I have a Shūsaku number of 5. My winning Shūsaku number is at most 9 if "unpure". My "pure" winning Shūsaku number is at most 13.
I have a Shūsaku number of 5. More Shūsaku numbers:
I have a Shūsaku number of 5.
Here's a collection of a few Shūsaku numbers, making it easier for you to find your own Shūsaku number. Of course all listed Shūsaku numbers are just upper limits.
I have a Shūsaku number of 5. I don't want to tell you the path through which that was achieved.
But who gives a shit about that? You can not write an article about just that, so I decided to collect a few Shūsaku numbers for you, making it easier for you to find your own Shūsaku number. Of course all listed Shūsaku numbers are just upper limits, because we have incomplete information. It could always be uncovered that Shūsaku secretly played a game against the emperor of China and once that information is leaked, suddenly thousands of new paths open up.
4: Zoran Mutabzija , Gyorgy Csizmadia , Frank Janssen , Dragan Barisic , Erik Ekholm , Gert Schnider , Victor Chow , Hu Yuqing , Ben Gale , Tan Jia-Cheng , Li Xianyu , Ri Pong-il , Fu Li , Yu Cheng-juei , Seo Yeong-hwi , Hong Maleun-Saem
4 or lower through Kikuchi Yasurō (菊池康郎): Zoran Mutabzija , Gyorgy Csizmadia , Frank Janssen , Dragan Barisic , Erik Ekholm , Gert Schnider , Victor Chow , Hu Yuqing , Ben Gale , Tan Jia-Cheng , Li Xianyu , Ri Pong-il , Fu Li , Yu Cheng-juei , Seo Yeong-hwi , Hong Maleun-Saem
5: Pavol Lisy , Jan Simara , Csaba Mero , Christian Pop , Pal Balogh , Ondrej Silt , Christoph Gerlach , Benjamin Teuber , Jan Hora , Svetlana Shikshina , Diana Koszegi , Catalin Taranu , Ilja Shikshin , Alexandre Dinerchtein , Andrii Kravets , Ali Jabarin , Valerii Krushelnytskyi , Fernando Aguilar , Artem Kachanovskyi , Benjamin Teuber , Gu Li , Jiang Mingjiu , Lin Chih-han , Chan Chi-Hin , Rob van Zeijst , Feng Yun , Michiel Eijkhout , Serhii Ridzel , Cheong Meng-Hou , Wang Xi , Luis Garcia-Valenzuela , Nitipone Aroonphaichitra , Krzysztof Podbiol , Adam Dottan , Antoni Bugaj , David Seibt , Daniel Krause , Alexander Kurz , Johannes Obenaus , Tony Claasen , Uwe Lanz , Thomas Derz , Gunnar Dickfeld
5 or lower through Zoran Mutabzija : Pavol Lisy , Jan Simara , Csaba Mero , Christian Pop , Pal Balogh , Ondrej Silt , Christoph Gerlach , Benjamin Teuber , Jan Hora , Svetlana Shikshina , Diana Koszegi
5 or lower through Frank Janssen : Catalin Taranu , Ilja Shikshin , Alexandre Dinerchtein , Andrii Kravets , Ali Jabarin , Valerii Krushelnytskyi , Fernando Aguilar , Artem Kachanovskyi
5 or lower through Cho Hunhyun : Benjamin Teuber , Gu Li , Jiang Mingjiu , Lin Chih-han , Chan Chi-Hin , Rob van Zeijst , Feng Yun
5 or lower through Michael Redmond : Michiel Eijkhout , Serhii Ridzel , Cheong Meng-Hou , Wang Xi , Luis Garcia-Valenzuela , Nitipone Aroonphaichitra
5 or lower through Christian Zak : Krzysztof Podbiol (who played against just about everyone in Europe, including myself) , Adam Dottan , Antoni Bugaj , David Seibt , Daniel Krause
5 or lower through Günther Cießow : Alexander Kurz , Johannes Obenaus , Tony Claasen , Uwe Lanz , Thomas Derz , Gunnar Dickfeld
My winning Shūsaku number is at most 9 if "unpure". My "pure" winning Shūsaku number is at most 13. More winning Shūsaku numbers:
It isn't possible to reduce your number to 4 any more, because all players known to have a 3 or lower have already died. And getting a 5 is becoming exceedingly difficult, because only a few players that are known to have a 4 are still playing. But if you're somewhat active in tournaments and are paired with one of the many listed players, it's relatively easy to get a 6.
