Working through the kyus! (Easier said than done)

moyoaji · Post by **moyoaji** » Sun Mar 02, 2014 3:15 pm

I'm very much enjoying my break, and have been filling it with studying go. (So the logic here: I'm on break from classes. Therefore, I will study. ) I was able to watch several lectures, played and reviewed a couple of games with Ember, and then reviewed a professional game on my own for the first time in weeks. And it happened to be a really good one.

The game was one of the Korean Female Kuksu semi-final matches, a game between Park Shiun 9p and Kim Sinyoung 1p. I like how simply and calmly black played to secure a nice victory. The game was easy to follow and I feel like I learned more about how to attack, defend, and find large points.(Again with this calm playstyle thing. You know, maybe you should get good at the game before you try to pick out a playstle. Maybe you're not even good at playing like that. )

I have been continuing to read in The Chinese Opening and have learned a lot. Kato Masao has been opening my eyes to new possibilities in this fuseki. (Oh, just say it. He's been opening your eyes to new opening possibilities. ) I hope to read more this week and possibly finish the book by the end of the month. I could finish it faster, but I'm also trying to get in Attack and Defense, which has really been challenging me and feels like it is exactly what I need to get stronger. (So get to reading. Why are you posting here then?)

moyoaji · Post by **moyoaji** » Mon Mar 03, 2014 11:38 am

A sad defeat today. (Finally, one of those games. ) I played another KGS match, as I said I would try to do more of over break, and I was unable to win against an opponent who played the "live everywhere" strategy I won against last time. I believe I made two key mistakes that cost me the game.

First, :w44:

should have been at F3 so I could turn around and successfully attack black's 2 stones on the right. I got greedy and tried to both seal him into the corner and attack his stones. Too much. :w42:

at D5 may have also been something to consider. (You complain that this opponent is playing an unreasonable strategy and then you go around and make an unreasonable move. You're just as bad as him. And he's better at this than you. )

Second, move 130 should have just sealed black in. The first cut didn't work, but the second one did. (Nice job getting psyched out. ) This definitely cost me the game, because even if I just seal black and can't kill him, I still get more than enough compensation to reduce the top and get points on the right.

I also have to give my opponent credit for finding the sequence to move 167 to get in the reverse monkey jump. That was a game saving set of moves. (Yep. Thanks igor1959 for preserving moyo's loss! )

I shall press on, though. More study and games will come this week.

EdLee · Post by **EdLee** » Mon Mar 03, 2014 1:12 pm

moyoaji · Post by **moyoaji** » Mon Mar 03, 2014 1:45 pm

EdLee wrote:Why did you pass on ?

I wanted to make myself strong before attacking, but you are correct that I did not need it. I misread, just as I did at 130. (Of course EdLee is right. And of course you misread. He's good at go, you aren't. )

Bill Spight · Post by **Bill Spight** » Mon Mar 03, 2014 2:33 pm

moyoaji wrote:First, should have been at F3

You mean G-03, right?

But, really, how about D-07?

moyoaji · Post by **moyoaji** » Mon Mar 03, 2014 4:29 pm

Bill Spight wrote:
moyoaji wrote:First, should have been at F3

You mean G-03, right?

But, really, how about D-07?

Actually, I meant E3. Expecting black to respond to not be sealed into the corner. Then I could go back and attack the two stones.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W This sort of thing $$ | . . O X . . . $$ | . O . . . . . $$ | . X O O . O . $$ | . X X . 1 . . $$ | . . . . X 2 . $$ | . . . . . . . $$ ---------------[/go]

I've never seen D7 before. How does that sequence go? (Of course you've never heard of it. Because you don't know anything about this game. I've always liked you, Bill. Able to come in here and show up moyo at every turn. I bet the sequence from there is a game-winning punishment. )

EdLee · Post by **EdLee** » Mon Mar 03, 2014 6:22 pm

moyoaji wrote:(Of course EdLee is right. And of course you misread. He's good at go, you aren't. )

I'm just a beginner. I'm wrong about Go all the time.

Bill Spight · Post by **Bill Spight** » Mon Mar 03, 2014 7:12 pm

A couple of comments about :w44:

, and a few before that.

moyoaji · Post by **moyoaji** » Wed Mar 05, 2014 11:56 pm

Thanks for the comments on the previous game, Bill.

A win and a loss tonight. Both going to the victor because they played correctly and then did not allow their opponent to trick them into losing. (Well, at least the loss went to the better player.)

