5k-9k. This is bacause the play at this level is
reasonably good, and direct. Higher level players will have games that
are complex enough to be confusing right now. (by all means watch high
dan games...they are fun and instructive)

Don't spend time yakking with others on the servers, unless you find a
very helpful and friendly group... otherwise you'll be wasting time with
talk and not play/observing.

I always suggest that players who have gotten some rudimentary skills to
read some books for sure, and to try watching *fast games* of "strong"
(that's relative, but in ur case 5k*-9k*) players for ONLY 40-50 moves,
and do this over and over again... you'll see patterns emerge.

The middle game gets complex, and needs attention of course, but leave
that for a little bit... at your level, and any level, with equal play
AFTER the opening will result in the player with the BETTER opening
winning! :- )

>
> Anyway, my question is, when is it too early for a beginner to resign a
> game. Saying "when you know you've lost" leads to the cheekily
> defeatist resignation after the first play. Not that I have.
>
> Often times on a 19x19 board I find the opening very interesting. I try
> different plays against the corners, and as each attempt leads to weak
> groups and mistakes I learn. It often makes me want to just start all
> over and try the different plays that I think may have been better. Is
> this too early to resign, when you have nothing but heavy and weak
> groups with poor shape after the opening?

It is always reasonable to resign - but eliminate the idea of WINNING
from your mind set!

When you look at the board think "is there something else I can learn
from playing out this situation?"

>
> As I said, I'm a bit intimidated by playing with strangers, either in
> the club or online. It's funny, I know on one hand that people like to
> win, so why would I be afraid of annoying someone by loosing to them?

If they agree to play with you, then their expectations will be
appropriate to the situation. Most stronger players are more than happy
to play with weaker players or new players. Nothing to worry about.
Everyone starts out as a weak player.

>
> So, to conclude. Is it appropriate or expected that a really novice
> player should resign after the opening if it is obvious all his groups
> are ruined.

Sure, you can always start a new game.
But, if after the opening you are all "ruined" you should not be playing
19 x 19 games yet, except as "teaching games", imho.

Download WinIgc a free 9x9 playing game, and learn to stay alive, and
progress until you can win some games and progress past the lowest
levels... There are also a number of half decent programs to play
against, if you must.

Again, read some books, and observe stronger players online (per my
suggestions above)... you'll do fine.
>
> Thanks
>

_-_-bear

Coyote

unread,
Dec 25, 2005, 5:09:55 PM12/25/05
to
I wasn't specific, the 5 stone handicap teaching games I was playing
with new players were on a 9x9 board.

Ted S.

unread,
Dec 25, 2005, 10:13:13 PM12/25/05
to
Somebody claiming to be BEAR <bear...@netzero.net> wrote in
news:11qqu1e...@corp.supernews.com:

> They are a fabulous resource. Just observe if you feel unready to play.
> You will learn by watching stronger players.
> At your level, I suggest spending the most time on mid level single
> digit kyu games - like 5k-9k. This is bacause the play at this level is
> reasonably good, and direct. Higher level players will have games that
> are complex enough to be confusing right now. (by all means watch high
> dan games...they are fun and instructive)

I subscribe to the GTL, and look at the reviews of games played by players
in the 3-6 kyu range (I'm 14k KGS). The problem I have is that I find it
difficult to tell what the stronger players are doing differently from me.
Obviously, they're doing *something* different, or else they wouldn't be
stronger than I am! But what that something is, I don't know.

By the same token, I quite often find myself thinking, when I play, of the
various pieces of advice I've been given in games I've had reviewed on the
GTL: don't be afraid to run into the center, don't play passively, urgent
moves are bigger than big moves, don't be afraid to play tenuki, play
lightly, and so on. Unfortunately, I can never figure out which adages
apply in any given position, and which I should ignore. :-)

Specifically, I have a lot of trouble with running out to the center.
I've been criticized for trying to make two eyes on the side, and
consequently ending up with a tiny amount of territory, but when I jump
out toward the center, I don't seem to end up with much eye-space either
on the side or in the center.