You can probably repeat the same thing with the American Go Assciation , but I'm not familiar with their systems, so someone else has to do it. But you can see that some of the listed people are from the Americas or Asia, so it should be about as easy to get a 6 there.
My winning Shūsaku number is at most 9 if we ignore any "purity" requirement, i.e. the requirement of defeats having to be in chronological order. There is a "pure" line of defeats that gives me a winning Shūsaku number of at most 13.
Obviously, without the "purity" requirement, the rules are much less restricting and allow you to get a low number easily. Just find a young player, defeat that player and then wait for that player to become much stronger and defeat much stronger opponents than you could. With the "purity" requirement, it only works in the other direction: Some strong player defeats even stronger players, but then gets older and weaker and then you can defeat that player. The only other helper is randomness: A stronger player does not always defeat a weaker player.
It isn't possible to reduce your number to 4 any more, because all players known to have a 3 or lower have already died. And getting a 5 is becoming exceedingly difficult, because only a few players that are known to have a 4 are still playing. But if you're somewhat active in tournaments and are paired with one of the many listed players (there are more of course), it's relatively easy to get a 6. I listed strong players, because they had so many opponents, but you can sometimes be paired with a much stronger player if you are in a large tournament or if you won a game in the previous round and your strong opponent lost a game in the previous round. Or you can just hunt down one of the many tournaments that Krzysztof Podbiol visits and hope to be paired against him.
You can probably repeat the same thing with the American Go Assciation , but I'm not familiar with their systems, so someone else has to do it. But you can see that some of the listed people are from the Americas or Asia, so it should be about as easy to get a 6 there. If you're from Japan, it should even be easy to get a 5, because Kikuchi Yasurō was a strong amateur who presumably played a lot of opponents and was active for a long time.
My winning Shūsaku number is at most 9 if we ignore any "purity" requirement, i.e. the requirement of defeats having to be in chronological order. There is a "pure" line of defeats that gives me a winning Shūsaku number of at most 13, going through Alexandre Dinerchtein like for most european players. But researching this in more detail is too tedious, because the "purity" requirement introduces a time dependence: There is no longer a single number that's true for all of time, but instead a function that decreases whenever you defeat a player with a lower number than your previous best. Players who defeated you before that date cannot profit from your improvement (in contrast to the normal Shūsaku number, where your decrease affects potentially everyone who ever played against you, no matter when) .
Obviously, without the "purity" requirement, the rules are much less restricting and allow you to get a low number easily. Just find a young player, defeat that player and then wait for that player to become much stronger and defeat much stronger opponents than you could. With the "purity" requirement, it only works in the other direction: Some strong player defeats even stronger players, but then gets older and weaker and then you can defeat that player. Since getting weaker with age is a slow process, you would have to wait a long time. The only other helper is randomness: A stronger player does not always defeat a weaker player. If the strength difference is small, an upset can happen. But those events are rare . The greatest ratings difference I ever defeated was around 300 Elo points (in the way the European Go Database defines Elo) .
Morphy and Shūsaku lived in similar times. Why are there still several players alive today with a Morphy number of 3, but almost all players with a Shūsaku number of 4 are retired already and all with a 3 are dead? I would say it has to do with a lack of internationality in Go. There were very few international tournaments before 1980. Then there is the strict separation between amateurs and professionals. Even today the number of professionals playing internationally is limited.
On the Chess side, there is the strong emphasis on having to record your games. In amateur Go, it took until the nineties for international organisations like the European Go Federation to collect tournament results. The FIDE also requires Chess players to play in international tournaments to receive a grandmaster or international master title. In contrast, Go pros can play in their home country for their entire lives.
