I think that was worse because the audience could hear the commentary and the players could “feel” their reactions. They couldn’t hear them with the headphones though
I don’t think it’s worth it to spend energy in teaching me.
But I really would like to know why most people whether they are black or white choose to open on one side or other, instead of placing the first 2 stones on a diagonal (for example, C16 and Q4). It’s such a boring way to start…
1 Like
People get in the habit of learning a certain fuseki (opening pattern) that they like to play. An individual player has to be able to play with a black side and a white side, since the other player can always choose to create this situation. He or she never has to play a diagonal opening because both players must agree.
There are some ideas about whether diagonal opening is good for black or for white and maybe this changed with the introduction of komi, but I don’t think the difference is enough to explain why so few people want to play diagonal games. I think it’s just what they’re used to.
We just played a Go tournament as part of a much bigger chess tournament, and also used clocks with no sound/countdown.
I kept missing a byo-yomi period by like a second or so 
I didn’t time out of any games, just started playing a bit faster
1 Like
In chess openings the king’s pawn E4 is meant to be more tactical and sharp leading to open games and the queen’s pawn opening D4 is meant to be more positional and strategic Leading to closed games. Note these aren’t absolutes. Is there any parallel to that in 4-4 Vs 3-4 corner fukesi? territorial vs influence and aggressive defensive, fast and slow .
For example, I play the scotch gambit with white, with black the Sicilian accelerated dragon Vs E4 and with Nimzo Indian against D4 cus I can often get open tactical games instead of a slow grind. If I want to play go in a similar style, what sort of fukesi should I be playing?
1 Like
I suppose play 4-4, then sometimes ignore an approach to your 4-4 in order to approach another corner, that way you can get a position in every corner quickly. Later you may need to deal with the double-approached corner (but you like fighting, right?) but less chance of a cold war between moyos and hopefully some good positions that you can work with in the middle game.
Tactically you can prefer to crosscut, for example, rather than make safe extensions. You do need to be careful about not overdoing this.
1 Like
Thanks for the advice. I’ll certainly give it a try. Been trying to figure out if I’m a 4-4 guy or a 3-4. Course I’m not saying that style suits me in GO where results are concerned just that I’d rather die on my feet than live on my knees so to speak
1 Like
I dunno in chess (I am curious about that) but beyond whatever arguments from players about this or that opening, IMHO the most important I lived through the decades is FASHION.
I stayed quite aside, having some interest more in my own thinking (with all due modesty lol) like a curiosity I had for some times about the 3-5.
But fashion was always here around brought by my partners and it changed regularly. .
1 Like
I wonder why players around the same ELO can vary in strength so much. Sometimes I totally crush my opponent, and sometimes I totally get crushed. Is this something that only happens at low ELO?
1 Like
At low ELO the Blunders are inevitably coming. Your basic task is to last longer than your opponent without blundering. Note: you also have to capitalize on that blunder.
So the beginner advice is, Grind puzzles to get tactical awareness, then try to play without out hanging any pieces or making obvious blunders. that alone will get you to 750 ELO. Be patient enough to let your opponent make the first mistake.
1 Like
It’s not about blunders. I mean I do make blunders, but sometimes I lose even without obvious blunders. I’m often in a situation where I have no good moves left even though it’s still early in the game. Not sure whether it’s considered zugzwang.
So, zugzwang is actually kinda of rare and more of a late middlegame or endgame phenomenon. It when you have few pieces and absolutely have to make a specific move. ( if you have more pieces you can always move one of those even though you lose a rook for example) True zugzwang is not common for lower rated players.
Losses under 1000 ELO and overwhelmingly due to a blunder at some point. that probably holds true up to 1500,(even to 1800). I’m not great at chess, but if you want I can have a look at a few of your games to see what you are talking about.
Then what do you call the situation where you lose material no matter where you play?
Depends on the situation, there are forks, double attacks, overloads, deflections, forced moves, forcing moves, skewers. Lots of headaches two worry about, all different tactical motifs. Pardon if I was being too specific about the term zugzwang, we understand what your trying to express.
in the end, in chess as in GO. Beginner games are chaotic. So yes victories and losses seem more lopsided and dramatic. IMHO that makes it even more fun to be at that level.
Those are local techniques but I’m talking about the entire board where there’s no good move to play. Actually I know it’s not zugzwang because zugzwang can be resolved by passing, but in my situation passing will lead to more losses.
1 Like
Mmmmm. You can’t “pass” in chess.
What you are describing sounds like a tactic your opponent has spotted. Which is the result of a mistake you’ve made a few moves earlier.
1 Like
I know you can’t pass, otherwise there wouldn’t be zugzwang. I’m just talking about the definition of zugzwang.
Would be good if there’s a word for my situation other than “gg”.
1 Like
Can you post an example of a real position where you find yourself with “no good move to play” and/or where “you lose material no matter where you play”?
Can’t remember at the moment. Will share once I encounter another one.
I believe the very definition of zugzwang is a position where passing would be best.
The term is typically used when passing would hold a draw and zugzwang forces you to go into a losing endgame.
Example: Black to move is in zugzwang and will lose the game
I’m not aware of a general term. You are more talking about the reasons why you are losing material. Like “The blunder will cost white some material.” or “Now it becomes clear that the positional disadvantage will cost material.” or “Black fell for this well-known opening trap which will cost material very soon.”
2 Likes