I remember when I was still DDK, Joaz and Bill were the only ones commenting on my matches. That deserves a special thanks again.

why? what did i say?
i at least tried to comment and reviewed his game and decided that it was pointless.
inundating him with correction is not a good way to learn at his stage.
i can not and will not comment on 200 different mistakes and it is pointless.
that is why i respect bill's patience for he does something i wouldnt do.
but is this what he needs? i dont think so. reviewing the game is not what i think he needs.
he needs to study simple life and death to acquire his reading first.
and he probably needs more 9x9 board game because 19x19 is beyond the scope of his ability.

_________________
"The more we think we know about
The greater the unknown"
Words by neil peart, music by geddy lee and alex lifeson

I'm sorry that you feel that way about my games. But I did point out that currently I am not playing to my best. Yes, my reading is off. But my teacher (1d) commented on this too, because it is usually my best attribute. Prior to these two weeks I won 19x19s, 13x13s and 9x9s. Though the latter two I do not play much. I have won both with and without handicaps on either side and set time out to study various tsumego at least once every two days.

I'm not saying this in the way of "You don't know what you're talking about" because I believe you do have some valid points. I probably would not be able to fully grasp comments on all my moves (That said, as it is an SGF I can keep coming back to it and re-review it until I do grasp all that was pointed out,) but more along the lines of "you've met me and observed my games when I've been in a rut." This is not my best ability at all, not even my "okay" ability, and I hope you'll see that when I'm back on form and posting games.

I believe you are right here.

so, what I usually try to do when reviewing beginner games is to look for and comment on the two or three type of mistakes that they make the most often, or one or two areas for largest potential improvement. That way they've got a couple of things to focus on for their next games.

False.

You are SDK, why didn't you post a review?

_________________
Stay out of my territory! (W. White, aka Heisenberg)

Just another point. The game Bill commented on was played very fast. At speeds like that, you're just playing on instinct. I hope not all your games are that fast, because in order to develop your instinct, you need to spend more time thinking.

I think that one's mood affects one's instinct, and while fast games can be fun and useful, playing them in the middle of a losing streak probably isn't going to get you past any walls.

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

That was the first fast game I'd ever played. My games normally have 45 mins + 5x30 byo-yomi. The other person set that up after I joined.

A very good point. Vann, here is my review of one of the games you posted. The focus is mainly on a couple of strategic concepts in the early stages of the game, as you'll acquire middle game fighting skill mainly from doing tons of tsumego. The main theme of my review is re-examing the purpose of the 3-3 invasion, and how to handle it when you're on the receiving end.
[sgf-full]http://www.hushfield.com/L19/vannlucasreview.sgf[/sgf-full]

Magicwand, that is much more like it. Now you are identifying what you feel are problems in VannLucas' approach to studying. I'm sorry if I offended you earlier, but just going "lol, noob!" is not a very contructive way to help other players. On what you say about playing smaller boards, I have heard many other strong players say this as well, so perhaps this is something you could do Vann, (perhaps it's also something I should do ^^, but since I haven't played 13x13 or 9x9s in years, and have mainly worked on my reading through tsumego, I don't know whether it is necessary.) So to echo the advice of other players: keep doing tsumego to improve your (middle game) fighting strength.

I don't agree with magicwand that doing reviews of your own games is pointless at your level, because scanning your own play for mistakes, thinking about where a game turned sour, etc. will definitely help you improve. It will take quite a lot of time, however, and the equal amount of time worth of tsumego might help you improve faster. Just do what you feel like doing, if you're not up to doing tsumego on a certain day, then just review one of your own games, or games of players that are 1-3 stones stronger than you. Hope this helps, and keep at it. Also, if you would like to play a teaching game or whatnot, just pm me.

Cheers,
hushfield

QFT.

