Life In 19x19 :: 11th Chunlan Cup

A pro player's thinking process would be something like: I read this variation; it doesn't seem to work; but if there's an extra stone there my sequence would work; let me find out a way to place that extra stone without my opponent noticing...... If a machine can do this sort of trick, our humanbeing would be wiped out soon.

Something I was thinking about from the 5th AlphaGo game was why Lee Sedol pushed with :b43:

as below. By loosing that liberty the n6 cut etc became more potent even though in the end white only got a squeeze (though actually given Mi's s10 attach I wonder if that squeeze really was a misread from AlphaGo or a sente sequence to stop Lee successfully playing that attach at a time when white would need to answer submissively as Park did, i.e. did AlphaGo see a line for black in which he played s10 and that reduced AlphaGo's winning chances so it played out the squeeze so Lee wouldn't have the chance to s10?).

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wcm42 $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . O . . . . . . . . X . . . . | $$ | . X . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 O . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 5 O 2 O X X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 1 X X X O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . 6 4 . . . . O X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . | $$ | . . . . . . O . . . . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

If black directly haned and this happened that looks like an unconditional improvement to me (actually the improvement might not be so much as white could still probe with the n6 cut or s7 hane and if black plays in a way that makes the o8 liberty sente then white fixes that cut in sente which makes a big difference to the strength of the centre moyo, and if plays to prevent o8 being sente white gets the same squeeze...).

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wcm42 $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . O . . . . . . . . X . . . . | $$ | . X . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 3 O . O X X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 1 X X X O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . 4 2 . . . . O X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . | $$ | . . . . . . O . . . . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

So did Lee fear white would trade with something like this? White abandons the top right moyo area (which makes sense as he hasn't yet invested building it with the a attach and subsequent gote building of thickness).

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wcm42 $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . O . . . . . . . a X . . . . | $$ | . X . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 4 O 6 O X X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . 5 1 X X X O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 . . . . O X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . . O X . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . | $$ | . . . . . . O . . . . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

Uberdude wrote:

Something I was thinking about from the 5th AlphaGo game was why Lee Sedol pushed with :b43:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wcm42 $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . O . . . . . . . . X . . . . | $$ | . X . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 O . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 5 O 2 O X X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 1 X X X O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . 6 4 . . . . O X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . | $$ | . . . . . . O . . . . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wcm42 $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . O . . . . . . . . X . . . . | $$ | . X . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 3 O . O X X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 1 X X X O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . 4 2 . . . . O X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . | $$ | . . . . . . O . . . . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wcm42 $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . O . . . . . . . a X . . . . | $$ | . X . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 4 O 6 O X X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . 5 1 X X X O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 . . . . O X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . . O X . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . | $$ | . . . . . . O . . . . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

Fan Hui gave a talk about AlphaGo vs Lee Sedol game 5 at the US Go Congress (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmK2HwKMrco), which answered some questions I posed in the above. Lee's push rather than direct hane does indeed seem to be a mistake, and his fear of the double hane may well explain it. But AlphaGo would have simply extended with 3 as below if he played hane, not double hane! (possible continuation a-f shown too)

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wcm42 $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . O . . . . . . . . X . . . . | $$ | . X . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . O d O X X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . c 3 1 X X X O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . f b a 2 . . . . O X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . e . . O X . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . | $$ | . . . . . . O . . . . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

Fan also showed the 1st line connection from the lower right dead stones to the upper right corner aji depending how black answers the crosscut there, though didn't say if AlphaGo saw those lines or just post-game professional analysis. No mention of Mi Yuting's s10 attachment though. Let's see what is in their release of commented games in a few weeks...

What was the explanation for rejecting the double hane?

Oh, did they change the pairings? Mr Kin's tournament table says it would be Ke vs Gu. http://igokisen.web.fc2.com/wr/cl.html. Btw Ke vs Mi was another example of the "wrong" close approach to Kobayashi that's popular these days.

I'm not sure, but I think I remember that sometimes when there is a draw that happens later, Mr Kin will print a table, and then shuffle it when the later rounds are revealed. It's one of the limitations of presenting a tournament table.

Semi Final;

Park Yeonghun defeated Ke Jie by resign.
Tan Xiao defeated Gu Zihao by resign.

