Life In 19x19 http://lifein19x19.com/ |
|
Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White http://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=462 |
Page 2 of 3 |
Author: | Joaz Banbeck [ Sat May 15, 2010 10:11 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
Author: | Solomon [ Sat May 15, 2010 11:01 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
Author: | unkx80 [ Sun May 16, 2010 11:16 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
Author: | Solomon [ Sun May 16, 2010 11:23 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
Author: | Bill Spight [ Sun May 16, 2010 12:42 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
Edit: Unhidden. With White strengthened on top, I was thinking about getting frisky with a double approach. Is an overplay? - is a solid response, I think. |
Author: | amnal [ Sun May 16, 2010 12:57 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
A question to white players: |
Author: | Joaz Banbeck [ Sun May 16, 2010 2:31 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
No point in hiding this, as it is in the past: unkx80 wrote: ... I thought that usually the atari at L15 is best not played, but to connect here directly. I felt that white really wanted L15: ...but I wasn't really sure. Any explanations for why K17 might be better? |
Author: | Kirby [ Sun May 16, 2010 3:02 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
Author: | Chew Terr [ Sun May 16, 2010 5:44 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
I can't let myself be intimidated by the ranks fo the other players, this is a game for everybody. |
Author: | Bill Spight [ Sun May 16, 2010 7:10 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
Chew Terr wrote: I can't let myself be intimidated by the ranks fo the other players, this is a game for everybody. Absolutely. That's the right attitude. Quote: Edit: Unhidden. In tournament contract bridge there is often a mismatch in strength between partners. We say that the stronger player carries the weaker. There is nothing wrong with that, that's how it is. I appreciate the thought that you put into this play, and I mean no reflection it, one way or another. But let me encourage a carefree attitude. Sit back and enjoy the ride. You do not have to carry us. You made a considered play, and that is good. But it would also be fine to make a play because you really want to make it. Nobody is going to jump on you for doing so. We do not expect perfection. We are carrying you. We all play within our limitations. It may well be that the best play is one that takes you into unfamiliar territory that would give you trouble. That's why you have partners. |
Author: | unkx80 [ Thu May 20, 2010 3:32 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
I was hoping someone else will make this move, but it seems that nobody is going to make this move. |
Author: | unkx80 [ Thu May 20, 2010 4:17 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
I made that comment offhand without much thinking. Now that Joaz asked this very good question, I have the burden to think about it to properly answer it. And then the differences aren't very big, sometimes quite subtle. I recommended the connection at . may extend, but then and is an acceptable attack. Of course, may see the double hane as a kikashi and tenuki, e.g., by playing the double approach against the corner. However, it does feel that white is missing a move around . The atari at goes against the 1-2-3 principle, and leaves behind a cutting point at a that may be exploited later. Also, the existence of makes the white group strong. It has some profound effects against the corner when white cuts at and . I have yet to figure out the best black response against , but black will have an easier if white cuts without having the stone. Here is one imagined sequence, which isn't possible if white had not connected. I didn't read all variations though. Here is another imagined sequence. |
Author: | Dusk Eagle [ Sat May 22, 2010 7:03 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
Author: | Joaz Banbeck [ Sun May 23, 2010 12:44 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
I think that everybody above 15K understands that there is going to be pushing and shoving here: white trying to get out, and black trying to preserve right side territory as white goes past. So I'm not hiding any of this. ( BTW, I'm not trying to hack Dusk Eagle, I just thought that this was a good opportunity to show beginners what tewari analysis looks like. ) After white's most recent, it will almost certainly look like this: Let's do some tewari analysis on the above diagram. Let's take out the marked stone, and pretend that we are allowing white to put it anywhere that he wants: Now, does white really want that stone to be at the circled point? Or would white rather have it as shown below? My conclusion is that the most recent white move should have been like this: ...probably leading to something like this where the cut at 'a' starts becoming interesting. |
Author: | Joaz Banbeck [ Tue May 25, 2010 10:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
Author: | Dusk Eagle [ Wed May 26, 2010 1:58 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
Joaz's move definitely seems better to me . I shouldn't have overlooked that move. |
Author: | Chew Terr [ Wed May 26, 2010 2:00 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
Your move is the sort I would have played instinctively, I never would have considered Joaz's, not for a minute. Obviously, I really need to work on looking for this sort of thing. Thanks, Joaz. |
Author: | topazg [ Wed May 26, 2010 2:58 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
Not this Joaz? This looks more fun Mainly because it deprives White of this in sente: Of course, White's pushing from behind on the 6th line (!?!?) but anything else is risking Black sealing White in - isn't that more unpleasant with Black's framework potential, and therefore aiming to be able to get "a" worth it? Black I think should play more sharply if he can to prevent this. |
Author: | Joaz Banbeck [ Wed May 26, 2010 8:03 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
topazg wrote: I thought about it, but the resulting black position felt too weak. If there were black stones at either of the marked positions, or at the lower right star point, I might be in favor of it. It is a tough one to call. I may be paranoid. |
Author: | unkx80 [ Thu May 27, 2010 2:51 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Forum Wide Malkovich Game: Black vs. White |
How come you guys are discussing moves that haven't been played so openly? |
Page 2 of 3 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |