11 ms·

Just look to Chess. The top players today are way better than any of the greats before, because they can train against computers and know exactly where they fai

Just look to Chess. The top players today are way better than any of the greats before, because they can train against computers and know exactly where they failed. That said, because they've gotten so good, chess at the top levels is pretty boring... it's hard to come up with a unique strategy so players tend to be defensive. Lots of ties. On the other hand, chess is more popular than ever. It's huge in high schools. I see people playing it everywhere. I know that for me, I love being able to play a game and then view the computer analysis afterwards and see exactly what I did wrong (granted, sometimes a move can be good for a computer who will know how to follow through on the next 10 moves, but not necessarily good for me... but most of the time I can see where I made a mistake when the computer points it out). Side note: I play on LIChess and it's great. Is there an equivalent app for Go?

tptacek 3y ago
online-go.com
- anononaut 3y ago
  OGS is definitely the best server in the West. Deserves all patronage it gets and more. I wish the AGA was more supportive of it rather than KGS.
  - naet 3y ago
    KGS is still pretty great. OGS might be more accessible to new players with one click sign in and a better web app, but I think KGS has a higher population of true dan+ strength players, and has a stronger "culture" around community reviews and studying. It used to be even better, but there are less total people playing on KGS than the previous peak.
    - tptacek 3y ago
      I found the culture on OGS, particularly wrt moderation, to be pretty great (as a newcomer, and I exclusively play 9x9). I've read about KGS but I've never figured out how to engage with it. (I know it to be the OG, srs bzns venue, though).
      - slowmovintarget 3y ago
        For KGS you had to bring your own client, like cgoban, if memory serves. They have a web client now, but the Java client was what I played on for while.
      - Alex3917 3y ago
        > I've read about KGS but I've never figured out how to engage with it. Just download CGoban, here is the website: https://www.gokgs.com/ https://www.gokgs.com/ Most of us started who are still active on the server have been playing there 20+ years at this point. E.g. I myself (and many others) started playing after reading this article: https://tromp.github.io/gostory.html https://tromp.github.io/gostory.html
  - Alex3917 3y ago
    > I wish the AGA was more supportive of it rather than KGS. Out of curiosity, why do you like OGS more? I find the UX of KGS to be way more intuitive.
    - anononaut 3y ago
      I find everything about OGS superior to KGS except for the quantity of strong players. In particular, its active development, community involvement, and modern tooling all make it more appealing. KGS is very closed source, running ancient software on ancient hardware, very static, very DIY and individual. It's about the game of go and little else. That is admirable in some regards, but not suitable for a growing niche community that is Western go.
fryz 3y ago
FWIW, I find the classical chess tournaments with the super GMs to be fairly interesting, if only because the focus of the games is more about the metagame than about the game itself. The article linked at the bottom of the source is a WSJ piece about how Magnus beats the best players because of the "human element". A lot about the games today are about opening preparation, where the goal is to out-prepare and surprise your opponent by studying opening lines and esoteric responses (somewhere computer play has drastically opened up new fields). Similarly, during the middle/end-games, the best players will try to force uncomfortable decisions on their opponents, knowing what positions their opponents tend to not prefer. For example, in the candidates game round 1, Fabiano took Hikari into a position that had very little in the way of aggressive counter-play, effectively taking away a big advantage that Hikaru would otherwise have had. Watching these games feels somewhat akin to watching generals develop strategies trying to out maneuver their counterparts on the other side, taking into consideration their strengths and weaknesses as much as the tactics/deployment of troops/etc.
- akkartik 3y ago
  On the other hand, a game like Praggnanandhaa vs Vidit 2 days ago feels like Russian roulette. https://www.chess.com/news/view/2024-fide-candidates-tournament-round-3 https://www.chess.com/news/view/2024-fide-candidates-tournam... Mistakes on both sides, including the side that presumably prepared this line with help from computers.
- non-chalad 3y ago
  Have they considered metagaming like pirates fight in The Secret of Monkey Island (1)? 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7a4HF3dIcuo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7a4HF3dIcuo
jsheard 3y ago
> Just look to Chess. The top players today are way better than any of the greats before, because they can train against computers and know exactly where they failed. AlphaGo isn't available for anyone to train against like Stockfish is though, what are Go players using? Has another powerful Go engine been developed since then?
- SonOfLilit 3y ago
