daal's board

[daal]

Thanks lovelove, I'll have a look.

Edit: I looked at your post, and was quite pleased to discover that my reasoning was pretty much correct. Thanks!

See pic for how to get post URL:



Edit 2: To see how I posted a link to your post, you can click "quote."

[logan]

Hi daal, thanks for sharing. That invasion in the first game was quite impressive!

I'm happy that you're enjoying your new board I also prefer playing professional games on a real board. There's a saying that chewing your food more allows the body to absorb nutrients more effectively and helps promote healthier food portioning because the body has more time to tell when it's becoming full. I think playing on a real board is like this is many ways. For example, the time between placing stones allows more time for the brain to think about each move. Some moves that appear on a computer may stand out as more interesting or intriguing on a real board, thereby meriting a second look or deeper reflection.

I may have to pick up that Kido book when it comes back in stock. I'm a sucker for commentary books

Best of luck : )

[Bonobo]

[..] There's a saying that chewing your food more allows the body to absorb nutrients more effectively and helps promote healthier food portioning because the body has more time to tell when it's becoming full. I think playing on a real board is like this is many ways. For example, the time between placing stones allows more time for the brain to think about each move. [..]

Beautifully said.

Yeah, that neuromuscular thing, deeper cognition with some physical effort (I think). I should do it much more …

[daal]

I thought I'd post again, just because this is, you know, my journal.

So far I've pretty much succeeded in reducing my quick thoughtless games, and replacing it with effortful study, but so far the results have been - well, nothing to write home about. Despite my lofty ideals, my opponents don't seem to be impressed. I guess I'll just have to keep at it.

[logan]

I know you can do it daal : )

As they say: No matter how many mistakes you make or how slow you progress, you are still way ahead of everyone who isn’t trying.

[Bonobo]

Too bad that you’re about 130 km away from my place, otherwise I guess I’d stalk you for games but I hope to make it to your city sometime this year, and I’d love to play you then.

[daal]

I must admit, I'm finding this business of studying professional games on my board harder than I expected. First of all, I am not particularly adept at reading game records, and it feels that way too much of my studying time is spent searching for the next move. Playing out a whole game one time usually takes at least an hour, and when I have that much time, I find it hard not to just play a game instead. Also, I need to play the game out several times before I get to the point of being able to watch the game unfold, and I find myself getting tired of it instead of wanting to know more about it.

On other fronts, of the last five games I've played, three of them have ended in a 0.5 win for me! Here is the last one - perhaps someone has a comment or two.

[SoDesuNe]

I found it quite hard to follow your game, especially at the beginning with all the Tenukis ^^
Generally I would recommend to look out for your stones. Sometimes you play moves just to sacrifice them on your next move or you first weaken your stones and then try to rescue them but you end up a bit heavy. Try to make your stones work together.

Then you could have played a lot sharper in some situations but maybe wasn't aware of your possibilities. A good Tesuji book might help here.



Regarding pro games: Which sources do you use? Maybe you have too many moves per diagramme?
I favour the approach of replaying the game just once and then one time without the source to see how many moves I could remember. If I struggle I just look at the source again. Then I'll go over the next game. If I've replayed all games I start from the beginning.
This way you will also learn a lot with each replay but you will learn with baby steps, it's easier to digest : D

[daal]

Generally I would recommend to look out for your stones.

Thank you for this as well as for your other comments. I thoroughly enjoyed your review.

[daal]

Recently I've been thinking about one of the many eye-opening comments that John Fairbairn has made. I don't know where it was or what exactly he said, but it was to the effect that in certain Asian go problem books, one is confronted with certain terms in the answers again and again, and that with time, the reader learns to approach the problems with these concepts in mind. He wasn't specific, but in my studies of pro games, the terms thickness and thinness are starting to stand out.

While we tend to muse a lot about thickness, what it's good for and how to use it, thinness doesn't seem to be as much a subject of conversation, and I'm starting to think that my failure to appreciate or even adequately consider what makes a thin position thin is a source of quite a bit of my grief. Not only do I have a propensity for making thin positions that get cut apart, but I also fail to recognize the opportunities that thin positions present.

