4 ms·

This reminds me of the anime Hikaru no Go. In one episode, prodigy named Touya Akira (the main rival of the main character) is being bullied by his schoolmates.

by PakG1 3y ago

This reminds me of the anime Hikaru no Go. In one episode, prodigy named Touya Akira (the main rival of the main character) is being bullied by his schoolmates. They challenge him to a 3-board match (he has to play three games simultaneously, each against a different person) with his eyes closed. Because of his reputation, he accepts the challenge. He calls out his moves and the opposing player places the stone. The opposing players also call out their own moves so that Akira can know what's happening in each of the games. he has to construct and track what the three boards look like constantly using only his memory. The one game of the three where he starts losing is the one where the opposing player is the least experienced. It's not the skill that starts defeating Akira. Rather, it's the idiocy of the amateur who doesn't know what he's doing, making it more difficult for Akira to track what the game actually looks like, because it's harder to remember and track nonsensical moves.

Someone 3y ago
In “Thought And Choice In Chess”, A.D. de Groot (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adriaan_de_Groot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adriaan_de_Groot) noticed that for chess. He asked good chess players (including Euwe and Alekhine) to take a short look at a board and then replicate it from memory. They were better at doing that for real games than for artificial setups. Also, their errors tended to be non-essential. When they misplaced pawns, for example, that wouldn’t affect the plan to pick. He also asked amateur-level players. I don’t remember whether they made more errors, but they did make more essential errors, and for them, the difference between ‘logical’ and ‘illogical’ board setups was smaller.
aio2 3y ago
It reminds me of one of Murphy's Law saying that an amateur is more dangerous than a professional since they are more unpredictable.
aleksiy123 3y ago
When I used to play a lot of CS:GO this effect was very obvious. Ranking up was essentially learning to counter strategies at a certain skill level. But sometimes when you played much weaker players your playstyle would be over optimized to predict/counter a different style of play. The solution was usually to stop overthinking it and just rely on your raw aim mechanics to beat them.
- themoonisachees 3y ago
  Exactly my experience as well. When I went back to playing and dropped to silver, you could frequently hear me go "what the fuck is he doing over there?!", Surprised that an enemy who lacks mechanics would not act like a reasonable opponent would, and surprise me.
  - NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
    Back in the days of Battle.Net and Warcraft III, I used to sit on my friend's computer playing 1:1 games. I played different races a lot and sort of got good, but I was bored. So I decided that I would exclusively play Night Elf and build nothing but Protector Trees. Now Protector Trees are Night Elf "buildings" which are, of course, rooted in the ground but they can throw boulders at attacking units, thus defending the home base. Protectors also have the unique ability to uproot themselves and move around the board, then take root somewhere else. I believe they are not capable of hurling boulders whilst uprooted. So that's what I would do: I'd build a bunch of Protectors (and enough Wisps to repair them all) and then I'd uproot a "formidable" Protector army and march to the enemy base. This was mostly ineffective and readily defeated by a capable adversary, but I really trololoved the reactions some of them had. They would be absolutely flabbergasted that I'd wasted my time on something so dumb. But it was undeniably hilarious from my perspective to just watch a bunch of trees waltz into the enemy's home base and start hurling boulders at everything in sight.

by PakG1 3y ago

Someone 3y ago

In “Thought And Choice In Chess”, A.D. de Groot (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adriaan_de_Groot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adriaan_de_Groot) noticed that for chess. He asked good chess players (including Euwe and Alekhine) to take a short look at a board and then replicate it from memory. They were better at doing that for real games than for artificial setups. Also, their errors tended to be non-essential. When they misplaced pawns, for example, that wouldn’t affect the plan to pick. He also asked amateur-level players. I don’t remember whether they made more errors, but they did make more essential errors, and for them, the difference between ‘logical’ and ‘illogical’ board setups was smaller.

aio2 3y ago

It reminds me of one of Murphy's Law saying that an amateur is more dangerous than a professional since they are more unpredictable.

aleksiy123 3y ago

When I used to play a lot of CS:GO this effect was very obvious. Ranking up was essentially learning to counter strategies at a certain skill level. But sometimes when you played much weaker players your playstyle would be over optimized to predict/counter a different style of play. The solution was usually to stop overthinking it and just rely on your raw aim mechanics to beat them.

themoonisachees 3y ago
Exactly my experience as well. When I went back to playing and dropped to silver, you could frequently hear me go "what the fuck is he doing over there?!", Surprised that an enemy who lacks mechanics would not act like a reasonable opponent would, and surprise me.
- NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
  Back in the days of Battle.Net and Warcraft III, I used to sit on my friend's computer playing 1:1 games. I played different races a lot and sort of got good, but I was bored. So I decided that I would exclusively play Night Elf and build nothing but Protector Trees. Now Protector Trees are Night Elf "buildings" which are, of course, rooted in the ground but they can throw boulders at attacking units, thus defending the home base. Protectors also have the unique ability to uproot themselves and move around the board, then take root somewhere else. I believe they are not capable of hurling boulders whilst uprooted. So that's what I would do: I'd build a bunch of Protectors (and enough Wisps to repair them all) and then I'd uproot a "formidable" Protector army and march to the enemy base. This was mostly ineffective and readily defeated by a capable adversary, but I really trololoved the reactions some of them had. They would be absolutely flabbergasted that I'd wasted my time on something so dumb. But it was undeniably hilarious from my perspective to just watch a bunch of trees waltz into the enemy's home base and start hurling boulders at everything in sight.