Author |
Topic: Hi all (Read 5650 times) |
|
UruramTururam
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2537
Gender: 
Posts: 319
|
 |
Re: Hi all
« Reply #15 on: Mar 31st, 2011, 2:59am » |
 Quote  Modify
|
There is something in that. 
I know the rules of Go to the extent that I'm able to play it somewhat better than just making random moves. But Go seemed always to me as game that lacks clarity. When I watch a match of chess, checkers, reversi or Arimaa (or even Bridge although it's somewhat different) played by a master of that game, I can catch in general what he's trying to accomplish, even if I don't understand how. For Go I'm lost. Moves of a master level player seem totally weird to me and all I know is he's trying to win...
|
|
 IP Logged |
Caffa et bucella per attactionem corporum venit ad stomachum meum.
BGG Arimaa badges - get your own one!
|
|
|
robinz
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #6110
Gender:
Posts: 65
|
|
Re: Hi all
« Reply #16 on: Mar 31st, 2011, 4:22am » |
Quote Modify
|
I must say that I agree with that - I've been playing Go for coming up to a year now, and am perhaps about 9kyu at the moment, and I also don't really understand most of the moves in professional games. Nor, when I walk up to a board in the middle of a game, do I really have any idea who's winning without staring at it for quite a long time (and probably doing some actual counting, too). I have seen plenty of games where one player has resigned and I've not thought it obvious at first glance that they were in any way losing! While I accept that much of this has to do with how weak I still am at the game, I think a lot of it is really to do with the nature of the game. (In particular with the fact that, unlike in chess, arimaa and most other games, there isn't a specific winning condition - you actually have to finish the game and then do some counting.)
With arimaa, I've been playing much less time - about 2 months now - yet I feel that I have about as much idea of what's going on in a game (whether one of my own or one that I'm watching) as I do in go. (In other words, not very much, but I'm not totally at sea either.) It's probably a totally wrong impression, but the fact that I have it - and it seems from this thread that others do too - probably counts for something
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
hanuman
Forum Full Member
Arimaa player #6307
Gender:
Posts: 17
|
|
Re: Hi all
« Reply #17 on: Apr 2nd, 2011, 4:06pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Robinz, you're comment makes a lot of sense. I vaguely remember going through that phase as a go player, and know that most everyone does. This is some of what I meant by my earlier comment. If you are 9 kyu (I'm around 2 kyu, though I haven't played much in a while), you've already put in some real effort, and you still feel like a beginner in certain regards (e.g. not being sure why one player resigned, which would not happen in chess or arimaa except for a total beginner.) It seems to me that the learning curve in Go is an order of magnitude longer and steeper than for any other game I know of. This is neither good nor bad, just the way it is.
I can point to one similarity (for me at least) between go and arimaa. Both are fun even as a beginner. I mean this seriously. There's a lot of puzzle solving to be done and it's fun to work out the possibilities. I never found this with chess.
I appreciate all the responses and would be happy to continue this thread as long as there is interest. It's been a while since I had the opportunity to compare and contrast different abstract strategy games with like minded people.
On a different subject, there's also a way in which arimaa is like stratego, with the pieces of different rank pushing each other to achieve a positional advantage.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: Hi all
« Reply #18 on: Apr 3rd, 2011, 1:00am » |
Quote Modify
|
I think of chess as having more clarity than Go, in that I can enjoy watching chess games well above my level, but just this morning I watched a game between two chess grandmasters which reached this position:
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | | | |R| | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | |P| |P|P| | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |P| | |B| |K| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|P| |P| |R| | |N|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|P| |P| | |K| | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |P| | | | | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | | | | | | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | | | | | | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
To me it appears that Black (green in the diagram), who is on move, is up by a pawn and poised to take on e7 as well, gaining a crushing material advantage and extinguishing the last hope of White (red in the diagram). Instead Black resigned! So even a game that is relatively comprehensible can be very baffling at times.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Hippo
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4450
Gender:
Posts: 883
|
|
Re: Hi all
« Reply #19 on: Apr 3rd, 2011, 5:34am » |
Quote Modify
|
May be due to fork on g8
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
SpeedRazor
Forum Guru
Skepticism is the Immune System of Science
Gender:
Posts: 72
|
|
Re: Hi all
« Reply #20 on: Apr 3rd, 2011, 9:23am » |
Quote Modify
|
I agree that Chess is less opaque than Go. But occasionally, even Grandmasters commenting on a game are confused about who is winning! Here's one famous example: http://coxschess.tripod.com/attack3.html
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: Hi all
« Reply #21 on: Apr 3rd, 2011, 9:39am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Apr 3rd, 2011, 9:23am, SpeedRazor wrote:| I agree that Chess is less opaque than Go. But occasionally, even Grandmasters commenting on a game are confused about who is winning! Here's one famous example: http://coxschess.tripod.com/attack3.html |
|
Nice, I hadn't seen that one. Thanks for the link.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
hanuman
Forum Full Member
Arimaa player #6307
Gender:
Posts: 17
|
|
Re: Hi all
« Reply #22 on: Apr 3rd, 2011, 10:07am » |
Quote Modify
|
It may be that chess is less opaque than Go, but ultimately, I think Go has greater depth and subtlety. It is difficult to really grasp and put into practice concepts like "aji", "and "playing lightly". These are less tangible than concepts like "I'm up two pawns" or "my rook controls the king's file".
It may also be wroth noting that you can find many go players who used to be chess players. I haven't yet met anyone who gave up go to pursue chess.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
hanuman
Forum Full Member
Arimaa player #6307
Gender:
Posts: 17
|
|
Re: Hi all
« Reply #23 on: Apr 3rd, 2011, 10:13am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Apr 3rd, 2011, 5:34am, Hippo wrote:| May be due to fork on g8 |
|
Not so good at chess myself, but if black Rxp, where is the fork on G8?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: Hi all
« Reply #24 on: Apr 3rd, 2011, 11:26am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Apr 3rd, 2011, 10:13am, hanuman wrote:| Not so good at chess myself, but if black Rxp, where is the fork on G8? |
|
I had to ask someone to explain it to me.
1 ... RxP
2 Rg5+ Kh6
3 Nf6
... threatening the fork on g8. Black has a whole move to avoid the fork, but neither the black king nor the black rook can go anywhere. Furthermore, an initial move by Black other than taking the pawn loses to the same sequence. I couldn't figure it out even after seeing the resignation, but I at least feel consoled that Black (a grandmaster) didn't see it coming, and purposely played for this position from a won position, thinking he was converting the win.
|
| « Last Edit: Apr 3rd, 2011, 11:28am by Fritzlein » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
hanuman
Forum Full Member
Arimaa player #6307
Gender:
Posts: 17
|
|
Re: Hi all
« Reply #25 on: Apr 3rd, 2011, 12:16pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Another funny contrast between chess and go. In chess, I have trouble seeing three moves ahead. In go, I can routinely look ahead up to 15 moves or so, but unfortunately, it's often necessary to read farther ahead than that. When you read commentaries of master games, you often read things like "so-and-so moved here because he foresaw the following 40 (or 60 or 80) move sequence leading to such-and-such result."
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print