r/baduk • u/LosttMutaliskk • 4h ago
Thoughts on the direction of creativity in the AI revolution?
After watching Shin Jin-seo vs Kata Go, I have mixed feelings.
Game 1 was definitely my favorite, KataGo started with a novel creative fuseki. Game 2 included a very long book joseki lasting 50 moves that favored Shin. Game 3 had simple joseki variations that naturally led to settled living groups for both sides with little fighting.
Game 2 and 3 were somewhat of a letdown because it relied so heavily on a combination of book knowledge and submissive play from the human side. In fact, it felt like the AI was being more creative than the human. White's fuseki in Game 1 was already giving a really cool feeling.
I'm a low-dan Fox player and I'm fond of the romantic style. I love making bold moves that feel like overplays, and challenging my opponent to punish. I try to win by as many points as possible, rather than just 0.5. And many of my games don't go to scoring because someone resigns.
Ever since the AI revolution, advanced Go discussion has really become heavily analytical. Moves are evaluated by their winrate rather than their fighting spirit. Frankly, I will pick an aggressive continuation over one that is submissive but has a better win-rate.
The Ear-Reddening Game, the Game of the Century, and the Sixteen Soldiers Game are all great matches that would not stand the test of AI.
Disclaimer. Obviously, the gap between non-professional and professional is wide and a pro can play any style against an amatuer who memorized an AI opening, and the pro will still win. So I'm not suggesting that AI is the only correct way for students to learn to play.