  We use KataGo and sometimes LeelaZero (which is a replication of the AlphZero paper). KataGo was trained with more knowledge of the game (feature engineering and loss engineering), so it trained faster. It was also trained on different board sizes and to play to get a good result when it's already behind or ahead. KaTrain is a good frontend.
  - kadoban 3y ago
    > KataGo was trained with more knowledge of the game (feature engineering and loss engineering), so it trained faster. Not really important to your point, but it's not really just that it uses more game knowledge. Mostly it's that a small but dedicated community (especially lightvector) worked hard to build on what AlphaGo and LeelaZero did. Lightvector is a genius and put a lot of effort into KataGo. It wasn't just add some game knowledge and that's it. https://github.com/lightvector/KataGo?tab=readme-ov-file#training-history-and-research-and-docs https://github.com/lightvector/KataGo?tab=readme-ov-file#tra... has a bunch of info if you're interested.
    - SonOfLilit 3y ago
      I wasn't at all trying to say his work was simple. I was trying to say "deepmind were trying to build an AI that gets good at games without anything in their structures being specialized for the game, lightvector asked what if we did specialize the model on Go". And he did some wonderfully clever things.
- espadrine 3y ago
  KataGo is an open-source algorithm derived from AlphaGo, but with a number of tricks so that it trained faster: https://katagotraining.org/ https://katagotraining.org/ It likely surpasses AlphaGo, and just like Stockfish, it delivers a protocol that can hook into many user interface apps: https://github.com/lightvector/KataGo?tab=readme-ov-file#guis https://github.com/lightvector/KataGo?tab=readme-ov-file#gui... From those technologies, also came an interesting visualisation of how human players changed their habits following AlphaGo: https://drive.google.com/file/d/16-ntvk3D1_pgjJ7u64t4jMYMh0zqsiYG/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/16-ntvk3D1_pgjJ7u64t4jMYMh0z...
timetraveller26 3y ago
Don't know about go, but Lishogi is Lichess for shogi (Japanese chess)
Bootvis 3y ago
Second round of the Candidates tournament played Friday had 4/4 decisive games[1]. In general, a tie might be the most common result but even at the highest level there tend to be chances for both sides. [1]: https://lichess.org/broadcast/fide-candidates-2024--open/round-1/AjqSsU1w https://lichess.org/broadcast/fide-candidates-2024--open/rou...
- mtlmtlmtlmtl 3y ago
  It's really up to the players. SuperGMs these days are somewhat addicted to draws because it's a very safe result in a tournament setting and in terms of rating. Therefore these players tend to favour less risky and more calculable openings. They care more about avoiding a loss than they do about winning. The idea that the large amount of draws is because players are so strong now, is mostly a myth. It's really just psychology and game theory at work. For a perfect illustration of all my points, look at Aronian vs Grischuk from the 2018 candidates tournament. Here both players chose to play into complications, and the resulting game was wildly complex, with both players making several suboptimal moves simply because the position was just too complex even for two of the strongest calculators in the game at the time. And in the end, they still ended up constructing a draw by repetition when all 3 results were still possible. Both players had good winning chances, yet the fear of losing finally overtook them and they collectively bailed out of the game. It's not that players are now so strong it's almost impossible to win, the players just aren't as willing to seek out the necessary positions.
thatswrong0 3y ago
I wish Chess960 was more popular for this exact reason. It’s super fun to watch and play compared to normal Chess… basically all I do with my friends
Taek 3y ago
I think you would see fewer ties if players got 0.2 points each for draws instead of 0.5 points each for draws. It makes the risk of going for a risky strategy lower (you only drop 0.2 pts instead of 0.5 vs getting an easy draw) and it makes the rewards much greater... a single win and 4 losses scores the same as 5 draws. you wont see players doing intentional draws anymore either
- whimsicalism 3y ago
  think it is somewhat intrinsic to chess that it makes sense to go for ties as black in top tier play
- BurningFrog 3y ago
  Football (Soccer) did something similar. Before that is was 2 points for a win, 1 point each for a draw. In 1981 they made it 3 points for a win, and the sport has had substantially more offensive play since.
- dfan 3y ago
  One issue with this is that it encourages collusion. If you're a top GM playing someone of equal skill, it's +EV to agree to flip a coin beforehand to determine who will win (and then play a fake game) rather than playing it for real. Some chess tournaments have experimented with giving 1/3 point for draws instead of 1/2 and it didn't really change much. Mostly it acted as a tiebreaker, which you could have done by just using "most wins" as a tiebreaker anyway. My favorite idea (not mine) for creating decisive results in chess is that when a draw is agreed, you switch sides and start a new game, but don't reset the clocks.
  - paulddraper 3y ago
    But most tournaments don't have players playing each other an even number of times. Any sport can have a thrown match. A la Rocky.
    - worddepress 3y ago