But it's more than that. Shortly after Morphy's time, Chess players already expressed interest in knowing who the world champion is. And so regular international competitions at the highest level started in the 19th century. In contrast, even today Go does not have an authoritative international governing organisation for all pros and consequently no official world championship. It also took until 1928 for a strong non-Japanese player to move to Japan.
Another limiting factor may be the language barrier. Most players in Europe and the Americas natively speak a language from the Indo-European language family. That makes it much easier to form international organisations like FIDE. In contrast, Japan, Korea and China don't speak languages that are known to be related. Only China and Taiwan share a common language. A focus on internationality would probably help Go as a whole. The same happened in Chess: A lot of the development in Chess started after internationalising and professionalising it, not in the hundreds of years of European Chess history before that.
Morphy and Shūsaku lived in similar times. Why are there still several players alive today with a Morphy number of 3, but almost all players with a Shūsaku number of 4 are retired already and all with a 3 are dead? I would say it has to do with a lack of internationality in Go. There were very few international tournaments before 1980, meaning Japanese players had little chance of spreading their low numbers to the rest of the world. Then there is the strict separation between amateurs and professionals, limiting the spread of low numbers to amateur players. Strong players who came to Japan also rarely moved back to their home countries (Go Seigen, Chō Chikun) . Even today the number of professionals playing internationally is very limited. On goratings.org you can see that many professionals play exclusively in their home country.
On the Chess side, there is the strong emphasis on having to record your games, making it easier to track who played against whom. In professional Go, only tournament games are recorded always and they are not recorded by the players themselves. Consequently many records of older games are likely lost or have never existed. In amateur Go, it took until the nineties for international organisations like the European Go Federation to collect tournament results (not records of the games themselves) and only for rated tournaments. Casual tournaments results aren't recorded even today, making all claims of "I played against X" in casual tournaments unprovable. The FIDE also has instituted requirements for attaining the grandmaster title that include some limited internationality. To become grandmaster, you must attain one grandmaster norm in a tournament with international participation, making grandmasters from countries that "stew in their own juice" impossible. In contrast, Go professionals must simply become member of one of the professional organisations in their country by defeating contenders for that position and can thereafter play in their home country for the rest of their lives. Thus Chess grandmasters are "forced" to spread their Morphy numbers, while Go players are not. International Masters in Chess are similarly forced to play internationally (it's in the name) to attain the title.
But it's more than that. Shortly after Morphy's time, Chess players already expressed interest in knowing who the world champion is, which is of course impossible without international play. And so regular international competitions at the highest level started in the 19th century. In contrast, thanks to politics (the 4 greatest Go nations do not like each other) there is no authoritative international governing organisation for all professional Go players (only a wannabe organisation without any authority) and consequently there is no official world championship today and there has never been one. There is not even an official professional rating like FIDE's Elo rating, only an unofficial one . Today the cause may be politics, but during Shūsaku's time, I'd wager the reason was Japan's long forced isolation. During the Togugawa shogunate, Japan effectively existed in its own bubble for 250 years, hearing about the rest of the world only through rumors and very limited trade. Plus, Japan is an archipelago. That probobaly instilled in the Japanese of that time a lack of interest and lack of awareness of the rest of world that may have lasted for decades after the fall of the shogunate. It took until 1928 for a strong non-Japanese player to move to Japan.