I lost an OGS game against skydyr. I did quite poorly against his dual 5-4 opening. I approach the corners from the inside and then fought hard to get out, leading to a sub-optimal result in one corner and then death in the other corner. (So your 5-4 joseki is bad. I thought I remembered you once saying that you were comfortable with 5-4 joseki. That either means you were only comfortable with 5-4 joseki when you played the 5-4, which means you value the outside too much, or it means you are now realizing that you aren't as good as you thought. I'm going to guess the problem is both. ) Playing against dual 5-4 is definitely one of my weaknesses at the moment. Since I don't know how to handle 5-4 stones, that's something I should practice against and probably with as well. (Know your enemy? Trying that Sun Tzu approach to go are we? )

Here is the game. I'll show some of the ending variations I read out, but to be honest I'm not totally sure how each side should have played. I do know that white played correctly in the end. I'll show some of the tricks he didn't fall for. (So this is like a glimpse into an alternate reality where your opponent plays how you want them to play. I'm glad that reality isn't this one. )

The win was on IGS. It was an overwhelming victory because my opponent didn't know when to give up fighting for a dead group. I could have tenuki'd from the situation on the left long before I did, but I figured I had no need to. The game was already won by just killing that group. As Sun Tzu said in the Art of War, "[The good fighter] wins his battles by making no mistakes. Making no mistakes is what establishes the certainty of victory, for it means conquering an enemy who is already defeated." (You... you actually are taking the Sun Tzu approach to go... )

So I need to work on my 5-4 joseki, learning when to approach a 5-4, and continue to not make mistakes at the end of won games. (Was that last one one that you actually needed to learn? )

skydyr · Post by **skydyr** » Thu Mar 06, 2014 8:51 am

moyoaji wrote:Thanks for the comments on the previous game, Bill.

A win and a loss tonight. Both going to the victor because they played correctly and then did not allow their opponent to trick them into losing. (Well, at least the loss went to the better player.)

I lost an OGS game against skydyr. I did quite poorly against his dual 5-4 opening. I approach the corners from the inside and then fought hard to get out, leading to a sub-optimal result in one corner and then death in the other corner. (So your 5-4 joseki is bad. I thought I remembered you once saying that you were comfortable with 5-4 joseki. That either means you were only comfortable with 5-4 joseki when you played the 5-4, which means you value the outside too much, or it means you are now realizing that you aren't as good as you thought. I'm going to guess the problem is both. ) Playing against dual 5-4 is definitely one of my weaknesses at the moment. Since I don't know how to handle 5-4 stones, that's something I should practice against and probably with as well. (Know your enemy? Trying that Sun Tzu approach to go are we? )

Here is the game. I'll show some of the ending variations I read out, but to be honest I'm not totally sure how each side should have played. I do know that white played correctly in the end. I'll show some of the tricks he didn't fall for. (So this is like a glimpse into an alternate reality where your opponent plays how you want them to play. I'm glad that reality isn't this one. )

http://www.lifein19x19.com/forum/download/file.php?id=4221

A few thoughts:

First off, I think my first move was bad. It was played on a whim and should have been in a different corner, perhaps, as it allowed you to set up the opportunity for a favourable chinese opening, and resulted in me kind of wasting a stone breaking it up. This led to me scrambling to figure out what the heck I was planning on doing in this game, and I think I got lucky later to win.

Agreed that the push around 19 or so was aji-keshi, if not outright bad.

I'm not sure if :w28:

was a good move or not. I wanted to activate options for my E16 stone, but P3 or something else on the bottom may have been bigger.

At 33, I looked this up on josekipedia, which claims that your suggested move is the correct response, which leads to a fight where white gets a lot of thickness and black gets something on the bottom. It's described as 'good for white' (in this case). I didn't like the cut at N4, though, and wanted to strengthen that a bit, which is why I played :w34:

as I did. The issue, though, is that at :b45:

black can use O6 to get a few forcing moves by atariing at M5 and M6, and then use sente to kill the two white stones or make them live really low while black gets the corner. Certainly having only two stones instead of three makes the later side/corner fight much more difficult for white than in the game.

In your variation at :b49:

I think both sides would likely end up alive but small, and black would have a running fight in an area with a lot of white influence, whereas by killing the two stones, black gets a fair amount of territory and influence to make up for the central strength white builds. At that point, white would have almost no territory on the board, and while there's a lot of aji on the top side, the bottom and left would already be pretty solid. I'm not sure it would be easy for white to win.

