Today on IGS I played 4 games. Of these, 3 were handicap games in which I took White. The remaining one was an even game in which I took Black. I won all the handi games, but lost this one by 22.5 points. One thing that cost me the game - in addition to faster than usual playing - was the successful invasion of White 84 in the lower right corner. I now feel that, had Black 87 been avoided, White would've not had it so easy. Below is the game record. Much obliged in advance for your comments.
1 lost game out of 4 played
-
ez4u
- Oza
- Posts: 2414
- Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 10:15 pm
- Rank: Jp 6 dan
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: ez4u
- Location: Tokyo, Japan
- Has thanked: 2351 times
- Been thanked: 1332 times
Re: 1 lost game out of 4 played
Comments on a few early choices...
In the diagram below
is nice, it leans in order to expand your area while limiting White. When White invades deeply into your strength with 
, however, you jump straight up with 
. You should have played the diagonal move at "a" instead.
Six seconds later (of your time that is 
) you played 
below and then followed up with 
through 
. This gives White a free pass to the outside. What were your thoughts here?
I would probably play the double hane without thinking (being too lazy to read it out 
). It is important to realize that Black's shape in the upper right is better than White's. If you are cut off and end up in a capturing race, Black should have the better chances. In the game, Black lets White off too easily.
With 
through 
you force White to connect the stones on the left side without clearly making two eyes for yourself. You could have cut at either "a" or "b" and captured at least one stone to secure your group. What were your thoughts here?
You've already realized that 87 in the game was a poor choice. Almost any other move would have made it nearly impossible for White to live. Indeed, it would have been harder for White if Black had simply passed! 
In the diagram below
is nice, it leans in order to expand your area while limiting White. When White invades deeply into your strength with , however, you jump straight up with . You should have played the diagonal move at "a" instead.
Six seconds later (of your time that is ) you played below and then followed up with through . This gives White a free pass to the outside. What were your thoughts here?
I would probably play the double hane without thinking (being too lazy to read it out ). It is important to realize that Black's shape in the upper right is better than White's. If you are cut off and end up in a capturing race, Black should have the better chances. In the game, Black lets White off too easily.
With through you force White to connect the stones on the left side without clearly making two eyes for yourself. You could have cut at either "a" or "b" and captured at least one stone to secure your group. What were your thoughts here?
You've already realized that 87 in the game was a poor choice. Almost any other move would have made it nearly impossible for White to live. Indeed, it would have been harder for White if Black had simply passed! Dave Sigaty
"Short-lived are both the praiser and the praised, and rememberer and the remembered..."
- Marcus Aurelius; Meditations, VIII 21
"Short-lived are both the praiser and the praised, and rememberer and the remembered..."
- Marcus Aurelius; Meditations, VIII 21
-
tekesta
- Lives in gote
- Posts: 546
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:10 am
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: FanXiping
- OGS: slashpine
- Has thanked: 18 times
- Been thanked: 81 times
Re: 1 lost game out of 4 played
@illuck: No. 29 in the 2nd diagram was to being strengthening the Black group before White surrounded it. "Build strength by attacking another stone" is the proverb I tried to follow, but in hindsight I now wonder if it would've been better just to seal White in and let her live. I still need to practice dealing effectively with moyō invasions.
In the 4th diagram, I was looking to make a living - although overconcentrated - group by using tesuji.
Strategically speaking, in this game I see the same symptom from before, namely my failure to counter my opponent's plans on a global scale. One fault of mine is that I often let my opponent have 1 or 2 nice, big corners. I'll need to fight more if I am to let my opponent have a corner or two. Also, if Black 87 had been played at, let's say, q7, I would've won the game by 5-10 pts., barring losses elsewhere on the board. My opponent exploited my mistakes nicely
In the 4th diagram, I was looking to make a living - although overconcentrated - group by using tesuji.
Strategically speaking, in this game I see the same symptom from before, namely my failure to counter my opponent's plans on a global scale. One fault of mine is that I often let my opponent have 1 or 2 nice, big corners. I'll need to fight more if I am to let my opponent have a corner or two. Also, if Black 87 had been played at, let's say, q7, I would've won the game by 5-10 pts., barring losses elsewhere on the board. My opponent exploited my mistakes nicely
-
illluck
- Lives in sente
- Posts: 1223
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 5:07 am
- Rank: OGS 2d
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: illluck
- Tygem: Trickprey
- OGS: illluck
- Has thanked: 736 times
- Been thanked: 239 times
Re: 1 lost game out of 4 played
While it is nice to get credit for something I didn't do, I guess you actually want to direct that question to ez4u 
-
Joaz Banbeck
- Judan
- Posts: 5546
- Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:30 am
- Rank: 1D AGA
- GD Posts: 1512
- Kaya handle: Test
- Location: Banbeck Vale
- Has thanked: 1080 times
- Been thanked: 1434 times
Re: 1 lost game out of 4 played
For move 17, O15 seems small when one corner is not yet secured.
Remember: corners first, sides next, center last.
Remember: corners first, sides next, center last.
Help make L19 more organized. Make an index: https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5207
-
ez4u
- Oza
- Posts: 2414
- Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 10:15 pm
- Rank: Jp 6 dan
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: ez4u
- Location: Tokyo, Japan
- Has thanked: 2351 times
- Been thanked: 1332 times
Re: 1 lost game out of 4 played
The point about 29 is actually 31. If Black has to answer 30, then 29 was mistimed at best. In other words, 29 is not a case of "attacking another stone" if White connects out with 30 and 36. Black probably needs to go ahead and cut above 30 with 33, returning to the idea of sealing White in.tekesta wrote:@illuck: No. 29 in the 2nd diagram was to being strengthening the Black group before White surrounded it. "Build strength by attacking another stone" is the proverb I tried to follow, but in hindsight I now wonder if it would've been better just to seal White in and let her live. I still need to practice dealing effectively with moyō invasions.
In the 4th diagram, I was looking to make a living - although overconcentrated - group by using tesuji.
Strategically speaking, in this game I see the same symptom from before, namely my failure to counter my opponent's plans on a global scale. One fault of mine is that I often let my opponent have 1 or 2 nice, big corners. I'll need to fight more if I am to let my opponent have a corner or two. Also, if Black 87 had been played at, let's say, q7, I would've won the game by 5-10 pts., barring losses elsewhere on the board. My opponent exploited my mistakes nicely
In diagram 4 Black seems to have lost track of the real situation while fixating on "shapes"/"tesuji". Either of the diagrams below is much better for Black than the result in the game. After either one Black is strong and can invade the upper left and/or lower left corners with confidence. The "shape" moves in the game left Black not quite sure of having two eyes and therefore less able to reduce the top.
Dave Sigaty
"Short-lived are both the praiser and the praised, and rememberer and the remembered..."
- Marcus Aurelius; Meditations, VIII 21
"Short-lived are both the praiser and the praised, and rememberer and the remembered..."
- Marcus Aurelius; Meditations, VIII 21