Another limiting factor may be the language barrier. Most players in Europe and the Americas natively speak a language from the Indo-European language family , making it easy to learn a second language that is understood by most of them. I wanna bet most international Chess players in the 1900s were already bilingual. That makes it much easier to form international organisations like FIDE. In contrast, Japan, Korea and China don't speak languages that are known to be related. Only China and Taiwan share a common language (to some extent - Hokkien is not Mandarin) and their exchange is limited through politics since the end of the Chinese civil war. In fact, I've heard (though not experienced firsthand) that English language education is not treated very seriously in both Japan and China, making people with a strong English proficiency somewhat of a rarity in those countries. Of the 4 great Go nations, Only Korea seems to focus strongly on English education. Coincidentally (or maybe not?) , Korea has also been the strongest Go nation for over 3 decades now. Maybe Korea's smaller population, non-Island geography and being sandwiched between two larger nations that have proved their hostility in the recent past has convinced them that focusing on internationality is important for their survival. A focus on internationality helps not just foreign language education, but education in general and of course Go playing strength. The same happened in Chess: A lot of the development in Chess started after internationalising and professionalising it, not in the hundreds of years of European Chess history before that.
There does not have to be a point. But there is one clear effect: It gets people to think about how Go players are connected to each other and even about the history of the game and gives them a motivation (together with an "award", i.e. the number itself) to research these things. Go players can be quite focused on the game itself, but there are things surrounding the game that are just as important. If you want to become stronger in Go, then it is very useful to have international (or at the very least inter-city) competition, which the hunt for a lower Shūsaku number encourages. And international connections can play an important role in preventing wars. In fact, that much of Kyoto was preserved throughout the second world war when most other cities in Japan were completely destroyed through bombing came thanks to a veto by Henry Stimson, who had visited Japan before the war. So maybe your obsession with your Shūsaku number will prevent a war in the future or save at least one city. Oh, and of course lowering your Shūsaku number is a much easier goal than becoming national champion or even just becoming shodan.
Once again ignoring the "purity" requirement because that is so expensive to research, here are some numbers I found:
Once again ignoring the "purity" requirement because that is so expensive to research, here are some numbers I found:
So as you can see, most strong European players have an 8. Not all though, some have missed out on defeating Dinerchtein.
So as you can see, most strong European players have an 8. Not all though, some have missed out on defeating Dinerchtein.
5: Awaji Shuzo , Cho Chikun , Fujisawa Hideyuki , Ishida Yoshio , Kato Masao , Kobayashi Kōichi , Nie Weiping , Otake Hideo , Rin Kaiho , Sakata Eio , Takemiya Masaki
5 or lower by defeating Hashimoto Utarō : Awaji Shuzo , Cho Chikun , Fujisawa Hideyuki , Ishida Yoshio , Kato Masao , Kobayashi Kōichi , Nie Weiping , Otake Hideo , Rin Kaiho , Sakata Eio , Takemiya Masaki
This shows particularly well what I meant by lack of internationality in Go. Hashimoto Utarō and Cho Hunhyun had career overlap of more than 20 years and both played dozens of games during that time, but they never played against each other. Even though Hashimoto had a really long career and played against just about everyone in Japan, the only recorded international opponent I know of is Nie Weiping. Had Cho defeated Hashimoto, that would drop so many players by one, because so many players defeated Cho over his long career (and he is still playing) . Nie Weiping can fulfill the same role, but he didn't play against everyone and that limits the flow of low numbers from Japan to the rest of the world. And if the recording of game results of strong amateur players like Kikuchi Yasurō received as much attention and care as the recording of professional games, we would probably know quite a few more players, even amateuer players, with a 5, because Kikuchi played for much longer than Hashimoto and supposedly had the same winning Shūsaku number.