Final,

Park Younghun vs Tan Xiao

Good to see Park doing so well. He's one of my favorite players. I really enjoy his calm and balanced style.

Author:	Uberdude [ Tue Mar 29, 2016 10:06 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
Maybe we should take this analysis to some AlphaGo not Chunlan Cup thread...

Author:	Uberdude [ Tue Mar 29, 2016 11:37 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
Nice sequence macelee, Go Seigen would be proud of that 1st line crawling! I wonder if any such sequences appeared in AlphaGo's playouts and that is why it didn't make the s10 t9 exchange. I don't think there was any time Lee could have exchanged s10 for r11 later in the game was there (too small), so it seems Mi has found the correct timing. Is it overly harsh on Lee to say that he should have found s10 in the game? Hindsight is nice, the games had a lot of pressure and 2 hours is not much time to think, but for a top top pro such as himself they should pay attention to the tiniest details and efficiencies.

Author:	macelee [ Tue Mar 29, 2016 2:25 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
I am sure the first-line move was discovered by a Chinese pro during one of their regular group studies. I read it from some discussions on the Internet. Given the hint, even amateurs at our level can read through. But getting that strategy in the first place is much more difficult. I think it is highly unlikely that an AI program can 'plan' for something like that. A pro player's thinking process would be something like: I read this variation; it doesn't seem to work; but if there's an extra stone there my sequence would work; let me find out a way to place that extra stone without my opponent noticing...... If a machine can do this sort of trick, our humanbeing would be wiped out soon.

Author:	Uberdude [ Tue Mar 29, 2016 2:33 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
macelee wrote: A pro player's thinking process would be something like: I read this variation; it doesn't seem to work; but if there's an extra stone there my sequence would work; let me find out a way to place that extra stone without my opponent noticing...... If a machine can do this sort of trick, our humanbeing would be wiped out soon. Reminds me of Ma Xiaochun's 36 Stratagems book, all sorts of brilliant sneaky plans like that.

Author:	Uberdude [ Thu Aug 11, 2016 4:43 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
Uberdude wrote: Something I was thinking about from the 5th AlphaGo game was why Lee Sedol pushed with as below. By loosing that liberty the n6 cut etc became more potent even though in the end white only got a squeeze (though actually given Mi's s10 attach I wonder if that squeeze really was a misread from AlphaGo or a sente sequence to stop Lee successfully playing that attach at a time when white would need to answer submissively as Park did, i.e. did AlphaGo see a line for black in which he played s10 and that reduced AlphaGo's winning chances so it played out the squeeze so Lee wouldn't have the chance to s10?). Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm42 $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . O . . O . . . . . . . . X . . . . \| $$ \| . X . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X X . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O . . \| $$ \| . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . \| $$ \| . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . X X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . O O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 O . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . 5 O 2 O X X . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . 1 X X X O . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . 6 4 . . . . O X . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X . . \| $$ \| . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . O . . . . . . X . X . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go] If black directly haned and this happened that looks like an unconditional improvement to me (actually the improvement might not be so much as white could still probe with the n6 cut or s7 hane and if black plays in a way that makes the o8 liberty sente then white fixes that cut in sente which makes a big difference to the strength of the centre moyo, and if plays to prevent o8 being sente white gets the same squeeze...). Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm42 $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . O . . O . . . . . . . . X . . . . \| $$ \| . X . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X X . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O . . \| $$ \| . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . \| $$ \| . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . X X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . O O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . 3 O . O X X . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . 1 X X X O . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . 4 2 . . . . O X . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X . . \| $$ \| . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . O . . . . . . X . X . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go] So did Lee fear white would trade with something like this? White abandons the top right moyo area (which makes sense as he hasn't yet invested building it with the a attach and subsequent gote building of thickness). Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm42 $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . O . . O . . . . . . . a X . . . . \| $$ \| . X . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X X . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O . . \| $$ \| . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . \| $$ \| . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . X X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . O O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . 4 O 6 O X X . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . 5 1 X X X O . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 . . . . O X . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . . O X . . \| $$ \| . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . O . . . . . . X . X . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go] Fan Hui gave a talk about AlphaGo vs Lee Sedol game 5 at the US Go Congress (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmK2HwKMrco), which answered some questions I posed in the above. Lee's push rather than direct hane does indeed seem to be a mistake, and his fear of the double hane may well explain it. But AlphaGo would have simply extended with 3 as below if he played hane, not double hane! (possible continuation a-f shown too) Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm42 $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . O . . O . . . . . . . . X . . . . \| $$ \| . X . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X X . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O . . \| $$ \| . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . \| $$ \| . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . X X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . O O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . O d O X X . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . c 3 1 X X X O . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . f b a 2 . . . . O X . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . e . . O X . . \| $$ \| . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . O . . . . . . X . X . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go] Fan also showed the 1st line connection from the lower right dead stones to the upper right corner aji depending how black answers the crosscut there, though didn't say if AlphaGo saw those lines or just post-game professional analysis. No mention of Mi Yuting's s10 attachment though. Let's see what is in their release of commented games in a few weeks...

