(Why doesn't it end the quote here, I wrote [/ quote]


Anyway, instead Black could play like this to connect

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . 5 a . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . 4 3 O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . 2 7 . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . 6 . 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

i was afraid he might play that which was correct.
i guess he is stronger than i gave him credit for..
if he makes his two point extension that would have been terrorable mistake for black..
i think this is very important lesson SDKs or low dans must learn from our game..

but his two stone is still my target and will be attacked because i am stronger fighter.
and i will see how many bullets he will dodge.

I wonder how much better/worse magicwand would be if he played the board and not the person...

Can you show us the approximate sequence that you thought would flatten black? Thanks.

Gonna try to cram 3 weeks worth of material from my stochastic calculus class in 1 day at the library, so I'll be a bit busy today. I'll post my move tonight (and answer Joaz's question, although if someone else can answer it that'd be nice too, as it'd show me that others understand my concept of "flattening").

But let me post some brief thoughts:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm11 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . X . X . a . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . W . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . X X . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

I said earlier that if White were to play , it would be slow and gote. It is slow, but what I wonder is whether it is really gote. It is quite clear that he wants to play a move like 'a' so he can bully my group around. So the questions I'm really asking myself are:

1. Should I play where my opponent wants to play?
2. If I play a big move elsewhere and he caps, could I survive?

(The answer to question 2 depends if I'm listening to a particular song by Gloria Gaynor.)

I would connect at a without hesitation - wouldn't it be really, really huge to seal black in??

On a related note, although I have seen elsewhere that white often does not connect at 'a', in that case, why play the - exchange at all?

Presumably the aji is better:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm11
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . X O 1 X 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

This has more potential than Black after:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm11 This would be the correct play for magicwand.
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . X O . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Well, the reason is simply that taking gote here would be too slow. Please note that black cutting at a is also gote, and a double-gote makes the move worth less. And also as topazg pointed out, there is still some aji left in the position. The main point is that only the 3 stones facing the top are the important ones, and black a would not threathen them.

White would like to play something like b, c, d at the top. By making a fight, he can use the influence in the lowerleft. If playing at A, and black for example playing d would be painful for white as black is developing fast all over the board without a weakness.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm11 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . X . X . a . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . O . x . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O . y d . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . X X . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Play where your opponent wants to play. As much as I want to play elsewhere and take a big point, White's top is pretty strong + by playing my move, it lets me worry less about the center group and concern myself on how to handle F17 or which points are biggest on the board. I like thinking about these things better.

'a'-'d' were the moves I had in mind really. Some people may call my last move 'slow'...I prefer 'steady'. Now I can make a loose surround and gain control of the center with 'x', although there is a weakness at 'y' (ko problem if I block directly with 'd').

RE Joaz:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm15 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , c . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . X X . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

When B plays the two-space extension, White has moves he can play later on (e.g., when his bottom group stabilizes) such as 'a' and 'b' to force Black to reinforce the connection between the two stones while White gets stones on the outside. A move like 'c' can also put pressure on Black; despite the two-space extension if White is strong on the outside there is still weakness in the B8 area. Also 'c' forces Black to move out anyways as I've already taken care of.

i think it is the only move

Haha, when I read what Araban wrote I suspected Magicwand would play here next... don't you just hate when that happens?

I don't want him to get H3 and get a loose surround on my corner. And my move has sealing potential. Note that we're not even on move 20 and this is the second time already I mention 'loose surround'...the next worst thing to dying is getting sealed in.

I wonder if at that level it isn't necessary to start playing the person. By that I mean, that person's go, their style. Do dans adapt to other player's styles?

I think if you just focus on playing good Go, your stones won't suddenly suffer '-1 to liberties' just because the opponent is a strong fighter

If you want to win, it's worth it. If you want to just play the best possible Go regardless, it isn't. It depends on your priorities I guess

But Go is a two-player game. Isn't the optimal strategy, one which accounts for your opponents strengths and trying to counter those?

Is it? Is the goal to beat the opponent, or to play perfect Go? The optimal strategy I would have thought is one aimed towards achieving the ultimate result against the perfect opponent, is it not? The perfect opponent has no flaws, and no strengths or weaknesses per se. Only the "best" move is good enough at each and every move. A move that you know your opponent deals with badly but you know is a sub-optimal move feels wrong somehow, even if it increases your winning chances - To take this one stage further, we all hear playing bots teaches you bad habits right? Isn't this precisely because you intuitively start to "play your opponent, and not the board"?