Jury report of the 2012 edition

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Iwamoto Award 2012 – Evaluation

1. Project No. 15: Play Go in School

The project is focused on a very important target – a young generation. It is really important to spread go in schools. That is one of the most important ways how to set up go in a society.
It is actually very hard and demanding work which can resemble ‘a long distance run’, if not even marathon. Still, here might lie the right way how to spread go in a society as a part of its culture, through children, through their education. Therefore, we put the project on the first place.

2. Project No. 7: Go Videos

It is apparent that there is a lot of work behind that project. It is a positive aspect of it. Also, the idea of making teaching videos and put them on youtube has something in it. It can be useful for go players, especially for go players – beginners. It can be usefull from that point of view, because especially beginners are a group of players who may loose an interest in go very fast, if they do not have an easy access to a study material. Still, even if it might bring an attention of non-go community as well, the target audience here are more or less existing go players than anybody else. That is a drawback of the project, Also, it looks more like courses of Distance learning for University students than a promotion material for a wide society. Moreover, considering the content of lessons, there is a very little new in it, in fact.
It reminds that kind of diploma works, when a student takes five research articles and rewrite them into the sixth one. Despite mentioned drawbacks, also with regards on amount of work behind it, and possible benefits for go players – beginners , we put the project on the second place.

3. Project No. 6: Go public

It seems that it is actually very little work behind this project. In spite of that, this idea can work if a promotional material mentioned in the project, which is distributed freely on streets, is well prepared, and if there is a network of clubs and places where people, who might be attracted by that performance, can come and start playing go. This project can also be easily copied, which was a criterion for the evaluation. Nevertheless, without a very good promotional material, and without a background network prepared for people attracted by go performance on streets, it cannot work. That is a defect of this project. There is a lack of information about a prepared promotional material, about plans where to invite attracted people and how to work with them afterwards. Still, if well prepared, the project might be very efficient. It means, it can bring an attention to go and help to increase a local community of go players a lot for a very low cost. Therefore, we put the project on the third place.
September, 2012

The jury of the fourth contest consists of:

  • Ting Li, EGF officer, Austria
  • Tobias Berben, Germany
  • Jana Hricova, EGF officer, Czechia

Leave a Reply