Just because you’ve played enough games to know the outcome of a 3-7 move sequence doesn’t mean it’s equivalent to “not reading a lot”.
I’ve looked at a few basics videos/streams and he consistently bases his responses on knowing the outcome of local sequences. How do I know? Because he chooses complex variations over simple variations. If you know the outcome of a complex variation is better for you (i.e. capitalizing on your opponent’s weaker-ness) than the simple variation (actually derivable from basic ideas) but you still play the complex one, I have to question the value of your ‘teachings’.
He could easily work out basic principles, display them on screen and iterate through them for each move. Lacking strict principles, he is free to play complex moves and try to …what’s a nice expression… explain away their complexity after the fact.
That’s not at all the case. First off, they do work, and usually at all levels, unless the opponent is unreasonably aggressive. However, the problem is that Dwryrin can read oud that a group is dead about 10 moves before his 5k opponent realises it. Of course the proper move is to kill it in such cases, but then he doesn’t teach strategy, but reading. Improving strategy is a lot easier (applying a couple of basic principles will do wonders) than improving reading (which just means hours and hours of experience).
So, by killing his opponents groups, he would both be completely overpowering his opponent using a skill that someone of the same level of the opponent doesn’t have. On the other hand, by not killing everything, he shows that if you follow those few basic principles, it’s easy enough to get ahead simply by playing solidly.
And those principles are not something a 5k couldn’t know. It’s things like, block the extension, hane at the head of 2 or 3 stones, don’t push from behind, start a reduction by playing on the sector line, make shape when your group is fragile, etc.
He has his other series in which he tries to play risky and kill anything reasonable, where he plays against dan opponents.
Usually, what I see is him chosing the simple move - a cap, a shoulder hit etc, following the principles that he teaches.
Of course, I have a vastly more limited ability to appreciate what’s really going on, so maybe a Dan can see the tricks.
But on the other hand, does it matter anyhow? If he is teaching a set of principles that Kyus can use to improve, who cares if the method has a little smoke and mirrors…
@smurph: I admit that you are correct that dwyrin does read in his basic games. However, he often ignores the result of his reading in favor of playing a ‘basic’ move (an urgent move, a big move, a shape move, etc). For example, I have repeatedly watched dwyrin read out a sequence to kill a group, but then ignore the seqeunce he just read out in favor of a basic move.
I never questioned his showmanship (“look, here’s a sequence I’m NOT going to play!”), or that he never plays a move that could’ve been derivable from basic principles. I’m saying that he consistently uses non-basic moves that haven’t been derived from any principles, only to later make up some some sort of explanation for why it ‘was’ basic.
I’m also not claiming it was unhelpful to people, (how would I know?), I’m saying any benefit would be incidental, not systematic.That’s a bit of a problem if you’re espousing a systematic approach (“play basic moves”).
I would expect that a systematic approach generates reproducible results, i.e. if I give the same board position to two ‘students’ of the same method, that they would answer the same questions similarly and would be able to generate similar moves. Judging by the material I’ve seen, I very much doubt that this would be the case with the ‘basics’ series.
If it’s not reproducible, it reduces to “and this is how I’m going to win this game against a weaker opponent today”. I’ve done similar work, but again, that’s entertainment, not teaching.
It would be fascinating (and argument-supporting ) to see some examples of this.
I found this quite compelling at first, and had to go off to think about it.
However, it doesn’t seem to stand up to scrutiny.
This isn’t a “recipe to produce a cake” that produces similar results if it is followed the same way.
It’s a means to sift from a zillion options ranging from “awful” to “god like” down to “a set of choices that has a reasonable chance of giving you a solid basis for play at Kyu level”.
The approach itself leaves many options open, otherwise a monkey could do it, and that’s why you would not get “reproducible results” in the sense of “different players play ‘similar moves’ given the same situation” - as implied.
It’s an extension of “corners, side, centre” - you don’t argue that this should produce “similar results” in this way.
What you would hope for in reproducible results is that people applying the method would improve at a better rate than the background level. Maybe the “What’s the best way to improve” project could have this as a variant to test
How often are those “you’ve been Dwyrin’ed” things supposed to happen?
If it’s once a month or less, maybe it’s just as simple as reaching out to the mods here to get the game annulled There seems to be enough of a fan base here to be assured we won’t miss them.
If it’s supposed to happen more than once a month, I’ll stand by my previous comment.
I haven’t read the thread but “please make it possible for Dwyrin to sandbag?” What sort of a question is that? Sandbagging is banned on OGS, it doesn’t’ matter if you’re a famous streamer. Dwyrin surely has a collection of followers around the 1k mark, so he should play with them if he can’t find opponents on OGS. Or play somewhere else.
I got curious, so I let the video (OP link) run to take a look at the game itself.
I am using Leela Zero v234 as a reference, and I would encourage Dwyrin followers to do so. If you don’t want to install it, take advantage of the OGS supporter offer. Just to be clear, Leela Zero is not expected to teach anybody, it just gives a healthy perspective on the game status to balance the comments.
Disclaimers:
I am just focusing on the bad and the ugly to make my point. Let me acknowledge here that there were good and aha moments too.
Dwyrin is an amateur player and makes comments on the fly. It is expected that they cannot be as accurate as, for example, Redmond’s deep analyses on the AGA channel
With that said…
First, let this sink in: by move 35, before any serious contact play, white has lost ground. The 2 kyu has played more solid moves than the 5d. According to Leela Zero, white has lost around 10% winrate.
Now, let’s move to a specific example. In the lower right, the commenter despised two good and by-the-book moves, N2 (actually played by black) and S2 (not played in the actual game sequence).
He also went on to lose P2, allowing black to gain more than 5% winrate in the sequence.
I’d like to insist that I am ok with inaccurate comments, as mentioned in my disclaimer. What I don’t like are the idea to prey on the weak to help justify bad moves (as expected, the kyu player quickly loses ground when the fights start), and the demeaning tone, including on moves that are actually solid.
These two things are really at the heart of the criticism of Dwyrin.
It’s about perception.
Is it demeaning or dry humour?
It is preying on the weak to justify bad moves, or teaching basic principles to help the weaker?
Personally, I find myself where I can appreciate how people see it the bad way, but my experience of it is the good way - I find the humour dry, and it feels like what he teaches helps my play.
To be perfectly honest I am not too comfortable with what the thread is becoming, especially since Dwyrin does not seem to be frequentong our forums it kind of feels like onesided behind the back criticism.
For the record I too am not a fan of Dwyrin’s online persona, but what’s the point of this discussion? I am sure everyone can choose for themselves whether they like his “humour” or whatever you would call it, and I would hope everyone can realize nobody (let alone amateur player) will be flawless in his/her every move. Of course he also makes mistakes. Kind of duh. He is the most popular so he must be doing something right…
Anyone can stream and anyone can chose who to watch or not. I can appreciate the desire to vent when someone popular is getting on one’s nerves but maybe we could gradually try to get something more productive out of the original intention (at least how I understood it) of the thread? Like how to better accomodate streamers on OGS whoever they are and maybe suppprt new ones? To offer more competition and more choices? Win-win
I don’t get that comment. Are you saying that people should not comment on a movie, or a book, or in this case a streaming channel, unless the author has been invited?
I believe this is the core of the current discussion, considering that accommodating is equal to facilitating sandbagging in this case. There are certainly other options, but it would be nice to start by ruling out that one.
) to see some examples of this.
but maybe we could gradually try to get something more productive out of the original intention (at least how I understood it) of the thread? Like how to better accomodate streamers on OGS whoever they are and maybe suppprt new ones? To offer more competition and more choices? Win-win 