Arthur Smith

It IS difficult to say which o f the two games gives more
pleasure . The combinations in Go suf er in comparison
with those of Chess by reason o f a certain monotony ,
because there are no pieces having different movements , and because the stones are not moved again after once being placed on the board . Also to a beginner the play , especially in the beginning of the game , seems vague ; there are so many points on which the stones may be played , and the amount of territory obtainable by o n e move or the other seems hopelessly indefinite . This objection 18 more appar ent than real , and as on' s knowledge o f the game grows , it becomes apparent that the first stones must be played with great care , and that there are certain definite , a d v an tageous positions , which limit the player in his choice of moves , just as the recogni zed Chess openings guide our play in that game . Stones so played in the opening are called Joseki” by the Japanese .

Go , on the other hand , is not merely a picture of a single battle like Chess , but of a whole campaign of a modern kind , in which the strategical movements of the masses in the end decide the victory . Battles occur in various parts of the board , and sometimes se v eral are going o n at the
same time . Strong positions are besieged and captured ,
and whole armies are cut o f from their line o f co m m un ica
tions and are taken prisoners unless they can fortify them
selves in impregnable positions , and a far reaching strategy alone assures the victory .