6: Chang Hao , Cho Hunhyun , Cho U , Fan Tingyu , Gu Li , Hane Naoki , Hane Yasumasa , Hans Pietsch , Hikosaka Naoto , Ichiriki Ryo , Iyama Yuta , Kobayashi Satoru , Kong Jie , Kono Rin , Lee Changho , Lee Sedol , Ma Xiaochun , Mi Yuting , Michael Redmond , Murakawa Daisuke , O Meien , O Rissei , Park Junghwan , Park Yeonghun , Rui Naiwei , Seo Bongsoo , Takao Shinji , Ueno Asami , Weon Seongjin , Yamashita Keigo , Yo Kagen , Yoo Changhyuk , Yu Bin , Yuki Satoshi , Zheng Hong , Zhou Junxun , Cao Dayuan , Chen Yaoye , Ding Wei , Hu Yaoyu , Ke Jie , Kim Yeonghwan , Kong Jie , Liao Xingwen , Liu Xiaoguang , Mok Jinseok , Park Junghwan , Qian Yuping , Shi Yue , Song Taekon , Zhang Xuan , Zhou Ruiyang , Antti Tormanen
6 or lower by defeating Yoda Norimoto : Chang Hao , Cho Hunhyun , Cho U , Fan Tingyu , Gu Li , Hane Naoki , Hane Yasumasa , Hans Pietsch , Hikosaka Naoto , Ichiriki Ryo , Iyama Yuta , Kobayashi Satoru , Kong Jie , Kono Rin , Lee Changho , Lee Sedol , Ma Xiaochun , Mi Yuting , Michael Redmond , Murakawa Daisuke , O Meien , O Rissei , Park Junghwan , Park Yeonghun , Rui Naiwei , Seo Bongsoo , Takao Shinji , Ueno Asami , Weon Seongjin , Yamashita Keigo , Yo Kagen , Yoo Changhyuk , Yu Bin , Yuki Satoshi , Zheng Hong , Zhou Junxun
If you could choose which professional player to play, who would be a good target to get a lower winning Shūsaku number? Zheng Hong, Yi Lingtao, Li Le, Yo Kagen, Hasegawa Sunao and Chen Yaoye have all been defeated by western Go players, there might be more.
This shows that many of the currently active professional players will have achieved at most a 7 by defeating one of the many 6-players. But there are also quite a few professional players who according to goratings.org seem to have played exclusively against compatriots and lost almost all of their games. These players appear to have a worse chance of getting a good winning Shūsaku number than the average European amateur player. Just pick one of these poor souls and try to find a winning path, it's quite difficult.
If you could choose which professional player to play (you can't) , who would be a good target to get a lower winning Shūsaku number? It has to be a professional that can actually be defeated. Mateusz Surma defeated Zheng Hong, which guaranteed him a 7 independent of his win against Alexandre Dinerchtein. Ilja Shikshin defeated Yi Lingtao who defeated Liao Xingwen previously, guaranteeing at most an 8. He also defeated Li Le, who defeated Wang Yuanjun previously, who defeated Zhou Junxun, guaranteeing at most a 9. Fernando Aguilar defeated Yo Kagen and Hasegawa Sunao, guaranteeing at most a 7. Ryan Li defeated Chen Yaoye, giving him at most a 7, but good luck repeating that. So there are quite a few professionals that can be defeated by amateurs or non-Asian professionals, but there are few opportunities to get them in your crosshairs thanks to the relatively strict separation between amateurs and professionals. If that weren't the case, there are a lot of sixes that are vulnerable to defeat and even a few fives who are still active and who have declined in strength a lot.
Easier to defeat opponents with 9 or lower: Simo Vanhala , Ofer Zivony , Vladimir Danek , Karol Cieslak , Maksym Walaszewski , David Ulbricht , Lucman Bounoider , Habu Koichirō , Dmytro Yatsenko , Gyorgy Csizmadia , Antoine Fenech , Christopher Kacwin , Bernd Radmacher , Alessandro Pace , Zeno van Ditzhuijzen , Martin Jurek , Daniel Cioata , Peter Marko , Petr Cipra , Francois Gonze , Robert Csizmadia , Ondrej Kralik
Easier to defeat opponents with 10 or lower: Darius Dobranis , Scott Cobbold , Mikko Berg , Antti Soukka , Kim Johansson , Micael Svensson , Adriana Podpera , Dach Zbynek , Milos Bojanic , Dawid Jurkiewicz , Radoslaw Jachim , Oleksandr Yeroshkin , Jitka Bartova , Andrzej Drzystek , Marianna Szychowiak , Andrei Arba , Marcin Kosz
Based on this list, it seems you have to prepare yourself for defeating someone at least around 1 Dan if you want an 11.
Written by the author; Date 10.05.2026; © 2026 spinningsphinx.com