Life In 19x19 http://lifein19x19.com/

11th Chunlan Cup http://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=12910	Page 2 of 4

Author:	ez4u [ Thu Aug 11, 2016 4:58 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
Uberdude wrote: Uberdude wrote: Something I was thinking about from the 5th AlphaGo game was why Lee Sedol pushed with as below. By loosing that liberty the n6 cut etc became more potent even though in the end white only got a squeeze (though actually given Mi's s10 attach I wonder if that squeeze really was a misread from AlphaGo or a sente sequence to stop Lee successfully playing that attach at a time when white would need to answer submissively as Park did, i.e. did AlphaGo see a line for black in which he played s10 and that reduced AlphaGo's winning chances so it played out the squeeze so Lee wouldn't have the chance to s10?). Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm42 $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . O . . O . . . . . . . . X . . . . \| $$ \| . X . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X X . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O . . \| $$ \| . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . \| $$ \| . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . X X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . O O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 O . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . 5 O 2 O X X . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . 1 X X X O . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . 6 4 . . . . O X . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X . . \| $$ \| . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . O . . . . . . X . X . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go] If black directly haned and this happened that looks like an unconditional improvement to me (actually the improvement might not be so much as white could still probe with the n6 cut or s7 hane and if black plays in a way that makes the o8 liberty sente then white fixes that cut in sente which makes a big difference to the strength of the centre moyo, and if plays to prevent o8 being sente white gets the same squeeze...). Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm42 $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . O . . O . . . . . . . . X . . . . \| $$ \| . X . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X X . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O . . \| $$ \| . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . \| $$ \| . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . X X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . O O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . 3 O . O X X . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . 1 X X X O . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . 4 2 . . . . O X . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X . . \| $$ \| . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . O . . . . . . X . X . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go] So did Lee fear white would trade with something like this? White abandons the top right moyo area (which makes sense as he hasn't yet invested building it with the a attach and subsequent gote building of thickness). Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm42 $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . O . . O . . . . . . . a X . . . . \| $$ \| . X . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X X . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O . . \| $$ \| . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . \| $$ \| . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . X X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . O O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . 4 O 6 O X X . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . 5 1 X X X O . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 . . . . O X . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . . O X . . \| $$ \| . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . O . . . . . . X . X . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go] Fan Hui gave a talk about AlphaGo vs Lee Sedol game 5 at the US Go Congress (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmK2HwKMrco), which answered some questions I posed in the above. Lee's push rather than direct hane does indeed seem to be a mistake, and his fear of the double hane may well explain it. But AlphaGo would have simply extended with 3 as below if he played hane, not double hane! (possible continuation a-f shown too) Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm42 $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . O . . O . . . . . . . . X . . . . \| $$ \| . X . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X X . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O . . \| $$ \| . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . \| $$ \| . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . X X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . O O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . O d O X X . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . c 3 1 X X X O . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . f b a 2 . . . . O X . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . e . . O X . . \| $$ \| . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . O . . . . . . X . X . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ \| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \| $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go] Fan also showed the 1st line connection from the lower right dead stones to the upper right corner aji depending how black answers the crosscut there, though didn't say if AlphaGo saw those lines or just post-game professional analysis. No mention of Mi Yuting's s10 attachment though. Let's see what is in their release of commented games in a few weeks... What was the explanation for rejecting the double hane?