Your other sequence around :b53:

is roughly what I was expecting as the outcome, or white playing Q2 in sente and then taking care of the aji of the weak black stones. I don't think it's a spectacular result for white, when black can keep white's upper right stones low, and a white play there induces black to fix his side up.

Also, following our discussion last night I remembered why I didn't pay much attention to the ladder. White can just net the stones with M8 if they try and get out, and I didn't want to give black the opportunity to play a ladder breaker and really seal up the upper left.

Edit: the net doesn't entirely work, but I think it puts white in a favourable position.

moyoaji · Post by **moyoaji** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 11:19 pm

Hey guys, sorry I haven't updated this journal more. I've been busy and whatnot, but I figured I should share stuff here since some go related things have happened in my life.

(It has been way too long since a post here. An internal critic needs to be able to vent every now and then.

Moyo has been neglecting his studies to some extent. Sure, he still reads on occasion, and every now and then he'll do a go problem, but he hasn't been playing games like he should. Even his club visits are lacking in games. I know he's got a life, but I feel I need to give him a push every now and then.

In my own way I do support him. I want him to become a dan level player, too.

The guy's a kyu, he makes lots of mistakes in his games. I like pointing these out because, let's face it, making fun of him is my job. And it's fun. He's made it too easy, though.

So I do want him to become a dan. That way his problems will be harder to see and it will actually give me a challenge. )

For my birthday I received 3 go books. All of them were from Hinoki Press. Up to this point, all of my books are Kiseido, so it is probably good to mix things up a bit. (Because a different publishing company is going to give you that much diversity. All the books are about go, how different can they truly be?) The books are: "The Art of Positional Analysis," "Shuko: The Only Move - Vol. 1," and "The Theory and Practice of Shapes." (You're about a 4 kyu currently... Aren't those books for dan players? )

These books are higher level than anything I've read before. ( ) The only book I've read that comes close to this level is "The Direction of Play," which was quite a challenge for me at 9 kyu. I have the book on extended loan to a friend of mine, but would like to get it back to see if I can take a second stab at it.

"Shapes" seems the easiest of the three, but the first chapter was very introductory. The first problem set was moderately difficult for me, we'll see if it gets harder.

"The Only Move" is an interesting book. I like the author's style so it will probably be a fun read, but it has been difficult for a kyu like me. My favorite problem so far is the third one. The answer is something that would have fit perfectly into "Lessons in the Fundamentals of Go." I remember reading the problem and thinking "Okay, Kageyama would probably say to play this, but the answer is probably this instead." Of course the right answer was exactly what I thought Kageyama would have played. (Is Kageyama your version of Sai or something? )

"The Art of Positional Analysis" is fascinating so far. I feel that I had a breakthrough moment when looking at the first game. (Oh, this ought to be good...)

The following position is one where Kobayashi said he spent about one hour trying to find an alternative to :b49:

. That astonished me and made me realize just how important good reading is when you get into a tight spot. Don't just settle for letting your opponent do something bad to you, try to find another move even if, in the end, none appears. That, however, was not my breakthrough. I then looked at the board and wondered "Where will black play :b51:

?" While "Positional Analysis" is not a problem book, I did want to spend time on that move.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Bm47 Kobayashi Koichi 9p (B) vs. Sonoda Yuichi 9p (W) - Oct. 1984 $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . O . X . . X . . . . | $$ | . . O , . . . . . c . . . b . , X . . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X O O . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . O . O . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O O X . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . 2 1 X X . X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O O 3 . | $$ | . . . O . . a . . . . . O X . O X . . | $$ | . . O , X . . O . , . . . X . , X . . | $$ | . . . O X . . . . . . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

After about a minute, I figured that the shoulder hit at 'a' would be a good move as it helps the only weak group on the board. It was then that I asked a new question. "Assuming white comes away with sente, where would he play?" The answer seemed obvious to me. White would play at 'b'. If black defends, white will block on the outside facing the center and he will have a massive box. This idea was presented earlier in the chapter. (Of course it was, you'd never be able to see a move like that...)

