no it isn't. especially not in the last one.countsheep wrote:In your diagrams, invading san-san is a good choice.hyperpape wrote:Interesting perspective. But what about
Invading the corner
-
speedchase
- Lives in sente
- Posts: 800
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2011 4:36 pm
- Rank: AGA 2kyu
- GD Posts: 0
- Universal go server handle: speedchase
- Has thanked: 139 times
- Been thanked: 122 times
Re: Invading the corner
-
countsheep
- Beginner
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 8:50 am
- GD Posts: 0
- Been thanked: 16 times
Re: Invading the corner
Yes, I agree with you. Go is a zero-sum game, it's all about efficiency. If you have a higher efficiency, the territory comes with you. And that's why people like the good shapes and hate the bad ones.Uberdude wrote:Right, the inefficiency is already a good result for you. They aren't something you need to find a follow-up for to take advantage, you already have one.
I said 33 invasion is a good choice, but I don't mean it's the only choice. And, I said it's all about local.speedchase wrote: no it isn't. especially not in the last one.
Let's just talk about the last diagram. Maybe you think white should kakari and play like this. What do you think about this diagram?
Actually, locally the result is bad for white. We all know, with the two circle marked stones, w should extend a. But in this diagram white can only play a two space extension. So white is an inefficient shape.
Why so many people play this diagram? That's because, white wanted to break black's moyo, or the moyo in potential. With the white group on the top, black can't make a moyo. That's the whole board thinking. It means the diagram is locally bad, but maybe globally good.
So, locally, 33 is still a good choice. But if you are worried about the moyo, you can kakari and play the diagram above.
Pro Game Videos You Can Understand - GoCommentary.com