Author:	Uberdude [ Thu Aug 11, 2016 5:06 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
ez4u wrote: What was the explanation for rejecting the double hane? Not much directly, other than extend was good enough and result to f was good for white too with a lone black stone in a sea of white centre.

Author:	trout [ Mon Dec 12, 2016 6:00 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
Reminder !!!!!!!!! round of 8; Gu Zihao vs Kim Jiseok Park Yeonghun vs Lian Xiao Mi Yuting vs Ke Jie Tan Xiao vs Tuo Jiaxi round of 8 - 12/20/16 round of 4 - 12/22/16

Author:	trout [ Tue Dec 20, 2016 12:05 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
round of 8; Ke Jie defeated Mi Yuting by resign. Park Yeonghun defeated Lian Xiao by resign. Gu Zihao defeated Kim Jiseok by 0.5. Tan Xiao defeated Tuo Jiaxi by resign. round of 4 - 12/22/16

Author:	pookpooi [ Tue Dec 20, 2016 2:55 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
Next round Ke Jie vs. Park Yeonghun Tan Xiao vs. Gu Zihao

Author:	Uberdude [ Tue Dec 20, 2016 3:11 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
Oh, did they change the pairings? Mr Kin's tournament table says it would be Ke vs Gu. http://igokisen.web.fc2.com/wr/cl.html. Btw Ke vs Mi was another example of the "wrong" close approach to Kobayashi that's popular these days.

Author:	pookpooi [ Tue Dec 20, 2016 4:09 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
Uberdude wrote: Oh, did they change the pairings? Mr Kin's tournament table says it would be Ke vs Gu. http://igokisen.web.fc2.com/wr/cl.html. Btw Ke vs Mi was another example of the "wrong" close approach to Kobayashi that's popular these days. My source is http://live.sina.com.cn/zt/l/v/sports/chunlan8/

Author:	hyperpape [ Tue Dec 20, 2016 8:26 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
I'm not sure, but I think I remember that sometimes when there is a draw that happens later, Mr Kin will print a table, and then shuffle it when the later rounds are revealed. It's one of the limitations of presenting a tournament table.

Author:	macelee [ Tue Dec 20, 2016 10:57 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
hyperpape wrote: I'm not sure, but I think I remember that sometimes when there is a draw that happens later, Mr Kin will print a table, and then shuffle it when the later rounds are revealed. It's one of the limitations of presenting a tournament table. That is correct. Mr Kin builds those tables from the beginning of the tournaments. They often have to be adjusted at later time.

Page 2 of 4	All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	trout [ Thu Dec 22, 2016 12:36 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
Semi Final; Park Yeonghun defeated Ke Jie by resign. Tan Xiao defeated Gu Zihao by resign. Final, Park Younghun vs Tan Xiao

Author:	TheCannyOnion [ Thu Dec 22, 2016 1:54 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
trout wrote: Semi Final; Park Yeonghun defeated Ke Jie by resign. Tan Xiao defeated Gu Zihao by resign. Final, Park Younghun vs Tan Xiao Good to see Park doing so well. He's one of my favorite players. I really enjoy his calm and balanced style.

Author:	Lucian [ Thu Dec 22, 2016 2:17 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
TheCannyOnion wrote: Good to see Park doing so well. He's one of my favorite players. I really enjoy his calm and balanced style. Indeed, a characteristic game for Park when he is in good shape. Not sure what was Ke Jie mistake in fuseki, but thereafter Park play looked so smooth and effortless. I am happy to see the nimble Tan Xiao in his first world final. I checked on go4go but couldn't find a head to head Park - Tan, did they ever play together?

Author:	Uberdude [ Thu Dec 22, 2016 3:01 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 11th Chunlan Cup
I too like Park Yeonghun's calm territorial style, though I found it interesting that in his game with Ke Jie he did that fancy attach on the top right corner to make shape in sente and swallow up the invader, whereas Lian Xiao just did the simple attach on top of the invader (and all those stones subsequently died). This is a great chance for Park to win his first international title in almost a decade: he won the Fujitsu aged 19 in 2004 and again in 2007. He had a bit of a resurgence last year (https://www.goratings.org/players/125.html) but lost in the final of the LG cup to Kang Dongyun (beat Park Junghwan and Tuo Jiaxi on the way).