I am coming to this realization via my observations of professional games, in which positions crop up where one player seems to have too much, but in fact he doesn't. The thinness gets exposed and the huge area becomes manageable. In my own games, this often doesn't happen - though it probably has less to do with my thin positions than a propensity to get lazy. My impression of quite a few of the games in which I've been trounced is that my opponent is simply trying harder than I am to win. Whilst he is thinking: "Can't let all this thinness go to waste," I'm saying to myself: "C'mon already, I've made all these good moves, why isn't this game over?"

[daal]

I was going to add in a line in the above post about being too lazy to find John Fairbairn's post, and about being too lazy to post a game record (because it was in .ngf format) but although I may be too lazy to think about go for more than 20 minutes at a stretch, I do have considerable energy available for posting.

JF's post is here, and the sequence that prompted my thoughts was this one on the top left, starting at move 73:

[SoDesuNe]

The sequence starting at move 73 is basically (shape-wise) a "simple" and (I think) common Tesuji problem. Although spotting this in a game is obviously more challenging.

Regarding thickness and thinness: I think these are just different sides of the same coin. If you consider yourself able to appreciate thickness than thinness shouldn't be harder to understand. In the end knowing what are the important aspects of a thick position leads to awareness what a thin position lacks.

Maybe the different handling has something to do with psychology? The common sense is to attack from thick positions but to defend thin ones. I know that I don't like to defend when I don't see additionally benefit (as in defending while attacking the opponent). This quite often leads to a thin position becoming a floating group.
So for me it's more like I (most of the times) know where my thin positions are but I can't see good moves to defend (with style =D) and therefore I don't defend at all. (Still practicing my amashi-skills : D )

It's quite the oppsite with thickness. I love thick positions because they are carefree and because a lot of opponents love banging their head against them. I had quite a few games where I just won because my opponent tried unreasonable attacks although I was strong everywhere.

My conclusion is more Tesuji and Life-and-Death problems to better handle thin positions (with style =D).

[daal]

Regarding thickness and thinness: I think these are just different sides of the same coin. If you consider yourself able to appreciate thickness than thinness shouldn't be harder to understand. In the end knowing what are the important aspects of a thick position leads to awareness what a thin position lacks.

I wish this were true, but I think it isn't. Thick is easy - lots of attached stones with plenty of eyespace. There is also an easy concept to follow when you're thick: push your opponent against it, and make points elsewhere while doing so. Thin on the other hand, is weird. Early in the game, a two or three space extension with nothing nearby is solid - you've made a base! Yay! But later in the game, when more stones are around, that very same position can become thin. Same with small and large knight's moves. Like you said, it's not easy to know how or when to strengthen, but it's especially difficult if you don't notice in the first place that the position has, could, or is about to become thin.

I see it like this: thickness lets you wave your theory flag around, but thinness is where the action is.

[EdLee]

daal and soudesune, interesting discussion in the last 2 posts.

[SoDesuNe]

Thick is easy - lots of attached stones with plenty of eyespace.

How about: Thin is easy - few loosely connected stones with undefined eyespace : p

Like you said, it's not easy to know how or when to strengthen, but it's especially difficult if you don't notice in the first place that the position has, could, or is about to become thin.

Hm, I know this feeling when it comes to certain corner patterns. E.g. when to defend a Shimari or when to defend the 3*3 weakness after this Joseki.

$$Wc :w5: omitted
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . T . . . . . .
$$ | . . . X . 4 . . .
$$ | . . 2 . . . . . .
$$ | . . 1 3 . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc :w5: omitted
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . T . . . . . .
$$ | . . . X . 4 . . .
$$ | . . 2 . . . . . .
$$ | . . 1 3 . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

In the beginning I always thought Black's position was quite strong. After a douzen handicap games, I wasn't so sure anymore =D
But yes, as you correctly said, it all depends on the surrounding stones - that's why I omitted . If White's group is strong he can freely invade at the marked point, yet when his group is weak, respectively not defended properly, Black can descend (left of ), let White take the corner and after getting Sente (there's are some patterns), Black can attack White's group below.

In the end it comes down to knowing which possibilities lay within a shape. It's mostly experience and Tesuji and L&D knowledge again, I think.