Coyote

unread,
Dec 25, 2005, 11:38:39 PM12/25/05
to
the center isn't for eyespace. A group that's connected to the center
is more alive then something that isn't. The more alive a group is, the
easier it is to attack with it. If you are content with small territory
on the sides your opponent will allow you, building thickness around
you (like an oyster building a pearl around grit) and use that to make
large territory elsewhere.

BEAR

unread,
Dec 26, 2005, 3:51:44 PM12/26/05
to
Ted S. wrote:

> Somebody claiming to be BEAR <bear...@netzero.net> wrote in
> news:11qqu1e...@corp.supernews.com:
>
>
>>They are a fabulous resource. Just observe if you feel unready to play.
>>You will learn by watching stronger players.
>>At your level, I suggest spending the most time on mid level single
>>digit kyu games - like 5k-9k. This is bacause the play at this level is
>>reasonably good, and direct. Higher level players will have games that
>>are complex enough to be confusing right now. (by all means watch high
>>dan games...they are fun and instructive)
>
>
> I subscribe to the GTL, and look at the reviews of games played by players
> in the 3-6 kyu range (I'm 14k KGS). The problem I have is that I find it
> difficult to tell what the stronger players are doing differently from me.
> Obviously, they're doing *something* different, or else they wouldn't be
> stronger than I am! But what that something is, I don't know.

The thing to do there is to have *your games* critiqued by the highest
level players you can manage. You will know what you were thinking at a
specific point in the play - that is where the critque becomes valuable.

It is much more difficult to follow another player's game given the
sparse commentary that is usual.

>
> By the same token, I quite often find myself thinking, when I play, of the
> various pieces of advice I've been given in games I've had reviewed on the
> GTL: don't be afraid to run into the center, don't play passively, urgent
> moves are bigger than big moves, don't be afraid to play tenuki, play
> lightly, and so on. Unfortunately, I can never figure out which adages
> apply in any given position, and which I should ignore. :-)

Ignore all of these bits of advice, since they are positionally related
- different situations, different actions.

Take all this advice for future application - in an appropriate situation!

>
> Specifically, I have a lot of trouble with running out to the center.
> I've been criticized for trying to make two eyes on the side,

A very common issue!

How to cure:

- take some games and do nothing but RUN RUN RUN... even when there is
no pressure to run more. see where that gets you. Try to live (make
eyes) only if absolutely required by the situation. You may lose all
these games, but it should cure you of fear.

- watch some low-mid level d* games and see if you can see how they
manage to connect groups.

- never "make eyes" unless forced to do so.

- if given the choice of running out or making eyes, at least for now,
run out (unless there is no place to run out to easily)

- work on SHAPE - your fuseki should result in shapes that have miai for
making eyespace, ie. no weak groups/shapes!!

- learn why good SHAPE works! Test it, observe it, see how and when it
is used.

- be prepared to live small, run out and live small, or run out and
connect - this way you can confidently play the biggest moves on the
board rather than reacting to a move that only *appears* to be sente!
:- )

> and
> consequently ending up with a tiny amount of territory, but when I jump
> out toward the center, I don't seem to end up with much eye-space either
> on the side or in the center.
>

Nor should you - running out has its ultimate effect in the middle and
late game! Keep in mind that your opponent has the very same problems
that you have - always look for the place that YOU would play IF you
were the oppenent - and remember that one can't run *through* a wall.
Done right that = "power".

Also, much depends on if you are forced to run out due to poor SHAPE in
order to live or if you run out when *you* decide to run out...

_-_-bear

xed_over

unread,
Dec 28, 2005, 1:06:25 AM12/28/05
to

Coyote wrote:
>
> Anyway, my question is, when is it too early for a beginner to resign a
> game.
>

A couple of interesting articles in "The Magic of Go" online column
from the Daily Yomimuri about this very topic:

http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/columns/0001/321.htm
(and the previous week:
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/columns/0001/320.htm )

Thomas Bushnell, BSG

unread,
Dec 29, 2005, 2:35:13 PM12/29/05
to
"Coyote" <tpro...@rogers.com> writes:

> I'm a beginner Go player. I estimated myself at 16-14 kyu after a
> number of games against someone at the local Go club who claimed he was
> 10 kyu. However, I dropped out of playing Go for lack of opponents and
> I'm intimidated by internet Go(my job didn't allow me to regularily
> attend club sessions). Now, I know I'm a lot weaker from lack of
> practice and mostly playing 5 stone handicap games against new players
> as I try to teach them the game.
>
> Anyway, my question is, when is it too early for a beginner to resign a
> game. Saying "when you know you've lost" leads to the cheekily
> defeatist resignation after the first play. Not that I have.