_________________
Main Entry: zing·er Pronunciation: \ˈziŋ-ər\
1 : something causing or meant to cause interest, surprise, or shock
2 : a pointed witty remark or retort

VannLucas, I think you should be really be proud of yourself. You are a young player, and losing a lot when you have just started to play go is a very good thing, because eventually, you will learn to '' feel the game ''

And you have played since April. Nice! I played go for 8 months until I reached 14k! See, there are people much worse than you

I remember when I started to play Go, I had many victories, but that spoiled my game and made me a very bad player. And as you can see, you are 14k in a such short time. Well done!

Remember, with every defeat, you are slowly approaching 1d.

_________________
Stefany, web programmer

I just saw this thread.

After scanning your games, it's clear that you need to hit the books. 1001 L&D problems is ok, but Graded Go Problems for Beginners vol. II and III is probably a bit better for you-- get them. Your stones also lack global coordination, but that will develop with time and experience in even (or at least lower handicap) games. You should focus on learning to read, and on losing another 100 even games (preferably at least some on a smaller board). Oh, and stop resigning so early.

Part of your rank is how well you deal with the crap that people around your level play. Dan players effectively don't play the really awful crap that 15k's do, so you never get to play against it IRL, so you don't know what to do about it. Solution? Do your go problems, and when you see a move you don't think a dan player would play, think hard about how to punish it locally. Once in a while, ask someone stronger what you should have done in one of those situations.

Don't get into the trap of thinking, "I shouldn't be losing to these players, I know I'm better than this, I only take X stones against an Xk/d." This thinking, in addition to being incorrect and disrespecting your opponent, will only serve to make losses more bitter and the game less fun. If you lose 20 out of 22 games on KGS, it's apparent that, at least at the time, you were over-ranked. The reasons why that could be are many, ranging from "you had a few lucky wins to begin with" to "you are learning new material and haven't yet successfully synthesized it with the things you already know." Don't worry about it, it's a number-- it will go up in the long term even if there are some dips in the short term.

I hope that helps

PS I'm not sure how many stones your IRL dan players are giving you, but there's a good chance that they are not exerting themselves (they may even be working hard to not win the game by large margins). 36 points is an enormous margin for a 4d (don't worry, at your level it's not rude to play all the way to the end). Hopefully they give you helpful comments during or after the game, it kinda sounds like they do but I can't tell.

_________________
That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.
--
My (sadly neglected, but not forgotten) project: http://dailyjoseki.com

Some comments about game #1:

Move 3: The high 1-space approach is a specialized move. More usual is the low 1-space approach at O17.

You have probably heard "corner first, sides second, center last." Corners are the most valuable space in the beginning of the game because they are the easiest places to make territory and/or eyes for life. If you are not already familiar with the idea, have a look at: http://senseis.xmp.net/?CornersThenSidesThenCenter

By playing directly opposite black on the fourth line, you are blocking him from going westward. You are also postioning yourself so that he blocks you from going eastward. You are starting to secure the side for yourself; he is starting to secure the corner for himself. But since corners are worth more than sides, he gets more out of this than you do.

The arrows in the diagram below show the forces at work. ( You might not yet see these forces when you look at the board, but they are real: those two stones are struggling against each other, and are balanced in opposition. )

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bc
$$ ------------------|
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . O . X . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ { LN O19 O13 }
$$ { AR L18 O18 }
$$ { AR L17 O17 }
$$ { AR L15 O15 }
$$ { AR L14 O14 }
$$ { AR R18 O18 }
$$ { AR R17 O17 }
$$ { AR R15 O15 }
$$ { AR R14 O14 }[/go]

A move that attempts to intrude into the corner is better. That is why most people will approach low at O17. It threatens to slide under black's stone into the corner.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bc
$$ ------------------|
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . O . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . X . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ { AR N17 Q17 }
$$ { AR N17 P18 }
$$ { AR P16 N16 }[/go]

Move 11: Much better!


Move 45: Thematic, going in the right direction, but perhaps a bit heavy-handed. Q2 or R6 is more usual here.


Move 75: Saving these two stones is not worth your time. Look at moves like R7 or B12 or C18 or S4 or B4.

_________________
Help make L19 more organized. Make an index: https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5207

Mmm... there are a lot of different things in this thread...

So Vann, I'll tell you what I think.

Getting better at Go is like climbing a mountain.