      The difference here is you are not throwing a match for outside money. You are actually doing something in your interest and probably not against the rules (??) so you are just playing the game (the new game) as intended. Might be an interesting variant of chess where 2 players just decide how much of the point they get each via negotiation, and if they disagree, they go to "court" by playing the chess game.
Angostura 3y ago
> The Queens Gambit turned quite a few of my daughter's friends on to chess
hibikir 3y ago
The defensiveness has absolutely nothing to do with better computers and the improvements in play that came with it, but with tournaments where risk taking is an economic disaster. As others have said, there aren't massive numbers of ties in the candidates tournament, because the difference in value between being first and second is so massive that if you aren't first, you are last. Compare this to regular high level chess in the Grand Chess Tour: It's where most of your money is going to come from if you are a top player. Invitation to the tour as a regular is by rating, and there's enough money at the bottom of the tour than the difference between qualifying or not is massive. Therefore, the most important thing is to stay in the tour train. Lose 20 points of rating, and barring Rex Sinquefield deciding to sponsor your life out of the goodness of his heart, you might as well spend time coaching, because there are so few tournaments where there's a lot of money. This also shows in the big difficulties for youngsters that reach 2650 or so: They are only going to find good enough opponents to move up quickly in a handful of events a year where people with higher rating end up risking their rating against them. See how something like the US championship is a big risk for the top US professionals, because all the young players that show are at least 50 points underrated, if not more. This is what causes draws, not computer prep. Anand was better at just drawing every game in every tournament back when he was still on the tour, and yet computers were far worse than today, especially with opening theory.
- ummonk 3y ago
  And it simply doesn’t have to be this way. The top tournaments could just use a prior qualification tournament with an open Swiss. Then invite the top finishers from the open Swiss to participate in the round robin. Can reserve an invitational wildcard or two but the rest should have to earn their place.
- santoshalper 3y ago
  Very insightful!
- jimbokun 3y ago
  So they need to mandate a promotion and relegation system for the top levels. Force players in the top flight to beat at least some of their opponents, or get replaced by top players in the next lower tiers. I think that would increase spectator interest even more. In football, relegation battles can be almost as compelling as the title race..
yeellow 3y ago
I recommend goQuest (mobile app), and playing 9x9 go. I used to play on KGS, but it is less crowded now (the problem is that there are too many servers: OGS, IGS, Tygem, Wbadul, etc and no one dominates, therefore you wait for the game, you need a rating, etc. Most are not very modern, mobile unfriendly, etc.). Also 19x19 takes too much time for me when comparing to chess, 9x9 is perfect, and goQuest has many active players, after a few seconds you get a match (they offer 13x13 and 19x19, but those are less active I suppose).
Pet_Ant 3y ago
> That said, because they've gotten so good, chess at the top levels is pretty boring Yeah, I feel the same thing about Magic formats when the pros play. When a format is new and people are discovering, and they have to rely on their gut, and make educated guesses. That's when it's fun to play and watch.
- dumpsterlid 3y ago
  [dead]
zer0-c00l 3y ago
https://online-go.com/ https://online-go.com/ is the easiest place to get started as a western beginner. The far more active go servers are Asian and have a higher barrier to entry in terms of registration, downloading the client, and dealing with poor localization. (Fox Weiqi, Tygem, etc.)
- dunefox 3y ago
  OGS is great. There's an android app as well.
pushedx 3y ago
KGS is where I used to play, this is the homepage: https://www.gokgs.com/ https://www.gokgs.com/ and this is the web client: https://shin.gokgs.com/ https://shin.gokgs.com/ The homepage hasn't had a redesign since at the latest 2007, but the community is great an there are top players on there.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
thangalin 3y ago
https://katagui.baduk.club/ https://katagui.baduk.club/
baby 3y ago
https://www.gokgs.com/ https://www.gokgs.com/
ricefield 3y ago
OGS is the closest thing I’ve found to lichess but it’s quite good! https://online-go.com/ https://online-go.com/
Buttons840 3y ago
One nice thing about Go is there are no ties. This is offset by how boring the end games are though and having to count. Chess has explosive and exciting endings, Go just kind of fizzles out at some point.
protomolecule 3y ago
>Is there an equivalent app for Go? https://senseis.xmp.net/?GoServers https://senseis.xmp.net/?GoServers I used to play on KGS[0] via GoUniverse Chrome plugin [1]. Not sure if there are enough players there today. Fox and Tygem are huge. [0] http://www.gokgs.com/ http://www.gokgs.com/ [1] https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/gouniverse/iejedhnbogbenkmhfjoolmlibldbkhhj?pli=1 https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/gouniverse/iejedhnb...
veunes 3y ago
The ability to train against powerful computer programs have indeed elevated the level of play in many games

