šŸ“ Make reviews great again! šŸ’Ŗ

Friends, regulars, people, and yes, even @_KoBa! Help me brainstorm, polish, and maybe much much later realize an idea I have been having for some time :thinking:

Why:

I feel like the review culture is dying. It has been months since I have seen a review request. I like giving reviews. It makes me think about the game, I honestly think it helps the players, it strengthens the community, and it makes me feel smarter than I am. I have long since accepted that dan level players are now happy to review with AI, but us lower ranked guys? We still need human ideas IMHO to make things click. I would like to support the review and kibitz culture a bit. And also it could be fun.

How:

Well that is up for debate. At the moment I am leaning towards a fast correspondence tourney. The basic rule - The winner always reviews the game! (otherwise it’s DQ).

  • To make it more fun, and engaging, we should probably have some guest (let’s bully your favourite content creators into it) summaries, and reviews (and review reviews? :grin:) after every round.
  • Some (probably small - I am poor :laughing: but will annoy people into giving something away) prizes :wrapped_gift: for:
    • winning the tourney
    • best video review (tbd by a comitee)
    • best written review (dtto)
    • funniest review (as voted by the community)

Would you be game? Do you have any ideas, improvements, counterpoints?

13 Likes

Hmm maybe we could start doing those Q&R tourneys again? I remember taking part of those, and they were great fun ^^ Tho, i don’t think i’m actually strong enough that my reviews could really serve as prizes xD

I’ve been thinking whether the AI analysis has reduced how much people are willing to review games… Not only just because the bot does reviews so effectively, but also because people are somewhat afraid of saying stuff that kata disagrees with :confused:

4 Likes

What’s that?

2 Likes

Quick & review - some live tournaments we had around 2014-15, main idea was to play bunch of relatively fast games and then review some of those on twitch afterwards.

It’s really such a pity those died out… We had about 20 Q&R tourneys and i remember them being super fun as a ddk, but i guess they were quite exhausting for the few people who organised them. And there were also annoyingly many first-round timeouts due it being live tourneys which were scheduled days in advantage :<

5 Likes

I think it would be useful to hear dan-level players explain some moves, using Kata as well. The problem is that most mistakes that aren’t simply mechanical don’t come from undercounting - they come from not really understanding the general idea behind certain things. Especially during the joseki stage, it’s important for someone to explain why and what is actually happening.

Also, Kata isn’t very human in its suggestions, and a lot of the time there are less complicated variations with a much higher win rate from a human perspective that it won’t provide at all. So I think it’s always important to mention that as well.

3 Likes

That is too much of a commitment for me for a very limited player numbers. I would much rather do one big event to really draw people in, and mainly have some community fun together.

Absolutely! We would get some Go content creators or high dan players to review select games or review select reviews after each round.

Two steps basically:

  1. People would play tourney games, and review those on their own
  2. We would do streams/videos with high level reviews of some of the games.
    (Or at least that was my current idea)

Give me more ideas! What else would you like to see?

2 Likes

5 posts were split to a new topic: Human review queue feature?

I don’t know if the review culture is dying or not, I m way too young for that in Go age. I only know some magic KGS tales.
All I can say is that I am in the Go magic and Go beginner discord - people can submit their games there and request reviews. I check it from time to time and its almost impossible to review games because they get reviewed so fast. There is no lack of people doing reviews it seems. And the other way around, if people want reviews, they will get them for sure (If they know the place, maybe even when they dont but just ask somewhere).

Nonethenless I like your Idea of coruse. I just wanted to state the above.
I can recommend Octopodes Titan as ā€˜influencer’ for any review stuff. If there is a more concrete plan, it would be worth asking him if he wants to join. (If thats his type of stuff is a different thing). He started streaming again after some longer break and offers reviews to kyu players. Usually friday/saturday night. This is high class stuff for free on Twitch. Many sadly do not notice it, perhaps (also) because of the announcement changes on OGS.

Slighly off topic. Sorry.

4 Likes

People on the forum here have given amazing reviews, from my perspective the results of posting here are outstanding and I’m very grateful to everyone who contributes reviews.

So the existing system does work, so maybe it’s a matter of encouraging more people to use it.

