Back on track

Boidhre · **#81**

tentano:

topazg · **#82**

Yes boidhre, or more commonly:

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

Which could continue:

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

Hence the justification for playing :b6:

first, as it's nominally sente, and protects the "important" area in the lower left.

@Tentano: You are welcome to have that opinion of course, but I'm really not making it pointlessly difficult. This isn't a tsumego problem - it may not even be a book problem, but learning "this is always the right answer" is IMO a bad habit to pick up, when the reality can be that there is more than one right answer depending on context. It's quite possible Amelia's first instinct is indeed better for the board. It's played in some contexts professionally, so if the given "correct" answer stopped her from considering it, then I think a teaching/lesson mistake has been made.

Go is difficult, and I generally feel it's more generally more useful to ask yourself "why am I doing this? Does it really help me overall more than an alternative?" than to learn single responses as "right in all situations"

PS As an addendum:

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

Black does get a reasonable big follow up with the given answer. There's not a similar value one in Amelia's original instinct that protects, is worth nominal points and has a decent followup

tentano · **#83**

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$B $$ +-------------------------- $$ | . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . O X . . . . . . $$ | . . . O . O O X X . X . . $$ | . . . O . . . O O X . . . $$ | . . . . . . O . X . X . . $$ | . . . . . . O O O X X . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Here's a little twist on the endgame problem I had in mind in my last comment. HINT: it's not a ko!

It just showed up in a game, as if it knew I wanted to show it.

I probably don't disagree that much with you, topazg, because if I had never memorized the potential ko I would not have answered the above correctly.

Bill Spight · **#84**

topazg wrote:

I'm not actually sure there is a right answer. There's a whole board out there (and, in this case, with that star point where it is, it looks like a really big board out there).

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . O . O . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . X X . X . . X . . X , . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $$ ---------------------------------[/go]

There is something fishy about this problem, it seems to me, and now I think that the star point is a clue as to why. There is no star point on the 13-4 point on a real board, and there is a star point on the 10-4. So I think that there is a mistake in the problem diagram.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W Actual problem? $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . O . O . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . X X . X . . X , . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . O . . $$ | . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . $$ ---------------------------[/go]

This problem makes more sense.

That double two space extension was weird, and because the double extension was so thin, :w1:

was questionable, as was the answer given. And in this diagram the star point is correct.

topazg · **#85**

@Bill, yes, the star point had been bugging me too!

tentano · **#86**

@topazg:

topazg · **#87**

@tentano:

tentano · **#88**

@topaszg:

Bill Spight · **#89**

topazg wrote:

Does black have a stone just off screen on the right?
What's happing on the right edge of the board?
How about the centre of the board?

All these questions can affect what's locally right in a position like this. In some cases tenuki is fine too, treating Black's stone as kikashi if it forces a low sliding response.

tentano wrote:

I've always considered that if the rest isn't shown, then the problem doesn't intend for me to consider it either. There's usually one especially obvious answer that the author is trying to demonstrate. It's like how some endgame problems have a choice between a ko for more points than a simple sente endgame. They probably don't mean the more complicated answer, even though sometimes it's valid.

If you worry too much about the hypothetical rest of the board, you're just being pointlessly difficult. Any tsumego could be correctly answered by tenuki if there's a bigger point on the rest of the board. Maybe you should resign because the rest of the board is lost?

There is a general principle of discourse that applies both within and across cultures, that if you do not mention something you do not think that it is relevant -- unless it is something that "everybody knows". So if a part of the board is not shown, it is not relevant, as tentano says. It seems to me that that principle is followed in modern tsumego, but not in ancient tsumego nor in yose problems.

In ancient tsumego it seems to me that the rest of the board is assumed to be empty. The point is not to make the biggest play on the board, but to achieve a goal, such as connecting or killing stones. If stones escape to the rest of the board, they are usually safe, but not always, and sometimes whether the escaped stones live or die is an important part of solving ancient tsumego.

In yose problems the threat to escape to the rest of the board is treated as sente. There are a couple of problems with that. First, the rest of the board is not treated as irrelevant, but as belonging to one player, or a part of it is treated as belonging to that player, in violation of the general principle mentioned above. Second, for the escape to be a big enough threat to be sente is often unrealistic. Third, treating the threat to escape as sente means treating some plays as double sente, which is problematic.

topazg · **#90**

Thanks Bill, interesting post, and I agree, it's a complicated point. I think I was swayed by the comments on the original post about the position rather implying that "I thought this was ok, now I know it's not, but why not?" and it was making my learning spidey-senses tingle a bit.