So I looked at that result and realized that white's move would be too good for white. So I changed my answer to 'c' and that, it turned out on the next page, was the move Kobayashi chose. In fact, he said it was the only move. "If Black allows white to play [the standard moves] then Black's access to the center is blocked, making White's moyo in the center quite large. White's advantage would grow greatly." (I thought you were reading "The Art of Positional Analysis" not "The Only Move" )

Sometimes sente feels like the enemy of every kyu player, because mishandling sente is how a kyu loses the game. I must remember to read beyond my opponent's local responses, because if I suddenly lose sente with an exchange, even if it is a good exchange, I might be giving my opponent a chance to do something even larger. That sounds stupidly obvious when I say it (Because it is stupidly obvious... ), but until reading for my opponent comes naturally to me I must keep reminding myself.

I want to build too much. I prefer to enclose a corner rather than approach. I prefer to defend before attacking. This is not always correct and I need to know when playing defensively is a mistake.

There is an idea in the opening: When you have more potential than your opponent, you build. When your opponent has more potential than you, you destroy. This would seem to also apply in the middle game. Black can help his stones, or maybe make a few points on the bottom, but it will not compare to white's result of playing on the top side first. Even though these moves do not build anything for black they are necessary. (So you're saying you like good moyo aji better than bad moyo aji? )

All in all, I look forward to reading each of these books. They are above my level, but if I want to reach above my level then I can't just read books meant for kyus. (You probably should also spend less time with the books and more times at the board. )

Also, speaking of books, my review of The Chinese Opening will be coming soon to the Book Reviews sub-forum. I just need to finish reading the end of the last chapter and then consolidate my final opinions. (Did you just acknowledge me? )

In other news, I updated my signature to a new Kageyama quote from "Lessons." (And now you're back to ignoring me...)

moyoaji · Post by **moyoaji** » Sun Mar 30, 2014 11:29 pm

Fight of My Life: One of My Most Intense Games

My heart is still pounding from this game. My opponent wanted to fight. And so we did.

My reading has never been so sharp or intense as in that fight on the bottom side. I would have crumbled several months ago. Tonight, I triumphed.

I failed on the top right to save my group. I was so frazzled that I played :w42:

solidly instead of the more obvious R5 move. I paused at that. Looking at the time, it was only about a 20 second pause, but it felt much longer. I think it was the adrenaline. (Playing go like this gives you that much of an adrenaline boost? You need to get out more. )

Following that realization I started to do a bit better. At :w72:

I paused for a full minute, analyzing all 6 groups hanging in the balance of this conflict. (You sure it's only six? I'd count 9 groups, but I guess you didn't take time to read their fate.)

I'm sure I made a mistake somewhere, but I felt my opponent was asking for way to much and I called him on it. I don't know if :w82:

is a tesuji or not, but it looked good to me and my opponent had to back off. The bamboo joint formed by this forcing move ended up being game winning for me. (You think you came up with an original tesuji without having it printed in a book for you? Yeah, right. If you came up with a tesuji then I'm the real Batman. )

My sense of shape has improved greatly since I completed the chapter on shapes in "Tesuji" and since I stared to look at shape more seriously with my study of the book "The Theory and Practice of Shapes." The first chapter alone taught me a lot more about shape than I realized. :w72:

in particular is a move I would not have played without reading those books. And just compare the shapes of both sides after move :w96:

. Black has no less than 4 empty triangles and 0 eye shape. I, on the other hand, have plenty of shape. (Well, I guess maybe those books are helping you on the board after all... )

Black needed to let me capture at :w90:

. From

on the game was a one-way path to black's resignation. He tried too hard to kill my stones and it cost him the game.

I'm back to 3 kyu with this game, and I feel that I am stronger. I will get in a few more games. I will be able to make my 3 kyu rank official soon. And I will press on toward 1 dan. (Bold words. I can't wait to see you fail to back them up. )

Something is different. My go playing is different. Let's see what happens.

Bill Spight · Post by **Bill Spight** » Mon Mar 31, 2014 8:12 am

Congratulations!