tptacek 3y ago

online-go.com

anononaut 3y ago
OGS is definitely the best server in the West. Deserves all patronage it gets and more. I wish the AGA was more supportive of it rather than KGS.
- naet 3y ago
  KGS is still pretty great. OGS might be more accessible to new players with one click sign in and a better web app, but I think KGS has a higher population of true dan+ strength players, and has a stronger "culture" around community reviews and studying. It used to be even better, but there are less total people playing on KGS than the previous peak.
  - tptacek 3y ago
    I found the culture on OGS, particularly wrt moderation, to be pretty great (as a newcomer, and I exclusively play 9x9). I've read about KGS but I've never figured out how to engage with it. (I know it to be the OG, srs bzns venue, though).
    - slowmovintarget 3y ago
      For KGS you had to bring your own client, like cgoban, if memory serves. They have a web client now, but the Java client was what I played on for while.
    - Alex3917 3y ago
      > I've read about KGS but I've never figured out how to engage with it. Just download CGoban, here is the website: https://www.gokgs.com/ https://www.gokgs.com/ Most of us started who are still active on the server have been playing there 20+ years at this point. E.g. I myself (and many others) started playing after reading this article: https://tromp.github.io/gostory.html https://tromp.github.io/gostory.html
- Alex3917 3y ago
  > I wish the AGA was more supportive of it rather than KGS. Out of curiosity, why do you like OGS more? I find the UX of KGS to be way more intuitive.
  - anononaut 3y ago
    I find everything about OGS superior to KGS except for the quantity of strong players. In particular, its active development, community involvement, and modern tooling all make it more appealing. KGS is very closed source, running ancient software on ancient hardware, very static, very DIY and individual. It's about the game of go and little else. That is admirable in some regards, but not suitable for a growing niche community that is Western go.

fryz 3y ago

FWIW, I find the classical chess tournaments with the super GMs to be fairly interesting, if only because the focus of the games is more about the metagame than about the game itself. The article linked at the bottom of the source is a WSJ piece about how Magnus beats the best players because of the "human element". A lot about the games today are about opening preparation, where the goal is to out-prepare and surprise your opponent by studying opening lines and esoteric responses (somewhere computer play has drastically opened up new fields). Similarly, during the middle/end-games, the best players will try to force uncomfortable decisions on their opponents, knowing what positions their opponents tend to not prefer. For example, in the candidates game round 1, Fabiano took Hikari into a position that had very little in the way of aggressive counter-play, effectively taking away a big advantage that Hikaru would otherwise have had. Watching these games feels somewhat akin to watching generals develop strategies trying to out maneuver their counterparts on the other side, taking into consideration their strengths and weaknesses as much as the tactics/deployment of troops/etc.

akkartik 3y ago
On the other hand, a game like Praggnanandhaa vs Vidit 2 days ago feels like Russian roulette. https://www.chess.com/news/view/2024-fide-candidates-tournament-round-3 https://www.chess.com/news/view/2024-fide-candidates-tournam... Mistakes on both sides, including the side that presumably prepared this line with help from computers.
non-chalad 3y ago
Have they considered metagaming like pirates fight in The Secret of Monkey Island (1)? 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7a4HF3dIcuo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7a4HF3dIcuo

jsheard 3y ago

> Just look to Chess. The top players today are way better than any of the greats before, because they can train against computers and know exactly where they failed. AlphaGo isn't available for anyone to train against like Stockfish is though, what are Go players using? Has another powerful Go engine been developed since then?