"Black to play" is always going to be ambiguous I guess unless it's life and death. Even "Black to connect" is ambiguous as there are plenty of ugly and clunky ways of connecting those stones. Hard to phrase a problem like that really, or IMO make it all that meaningful. I'd rather see it as a discussion with a number of answers and some possible purposes of each explained.

Amelia · **#91**

Bill Spight wrote:

This problem makes more sense.

That double two space extension was weird, and because the double extension was so thin, :w1:

was questionable, as was the answer given. And in this diagram the star point is correct.

You're right of course. I messed up the diagram and copy pasted the mistake everywhere :oops:

I corrected it now.

tentano · **#92**

Ohshi-

Now I have to correct all of mine, too!!!

EDIT: Now look at how silly everyone else is, with their non-edited diagrams! Ha-ha!

Bill Spight · **#93**

topazg wrote:

I'd rather see it as a discussion with a number of answers and some possible purposes of each explained.

Another one of those damn adults who wants to understand!

(See this note, viewtopic.php?p=184000#p184000 and the following discussion.

)

Bill Spight · **#94**

Amelia wrote:

Bill Spight wrote:

This problem makes more sense.

That double two space extension was weird, and because the double extension was so thin, :w1:

was questionable, as was the answer given. And in this diagram the star point is correct.

You're right of course. I messed up the diagram and copy pasted the mistake everywhere :oops:

I corrected it now.

E. A. Znosko-Borovsky wrote:

Do not despise the small details; it is often in them that the idea of the position will be found.

Amelia · **#95**

Bill Spight wrote:

E. A. Znosko-Borovsky wrote:

Do not despise the small details; it is often in them that the idea of the position will be found.

Anyway, thanks to everyone for the contributions (despite the diagram typo :oops:

). A lot to think about!

Boidhre · **#96**

tentano wrote:

@topaszg:

topazg · **#97**

Bill Spight wrote:

topazg wrote:

I'd rather see it as a discussion with a number of answers and some possible purposes of each explained.

Another one of those damn adults who wants to understand!

(See this note, viewtopic.php?p=184000#p184000 and the following discussion.

)

Hahaha, what an interesting read, and yes, guilty as charged. It is the attempt at understanding to better guide explicit choices that I find fun about the game, rather necessarily than any improvement in strength, so I'll happily continue being one too

Amelia · **#98**

That was a week end with plenty of go

On Friday evening, I played topazg (thanks again!) and there are a number of interesting points to add to my study from that game. The first I'm going to work on are standard shapes in the corner. I even already have a book on the subject (but never properly studied it until now. I have too many books).

Then I went to the one and only local tournament, the Erlanger Go Turnier. As usual in tournaments, my results were poor, I won once and lost four games. Most were pretty close though. The toughest one happened to be against a cute 10 years old who not only dominated the board, but also demonstrated good sportsmanship. I'm looking forward to his future as a go player. (I'll be posting that game soon, but I recorded it on paper due to my tablet not working and I still have to create the sgf file).

The game below is the last one I played. The opening was a bit strange. I tried a sanrensei, which I otherwise hardly ever play and on top of that I was quite tired from the previous game.

EdLee · **#99**

Hi Amelia,

Congrats on attending the tourney!

:b13:

not good. Get rid of this bad habit.

don't follow your opponent around like a puppy. R7! :b13:

was not good,
but his tenuki to :w14:

gives you a chance to R7 and make :b13:

a good move!

what's the status of W's group lower right corner ? Is W alive ? Did you consider killing W there ?

:b25:

Speaking of learning your basic shapes, N17 here is a local, shared vital point.

Basic shapes are a very big problem for you right now (standard, common problems, for all of us around these levels

).

Example: :b97:

this is truly bizarre. Can you find a better local move ?

103 another very strange move. Can you find a better local move ?

Amelia · **#100**

Hi Ed, thanks for your comments!

I see why 13 is bad. But the problem here is that I find 12 confusing.
It appeared a couple of times in high handicap games and I played O4 or N4. I got no specific comments about those moves so I assume it's fine. I'm mapping out 4th line territory, nothing to complain about I guess, but are there other good options?

15: It seemed like a good opportunity to keep down a pretty low stone
17: Oh yes I did consider it, but I didn't think I could. I certainly could have harassed that group more in hindsight. At that point in the game I had my eyes on other points. Because he ignored my approach I wanted to go back to the lower left corner. I thought I could come back to it later. Not a great idea, since an attack on the lower right would probably have been sente all the way and given me some thickness. Instead those three stones are floating...

25: Mm, yeah, but I wanted to avoid being surrounded.

I'll look into 97 an 103 when I have a bit more time and a board.

Back on track

Who is online