I still like the idea of a tournament to promote reviews. (Although ā€œfast correspondenceā€ might be too fast for me and I wouldn’t want to slow everyone else down.)

P.S. Tschej, I believe you have given and received some reviews on the forum as well :slight_smile:

2 Likes

If you just want some brainstorm ideas:

  • Gamify reviewing, add stats (monthly, yearly games reviewed, comments added, thumbs up from the players whose games you reviewed), or rewards, achievements, bagdes.

Any sort of leaderboard or stats could possibly be exploited, but I suppose something like needing a thumbs up from the people whose game you reviewed counters some of that.

There could be badges/achievements from reviewing a game with your opponent and getting a thumbs up/thanks/kudos, for people that aren’t in your friends list, reviewing a tournament or ladder game and so on.

  • The rewards/points for reviewing others games (and getting thumbs up) could stack up slowly and be traded in for level 1, 2, 3 etc ai reviews for your own games, or you could gift them to another player.

Essentially thinking of things that benefit the player doing it, if they care about that sort of motivation, or a way they can still give back if they don’t (pass it on sort of mechanics).


@tonybe is another reasonable suggestion, but I guess as mentioned, the Go community has moved over time, it’s not that everyone meets and chats on the server, but might meet and chat over discord, and arrange games and reviews that way, or other off site platforms.

So you can still have people reviewing games but within smaller (or large) subcommunities, as opposed to reviewing random players games, or answering review requests from a central queue or chat like on the main site or forum.

So definitely something needed to pull them back to the main site, or gather a group of people as suggested.

There was also before a teaching ladder, to play and review correspondence games, but I assume one wants to encourage live reviews also.


Maybe as a stripped down version of tonybe’s suggestion, one could imagine since we have automated reviews of games (with at least the top 3 biggest mistakes being highlighted), one could opt in to submitting those key moves for review to a review queue (one or more).

Then as a player you wouldn’t be on the hook for a whole game review, but instead you’d try to review a key mistake from a game.

It would also almost function like a puzzle queue for players reviewing since they’d be looking through real game mistakes.


A reviews chat channel on the main site could be an idea, but I think with rengo it’s not guaranteed to take off as the way to schedule reviews in this case.

4 Likes

Hmm, maybe because there is a great alternative for man made game reviews: AI generated/inspired reviews.

I think it’s a genius concept. There’s a culture of spamming AI games, reviewing in AI which can be very dehumanising imo.


Agree, but what’s in it for the dan-level players? Occasionally AI makes recommendations which seem weird to me. A recent example for me was B11 in this game.

3 Likes
Long off-topic explanation of above linked the game

It’s actually a great and somewhat humane move.

And yes, at some point in the game it becomes more valuable than just saving the group in the corner.

So basically, starting from move 24, when this first appeared:
Another key mistake by Black is this move, because of this variation:

At first glance, it may not seem like a White advantage, but it is at least +5. You have to understand what happened: you dived into the corner, grabbed your points (a standard 3-3 corner for side influence), then attacked the strong side, miraculously lived, and ran away.

You may have some space to live on the side, but you don’t actually need it. At the same time, you gave Black awful shape on the side. Basically, half of their moves towards the lower corner are useless, and the funny part is that only Black has problems here. They have several awful cuts, and they can’t really attack White. If they try, White can basically give them that opportunity while grabbing a ton of points on the side.

And move 19 is still useful even now. Move B11 gives White opportunities to connect on the side, which means getting a tempo. It’s one of many variations, but basically it shows the idea.

So, to conclude for White: it helps with the cut Black is threatening, gives more space and opportunities on the side, and also compromises Black’s opportunities.
If White plays E13 outright, Black has variations like this:

(AB being move 8, depending on the style of play.)

White doesn’t have any opportunities to live on the side. Black is much stronger, with both cuts and connections, and will definitely have sente. I’m showing the easiest variation; there are a lot of ā€œwhat ifs,ā€ but even this one is roughly even. So, in conclusion, in terms of points, this is slightly better for Black. But in terms of how easy the position is to play and what opportunities each side has:

  • Variation 1: Black has a weak group vs. a semi-weak group.
  • Variation 2: Black has a strong group vs. a weak group.

The second situation is simply better in terms of the overall idea. Black is still losing, though, because of the mistakes played earlier that gave White so many opportunities on the side.