SonOfLilit 3y ago
We use KataGo and sometimes LeelaZero (which is a replication of the AlphZero paper). KataGo was trained with more knowledge of the game (feature engineering and loss engineering), so it trained faster. It was also trained on different board sizes and to play to get a good result when it's already behind or ahead. KaTrain is a good frontend.
- kadoban 3y ago
  > KataGo was trained with more knowledge of the game (feature engineering and loss engineering), so it trained faster. Not really important to your point, but it's not really just that it uses more game knowledge. Mostly it's that a small but dedicated community (especially lightvector) worked hard to build on what AlphaGo and LeelaZero did. Lightvector is a genius and put a lot of effort into KataGo. It wasn't just add some game knowledge and that's it. https://github.com/lightvector/KataGo?tab=readme-ov-file#training-history-and-research-and-docs https://github.com/lightvector/KataGo?tab=readme-ov-file#tra... has a bunch of info if you're interested.
  - SonOfLilit 3y ago
    I wasn't at all trying to say his work was simple. I was trying to say "deepmind were trying to build an AI that gets good at games without anything in their structures being specialized for the game, lightvector asked what if we did specialize the model on Go". And he did some wonderfully clever things.
espadrine 3y ago
KataGo is an open-source algorithm derived from AlphaGo, but with a number of tricks so that it trained faster: https://katagotraining.org/ https://katagotraining.org/ It likely surpasses AlphaGo, and just like Stockfish, it delivers a protocol that can hook into many user interface apps: https://github.com/lightvector/KataGo?tab=readme-ov-file#guis https://github.com/lightvector/KataGo?tab=readme-ov-file#gui... From those technologies, also came an interesting visualisation of how human players changed their habits following AlphaGo: https://drive.google.com/file/d/16-ntvk3D1_pgjJ7u64t4jMYMh0zqsiYG/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/16-ntvk3D1_pgjJ7u64t4jMYMh0z...

timetraveller26 3y ago

Don't know about go, but Lishogi is Lichess for shogi (Japanese chess)

Bootvis 3y ago

Second round of the Candidates tournament played Friday had 4/4 decisive games[1]. In general, a tie might be the most common result but even at the highest level there tend to be chances for both sides. [1]: https://lichess.org/broadcast/fide-candidates-2024--open/round-1/AjqSsU1w https://lichess.org/broadcast/fide-candidates-2024--open/rou...

mtlmtlmtlmtl 3y ago
It's really up to the players. SuperGMs these days are somewhat addicted to draws because it's a very safe result in a tournament setting and in terms of rating. Therefore these players tend to favour less risky and more calculable openings. They care more about avoiding a loss than they do about winning. The idea that the large amount of draws is because players are so strong now, is mostly a myth. It's really just psychology and game theory at work. For a perfect illustration of all my points, look at Aronian vs Grischuk from the 2018 candidates tournament. Here both players chose to play into complications, and the resulting game was wildly complex, with both players making several suboptimal moves simply because the position was just too complex even for two of the strongest calculators in the game at the time. And in the end, they still ended up constructing a draw by repetition when all 3 results were still possible. Both players had good winning chances, yet the fear of losing finally overtook them and they collectively bailed out of the game. It's not that players are now so strong it's almost impossible to win, the players just aren't as willing to seek out the necessary positions.

thatswrong0 3y ago

I wish Chess960 was more popular for this exact reason. It’s super fun to watch and play compared to normal Chess… basically all I do with my friends

Taek 3y ago

I think you would see fewer ties if players got 0.2 points each for draws instead of 0.5 points each for draws. It makes the risk of going for a risky strategy lower (you only drop 0.2 pts instead of 0.5 vs getting an easy draw) and it makes the rewards much greater... a single win and 4 losses scores the same as 5 draws. you wont see players doing intentional draws anymore either

whimsicalism 3y ago
think it is somewhat intrinsic to chess that it makes sense to go for ties as black in top tier play
BurningFrog 3y ago
Football (Soccer) did something similar. Before that is was 2 points for a win, 1 point each for a draw. In 1981 they made it 3 points for a win, and the sport has had substantially more offensive play since.
dfan 3y ago
One issue with this is that it encourages collusion. If you're a top GM playing someone of equal skill, it's +EV to agree to flip a coin beforehand to determine who will win (and then play a fake game) rather than playing it for real. Some chess tournaments have experimented with giving 1/3 point for draws instead of 1/2 and it didn't really change much. Mostly it acted as a tiebreaker, which you could have done by just using "most wins" as a tiebreaker anyway. My favorite idea (not mine) for creating decisive results in chess is that when a draw is agreed, you switch sides and start a new game, but don't reset the clocks.
- paulddraper 3y ago
  But most tournaments don't have players playing each other an even number of times. Any sport can have a thrown match. A la Rocky.
  - worddepress 3y ago
    The difference here is you are not throwing a match for outside money. You are actually doing something in your interest and probably not against the rules (??) so you are just playing the game (the new game) as intended. Might be an interesting variant of chess where 2 players just decide how much of the point they get each via negotiation, and if they disagree, they go to "court" by playing the chess game.