If you know you've lost at the first stone, then the handicap is not
high enough.

Thomas

Chris Brownell @

unread,
Jan 2, 2006, 3:20:28 AM1/2/06
to
This is good advice. I think that BEAR meant "igowin" as the free 9x9
game... At least that's the one that I'm using for practice. It's
certainly a great tool to reach a certain rudimentary level of
proficiency, before you start playing against live opponents. In fact,
the program is surprisingly good. Then, when you get on the Go servers,
you'll be less apt to think you will lose before you even begin. And
certainly, observe and play on 9x9 and 13x13 boards to start out. This
time will not be wasted, even if those sizes lack some complexity. There
should be no shortage of games to observe. There are even Go servers on
Yahoo and MSN, I believe.

I'd also like to recommend a book. There are scads of books for
beginners, but I like the philosophy and clear explanations of this one:
"Go! More Than a Game" by Peter Shotwell (in the US, published by Tuttle
Publishing, ISBN 0-8048-3475-X).

The philosophical part that I like about the book is that the author
maintains that beginners cannot hope to learn all the complexities of
the game by just studying. There is too much to learn. So, you should
just play, and not agonize over the moves too much. Play fast. Play a
lot. Then, when you have some idea of the questions you need answered,
study some more. Then play some more. The basic idea is to have fun, and
to honor the game, so that you don't make the task of learning so hard.
If you find everything daunting, eventually you'll just give up, because
you aren't having any fun. One of the authors main points is that,
because of the handicap system, even mismatched players can have a
rousing game of Go, without anyone feeling embarrassed at all. Anyway,
I'm enjoying this book, and I qualify as a rank beginner.

Good luck, and let us know what you learn!

- Chris

Chris Brownell @

unread,
Jan 2, 2006, 3:23:39 AM1/2/06
to
My apologies... There is also a WinIgc game. I should have checked
before posting.

dave...@aol.com

unread,
Jan 2, 2006, 7:35:39 PM1/2/06
to
Coyote wrote:

> Anyway, my question is, when is it too early for a beginner to resign a
> game. Saying "when you know you've lost" leads to the cheekily
> defeatist resignation after the first play. Not that I have.
>


Coyote, there is a interesting property about Go. In an even game ( no
handi, no komi ) the player who controls more than half the board wins.
A game that has progressed to the point where one side has more than
half the board, means basically that the other side will not any longer
be able to get more than half the board and thus can not win. Once a
player realizes this, they can resign with some confidence that
basically it's simply useless to continue and without feeling they
are being defeatist.

Of course, there may always be weaknesses in the apparent winners
position, etc and a stronger player may suddenly turn the tables on a
weaker player who just didn't properly read out one or more of the
life & death situations. Also there are other issues such no penalty
for pass that exists in some rule sets. But barring such things,
fundamentally it's a rather straight forward matter to decide at what
point there is a winner and looser and deciding if one should just
resign accordingly.

On a 9x9 there are 81 points. So if you control 40.5 or more you win if
there have been the same number of plays by both sides. By control I
mean number of stones a player has on the board plus the territory (
unoccupied points ) those stones control and one need not be concerned
with prisoners (dead stons on the board, just count right over them.

Try it out on a small board, 9x9 or smaller and simply count the points
you control. Use the tip of a pencil or mouse cursor and just
methodically count up one row and down the next. I think if you do try
it and experiment with it a little you'll find it adds a nice new
dimension to your understanding of Go.

Of course I am talking here about using "Area" counting, though I
am not saying rules that use "Area" counting are better or worse
than those using "Territory" counting. But I am advocating that
experimenting with Area counting can provide even beginner-beginners
with a lot of useful insights into the game and insights that can be
equally applied to any game of Go regardless of rule set.

dk

0 new messages