So basically, in all your games, you should look for sente moves that give you opportunities later while taking those opportunities away from your opponent. Extra eye space for a group that’s running is 90/100 times a halo.

Later, the idea changes. Black has somewhat established themselves there (although not really), but White is still a running group for quite a long time. For Black to gain anything from that, they can’t allow White to live on the side at all. It basically becomes permanent sente: grab, I don’t know, five points, and move on with your life.

However, at some point it becomes a halo again. At some point, after the corner was more or less played out, even if it could be killed or lived in one move, playing there was still important.

You were right about squishing. It’s easy to attack White even more severely than that. But that move - or rather, the sequence of moves - implies that giving up 20 points in gote in the corner isn’t really worth more than attacking Black and getting more space in the center for White.

You should count how many weaknesses your opponent has and make use of them.

Black had around three groups that were semi-weak or fully under attack, while you had around one and a half groups under attack. One of yours somehow got itself into trouble, but that’s another question.

That group was worth about 20 points, while Black’s two ā€œstonersā€ were worth nearly 40 each.

When you have that many groups and a decent lead, you should stabilize the position and attack one group. If it lives, attack the second one. If that one lives too, attack the third.

Every group that escapes will naturally move toward the center, which means you gain influence there. That lets you attack even more effectively and potentially gain a tremendous amount of points while Black is living with very little territory — or even kill them.

So basically, the same move had a different purpose throughout the game.

At the beginning, the idea was to stabilize yourself in sente and create opportunities to attack while weakening Black further.

Later in the game, it became a sente move that starts a sequence aimed at attacking Black and, most importantly, not giving Black opportunities to come back.

Here’s an example variation. White doesn’t have any weak groups. Even if the bottom-left corner is somehow dead, all of White’s stones across the board are safe and strong.

They influence the moyo and affect three groups simultaneously. Even after a defensive move, Black would still struggle to live there. Compare this variation with the one you sent where Black is squishing White. The difference is tremendous, and it all starts with that move.

Actually, it’s a semi-human move as of right now. I’m pretty sure that at the start of the game, the majority of players around dan level would have played it, if not all of them. And later in game, I’m pretty sure they would have sacrificed the group.

//Sorry for going off-topic, but I wanted to help the person understand the move.

//Sorry for the mod-edit, I am happy to keep it, but have collapsed the explanation to keep the thread more readable. - AdamR

6 Likes

There were few suggestions about how to reward them, and I’m sure some of them will be implemented, so thats kinda the first step.

Secondly, a lot of people want to do it from time to time. Just remember playing offline tournaments, and how usually the stronger player talks about what could have been done differently after the game, or both players review the game together, especially if thats a local tournament

So we already have a lot of culture around it. In some places its even rude not to explain if someone asks you after losing, I’m talking about my country here

So I at least hope that many people would come and participate. And I can vouch for myself, even as a low dan I would be interested in helping any people that might need it

2 Likes

We can maybe request the sdk+ streamers to take part and set aside some time for these reviews, so users can queue from ogs and get reviews.

3 Likes

Wow! Thank you for taking the time to make such a comprehensive reply. I’m looking forward to reading through that in detail, the line that leaps off the monitor at a first read though is…

Next level thinking.

4 Likes

I am a noob (16k), I am interested in getting reviews to improve my game and I could potentially give reviews to someone 19k or weaker but I don’t like correspondence games.

2 Likes

I’d be happy to participate whatever the format: review my own games in a tournament, or answering review requests from low SDK or DDK players.

AI is great but doesn’t know how to select variations that are easy to understand at a given level, and can’t explain the human thinking process with words. It doesn’t think of the stupid variations that low level players have in mind.

Whatever you do, I think we should keep it simple, otherwise the organization would be too time-consuming (unless you find a way to automate it). Like 1 review = 1 point. Or 1 text review = 1 point, 1 video review = 2 points.

3 Likes

I don’t mean to be rude, but I am saying this from the bottom of my heart: in the kyu range, good advice can really only come from someone with a 10+ kyu difference. In many cases, you might accidentally mislead someone, so it’s better to leave teaching to the stronger players, but its exelent that you have such intentions!

3 Likes

Is there any basis for these two claims? Personal experience?

1 Like