When you start off near the bottom, there are more paths to take, more ways you can advance. Some are faster or slower than others, it's not always easy to tell.

I think this is why people often vary on the subject of what to tell a beginner, especially a beginner who's having problems. Should he read a book on mountain climbing(theory)? Should he work out and get used to strenuous physical exercise(life and death)? Should he just keep trying to climb the mountain(play more games)?

I'll tell you that, in my experience, I had an easier time in the double digits because all I did was devour life and death like mad, until I was doing the ones that were aimed at 1-3k when I was at 10-13k. Theory didn't mean very much to me when I was ripping my opponents apart in contact fighting. Of course, I've had to slowly mellow out since then, but I think there's a lot to be said for the "Get in better shape before you attempt to climb the mountain" approach.

Personally, I think teaching you theory at this point will not have a significant impact on your game. You are not losing to your opponents on move 30 in the fuseki. It's only until later on in the middlegame when you make a reading mistake that things go badly. That's also why I don't feel that game reviews will really benefit you at this point. The middlegame errors, I think you can spot many of them yourself, and the opening errors largely do not matter.

For this reason, I think there is merit to playing on a 9x9 board. You can skip the opening and practice on the section of the game that is giving you the most trouble. It also can help you build confidence as you get used to fighting in a small space with fewer options. I think also, because the games are shorter, you'll get in more games worth of experience, rather than playing a 19x19 game, and spending the first 20-30 moves on things that really will have minimal impact on the game's result(no offense, I'm just trying to be honest and helpful).

I think the most important thing here is not to lose heart. It can be very frustrating to put in work and effort and not reap any satisfying results, I know.

Other than that, my prescription would be to play at least 50 9x9 games before you move back to the big board, and do as many life and death or tesuji problems as you are comfortable with.

That and good luck.

Vann,

I think Violence knows more theory that he realizes. He has played enough games that he has picked it up by osmosis, so he may not be conscious of what he knows about theory.
On the other hand, has learned L+D by deliberate studying, so he is concious of what he knows about L+D.

Regardless of how you learn it, you have to have some theory, no matter how good you are at fighting. You have to know what things are worth fighting for, else your opponents will concede fights to you for small things while taking the large things uncontested. You'll win all the fights and lose the game.

In the long run, you have to have both to get really strong. You can overemphasize one for a while, but eventually you have to go back and catch up on the other.

-JB


EDIT: As analogies seem to be in vogue, I'll offer you mine.

Go is like building a house. You can study the very detailed, technical stuff, like how to drive nails and how to mix concrete. Or you can study structural theory, how forces interact, how they transfer from one material to another, how compression and tension balance out.

The person who studies only the practical stuff can build a house that stands because the workmanship is good enough to compensate for the lack of its ideal use.
The person who understands theory will never have the materials overstressed, so they don't have to be perfectly done.

Either works. But if you want to build a cathedral, you must know both.

_________________
Help make L19 more organized. Make an index: https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5207

Well, I did study theory quite consciously... but I started when I was 3k. The only thing I knew about before then was corner-sides-center.

I don't think I undervalue theory, I've just been trying to ingrain it lately so I don't have to consciously think about it. Maybe that's why I don't really talk about it in Malkoviches.

I just mean that at his level, and where he is right now, I don't think he'll perform any better if he's taught theory right now. I don't think that's what's important here.

He didn't lose because he played a low or high approach, he lost because of a tactical mistake; a reading error.

I think he needs to correct those errors first, because they're what're responsible for the wall he's been feeling, imo.

Hey. Thanks again guys for all the advice and tips. It's really got me thinking and planning on my areas to improve.

A quick side-note. I've started something formed by the British Go Association called the Shodan Challenge in which you get placed with a mentor and you work together for the next year to get you to as high as you can get in rank. I think that, combined with all that you guys have offered to me, will be a great help.

Once again, cheers!

What I find when I hit a wall is to take a break for a day or two, then play a teaching game with someone, solve about 120 go problems at Gobase.org, and finally play a game after that.

Ya, long list - but it works