Iâll be honest, this is a good point that I had not considered, because I had never noticed such a thing. I came here after reaching 3k in DGS which is purely correspondence and has no other mode, so it was my impression that OGS was not correspondence friendly. I guess it is all a matter of what someone expects from the game, so thank you for pointing this out
I am genuinely not sure if playing correspondence is a good thing for most beginners.
On the contrary it is imho one of the best ways to test a LOT of moves and eventually distinguish good shape from bad shape. In a fast game, people do not have time for variations and, letâs face it, a lot of people do not review their games afterwards and just head for the next game.
On the other hand, a correspondence game is practically a game with an ongoing review happening, so in a live game youâd do mistakes and never review them or forget them by the time the game ends, in a correspondence game you can learn and review at the same time. Here is an example:
And that is just a teaching game where in order to pick the variations which you want to present, you have to play them out and see if they are useful and to the point. But in a real game, you actually go through variations for EACH move and then pick the best.
I attribute my fast improvement mostly to this tactic. I am not particularly smart or anything. All I did was challenge stronger players, show how they played and tested all variations for each my moves while playing. Add a couple of books I read and a few videos and I got from 12k to 5k in six months.
there is usually no continuity between the moves
This is easily solved, at least in DGS where there is no analysis and you have to download the sgf. I usually just opened it with cgoban (KGSâs old client) and made all my moves and variations there, offline. This way there was continuity and a full review left in the sgf afterwards.
Sadly I no longer do that, but it is an efficient way of learning.
This especially makes reviewing the game challenging, since you probably wonât remember what you were thinking when making the moves.
True, but as I said, you do not have to review a correspondence game. You already did that while playing.
the temptation to consult an AI engine
Iâve never done that. AI moves are usually counter-intuitive and require AI strength to execute correctly. Even at 3k, I never look at the AI analysis because I do not think that I have what it takes to gain much from it. So:
especially for beginners, who are often confused and mystified by the game. After all, consulting an AI doesnât feel that much different that just analyzing future variations on your own.
So, a beginner checking AI moves and thinking them as future variations of their own, is veeeery optimistic
if you get attached to winning.
Now that you mentioned it, I should point out that my aforementioned system involved getting attached to losing, since I kept challenging stronger opponents on even games. I lost most of those games and I have much fun and learned a lot.
I think that everyone knows that having a machine play for you is cheating because botting is against the rules in every game on the internet.
There are several reasons why I usually donât play corr, and the temptation to consult AIs is one of them.
Resist the urge and join us to the correspondence side ⊠you are allowed coffee and cookies ⊠heck, you can even cook while playing or take a nap and return to the game refresed