Angostura 3y ago

> The Queens Gambit turned quite a few of my daughter's friends on to chess

hibikir 3y ago

The defensiveness has absolutely nothing to do with better computers and the improvements in play that came with it, but with tournaments where risk taking is an economic disaster. As others have said, there aren't massive numbers of ties in the candidates tournament, because the difference in value between being first and second is so massive that if you aren't first, you are last. Compare this to regular high level chess in the Grand Chess Tour: It's where most of your money is going to come from if you are a top player. Invitation to the tour as a regular is by rating, and there's enough money at the bottom of the tour than the difference between qualifying or not is massive. Therefore, the most important thing is to stay in the tour train. Lose 20 points of rating, and barring Rex Sinquefield deciding to sponsor your life out of the goodness of his heart, you might as well spend time coaching, because there are so few tournaments where there's a lot of money. This also shows in the big difficulties for youngsters that reach 2650 or so: They are only going to find good enough opponents to move up quickly in a handful of events a year where people with higher rating end up risking their rating against them. See how something like the US championship is a big risk for the top US professionals, because all the young players that show are at least 50 points underrated, if not more. This is what causes draws, not computer prep. Anand was better at just drawing every game in every tournament back when he was still on the tour, and yet computers were far worse than today, especially with opening theory.

ummonk 3y ago
And it simply doesn’t have to be this way. The top tournaments could just use a prior qualification tournament with an open Swiss. Then invite the top finishers from the open Swiss to participate in the round robin. Can reserve an invitational wildcard or two but the rest should have to earn their place.
santoshalper 3y ago
Very insightful!
jimbokun 3y ago
So they need to mandate a promotion and relegation system for the top levels. Force players in the top flight to beat at least some of their opponents, or get replaced by top players in the next lower tiers. I think that would increase spectator interest even more. In football, relegation battles can be almost as compelling as the title race..

yeellow 3y ago

I recommend goQuest (mobile app), and playing 9x9 go. I used to play on KGS, but it is less crowded now (the problem is that there are too many servers: OGS, IGS, Tygem, Wbadul, etc and no one dominates, therefore you wait for the game, you need a rating, etc. Most are not very modern, mobile unfriendly, etc.). Also 19x19 takes too much time for me when comparing to chess, 9x9 is perfect, and goQuest has many active players, after a few seconds you get a match (they offer 13x13 and 19x19, but those are less active I suppose).

Pet_Ant 3y ago

> That said, because they've gotten so good, chess at the top levels is pretty boring Yeah, I feel the same thing about Magic formats when the pros play. When a format is new and people are discovering, and they have to rely on their gut, and make educated guesses. That's when it's fun to play and watch.

dumpsterlid 3y ago
[dead]

zer0-c00l 3y ago

https://online-go.com/ https://online-go.com/ is the easiest place to get started as a western beginner. The far more active go servers are Asian and have a higher barrier to entry in terms of registration, downloading the client, and dealing with poor localization. (Fox Weiqi, Tygem, etc.)

dunefox 3y ago
OGS is great. There's an android app as well.

pushedx 3y ago

KGS is where I used to play, this is the homepage: https://www.gokgs.com/ https://www.gokgs.com/ and this is the web client: https://shin.gokgs.com/ https://shin.gokgs.com/ The homepage hasn't had a redesign since at the latest 2007, but the community is great an there are top players on there.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

thangalin 3y ago

https://katagui.baduk.club/ https://katagui.baduk.club/

baby 3y ago

https://www.gokgs.com/ https://www.gokgs.com/

ricefield 3y ago

OGS is the closest thing I’ve found to lichess but it’s quite good! https://online-go.com/ https://online-go.com/

Buttons840 3y ago

One nice thing about Go is there are no ties. This is offset by how boring the end games are though and having to count. Chess has explosive and exciting endings, Go just kind of fizzles out at some point.

protomolecule 3y ago

>Is there an equivalent app for Go? https://senseis.xmp.net/?GoServers https://senseis.xmp.net/?GoServers I used to play on KGS[0] via GoUniverse Chrome plugin [1]. Not sure if there are enough players there today. Fox and Tygem are huge. [0] http://www.gokgs.com/ http://www.gokgs.com/ [1] https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/gouniverse/iejedhnbogbenkmhfjoolmlibldbkhhj?pli=1 https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/gouniverse/iejedhnb...

veunes 3y ago

The ability to train against powerful computer programs have indeed elevated the level of play in many games