Just a quick question. Why do you think that R-05 is obvious for :w42:

?

moyoaji · Post by **moyoaji** » Thu Apr 03, 2014 11:33 pm

If my signature could be longer than 255 characters, it would be this:
"The reason so many people never master this elementary skill [of nets and ladders] is that they keep ignoring it as being beneath them. They are the people who cannot be bothered to 'read'; who try to capture the uncapturable group because it just looks as if it can be done or because they can muddle through somehow, and so they rush headlong into disaster. They are also the people who, when they face a slightly stronger opponent, do not try to capture the capturable group because with their fuzzy reading they are afraid of messing it up; who innocently add unnecessary stones to their own already alive groups; who take fright without cause; who tremble when they sit down at the go board; who play through the whole game with a sullen expression; who lose every fight; who eventually come to hate go. Sorry wretches, through choice they have abandoned the most interesting and enjoyable of all games." - Kageyama Toshiro

(I think people posting walls of text like that is why your signature is limited. )

This would not be to show off to others, but instead a reminder to myself. I'm the first person to forget this quote, as I was shown when I found a comment on my review of "The Chinese Opening." gowan said this about my view that the book was beneath the level of dan players:

gowan wrote:Speaking as a dan-level player I would say that dan-rank players can learn from this book. My experience is that dan-level players still need work on fundamentals.

(Oh boy, he said "fundamentals." I don't think he knew what he was really saying to moyo with that word...)

Fundamentals. That is what the book gives - what it was always supposed to give. It was not meant to be a massively in-depth look at the Chinese opening. It was not supposed to show us how professionals handle hundreds of incredibly specific mid-game situations that arise from the opening. It is supposed to give the amateur reader a solid understanding of what makes the Chinese fuseki work. In the end, that is really what I need. Pro level discussions can wait for another day and another book.

I wanted the book to be a foray into higher level thinking on the Chinese opening, so when I began the book and it discussed responses to common moves in depth, I feared that I had made a mistake. Was this book a waste of my time and money because I already knew this?

So as the book wore on I listened less and less to the author. I would pay attention to things I felt were relevant, but would otherwise just lazily read the book. By the time I got to the last chapter I tried again to read passionately, but I basically just skimmed the last few games, even when the reviews could have been the most exciting part of the book. I should have played each one out on my board and thought through them as I have been doing with "The Art of Positional Analysis" - but instead I just read through them to finish the book. (Wow, you really tried to post an objective review when you only half-read a critical part of the book? )

So I read through this book with "a sullen expression;" I gave up trying to "fight" through it; and I came to hate the book. By failing to see the value in the opening of this book, I failed to see its value in teaching me about my favorite opening; an opening I love. Anything I read on that opening, no matter how basic, should fill me with joy, not indifference. My favorite opening of my favorite game; a game that I love. Anything I read about that game, no matter how basic, should fill me with joy.

I now feel like a fool. This is exactly what happened when I read "The Second Book of Go." I saw most of the topics as simple at best, beneath me at worst. This quote by Kageyama inspired me to read that again; give it another chance and finish it when I had not before. I thought I had learned from that experience. Now all I learn is that I need to keep learning that lesson. (It's alright. Sometimes you do need to keep relearning, but, eventually, you will get the message. )

And so I will be re-reading this book. This time with an understanding that I am working to grasp the fundamentals of the opening; not with some silly idea of "mastering" an opening that is still changing in the eyes of professionals.

So thank you, gowan, for reminding me of how important knowing the fundamentals of the game is. And thank you for giving me insight into my dislike for this book, whether you intended to or not.

@Bill - As for your question that I forgot to answer, :w42:

at R5 seems like the shape point for black's group. It shows up in many joseki. However, I suppose directly defending the cut leaves less aji on the left in this situation. Thanks to your comment I'm now less sure about that move. Maybe it wasn't a terrible mistake after all... (It was probably a mistake )

Bonobo · Post by **Bonobo** » Sat Apr 05, 2014 7:39 pm

Just wanted to say that I really really really dig reading your stuff, moyoaji.

Thank you, Tom

Life In 19x19

Working through the kyus! (Easier said than done)

Re: To 5 kyu in 5 months! (We'll see about that)

Re: To 5 kyu in 5 months! (We'll see about that)

Re:

Re: To 5 kyu in 5 months! (We'll see about that)

Re: To 5 kyu in 5 months! (We'll see about that)

Re: To 5 kyu in 5 months! (We'll see about that)

Re: To 5 kyu in 5 months! (We'll see about that)

Re: To 5 kyu in 5 months! (We'll see about that)

Re: To 5 kyu in 5 months! (We'll see about that)

Re: To 5 kyu in 5 months! (We'll see about that)

Re: To 5 kyu in 5 months! (We'll see about that)

Re: To 5 kyu in 5 months! (We'll see about that)

Re: To 5 kyu in 5 months! (We'll see about that)