Kirby's Study Journal
-
Uberdude
- Judan
- Posts: 6727
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 11:35 am
- Rank: UK 4 dan
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: Uberdude 4d
- OGS: Uberdude 7d
- Location: Cambridge, UK
- Has thanked: 436 times
- Been thanked: 3718 times
Re: Kirby's Study Journal
I'm not saying that k4 is unplayable. It's perfectly playable. If it is bad, which I believe so, it probably is less than half a point (for whatever scant meaning such metrics can be assigned to uncountable positions). When I say L4 is better I am striving to find the totally optimal moves, better than the mistakes pros sometimes makes. Yes those stats don't prove L4 is better, but 14 hits to 1 certainly says to me you should think about L4 seriously.
-
Uberdude
- Judan
- Posts: 6727
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 11:35 am
- Rank: UK 4 dan
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: Uberdude 4d
- OGS: Uberdude 7d
- Location: Cambridge, UK
- Has thanked: 436 times
- Been thanked: 3718 times
Re: Kirby's Study Journal
Kirby wrote:Uberdude wrote:I think there is a big difference between Inseong saying some move is okay for a bunch of kyu or low dan players in a lesson, and actually him engaging his full 8d power and analysing a position deeply and studying professional games.
I'm not sure if that's the case or not. I have no reason to believe it is, except for what you've told me.
I remember when I was in BIBA and getting On Sojin 7p to review some of my OGS games he could usually go through them quickly going "ok, ok, ok, ok, oh wait that direction looks dodgy or that shape is wrong" with little thought on his part, just relying on his intuition and experience. However there were a few times when we got to a position and he felt I was in a bad position but had been going "ok, ok, ok" before. He then put on his thinking cap and actually started reading like he would in a real game of his and would find some little mistake he'd skimmed over before or come up with some very clever long tactical sequence that wasn't just the 90% good enough moves that are usually ok for amateur reviews where the big mistakes throw away the game, but actually trying to find the 100% moves.
-
Kirby
- Honinbo
- Posts: 9553
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 6:04 pm
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: Kirby
- Tygem: 커비라고해
- Has thanked: 1583 times
- Been thanked: 1707 times
Re: Kirby's Study Journal
Uberdude wrote:I remember when I was in BIBA and getting On Sojin 7p to review some of my OGS games he could usually go through them quickly going "ok, ok, ok, ok, oh wait that direction looks dodgy or that shape is wrong" with little thought on his part, just relying on his intuition and experience. However there were a few times when we got to a position and he felt I was in a bad position but had been going "ok, ok, ok" before. He then put on his thinking cap and actually started reading like he would in a real game of his and would find some little mistake he'd skimmed over before or come up with some very clever long tactical sequence that wasn't just the 90% good enough moves that are usually ok for amateur reviews where the big mistakes throw away the game, but actually trying to find the 100% moves.
Sure. But this seems a bit different than a variation in a prepared lecture. I doubt that a teacher would add bad variations to explain an opening, just to water it down for kyu players.
It's possible that In-seong, or other teachers, might give variations that are simple, give a pretty good result, but maybe aren't optimal. I recall a few lectures from Kim Seongryong where he'd give refutations to trick plays. He'd often give a simple response, that would give you a decent result, and then give the "best" response, which was more complicated.
As In-seong gave multiple variations in the lecture, that could be the case here, too. I'll have to watch the video again.
For what it's worth, 14 hits to 1 in a game database *could* be indicative of a problem in the "1" pro's strategy, but it could also simply be that that "1" pro had a unique strategy.
Imagine, for example, the first time that the micro-Chinese opening was played. Take a snapshot of the database at that time, and there would be only 1 hit for that opening. Of course, that opening got fashionable, and now pros play it all the time. But if it hadn't - let's say the first guy to play it lost - then, we'd have to assume it is a bad opening, given the database stats.
Anyway, as I mentioned earlier, I can see that it is a bit of a burden for black when white gets so strong in the bottom left - I felt this during my game. Is it worth the fact that black got to play quickly around the board, and get a pretty good position on the top and on the right? I don't know for sure. But the DB stats alone don't make me feel bad about it.
be immersed
-
Uberdude
- Judan
- Posts: 6727
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 11:35 am
- Rank: UK 4 dan
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: Uberdude 4d
- OGS: Uberdude 7d
- Location: Cambridge, UK
- Has thanked: 436 times
- Been thanked: 3718 times
Re: Kirby's Study Journal
Kirby wrote:Sure. But this seems a bit different than a variation in a prepared lecture. I doubt that a teacher would add bad variations to explain an opening, just to water it down for kyu players.
When I said bad I meant in comparison to L4. K4 is a good move, but L4 is better. If I played every move in a game as 'badly' as K4 I would be stronger than 4d.
Kirby wrote:For what it's worth, 14 hits to 1 in a game database *could* be indicative of a problem in the "1" pro's strategy, but it could also simply be that that "1" pro had a unique strategy.
Imagine, for example, the first time that the micro-Chinese opening was played. Take a snapshot of the database at that time, and there would be only 1 hit for that opening. Of course, that opening got fashionable, and now pros play it all the time. But if it hadn't - let's say the first guy to play it lost - then, we'd have to assume it is a bad opening, given the database stats.
Yes one has to think critically when interpreting database results, just as one should when listening to a lecture. That the 1 game with K4 lost doesn't mean K4 was bad. Maybe it led to a nice result and he screwed up later. But I do think it is significant that the pro who played it did L4 first, then tried K4, and then went back to L4. And that most of those other pros playing L4 were in 2000 and 2001 AFTER the one try of K4.
Kirby wrote:Anyway, as I mentioned earlier, I can see that it is a bit of a burden for black when white gets so strong in the bottom left - I felt this during my game. Is it worth the fact that black got to play quickly around the board, and get a pretty good position on the top and on the right? I don't know for sure. But the DB stats alone don't make me feel bad about it.
I don't understand this line of reasoning. This would make sense if I was saying don't tenuki the kick but extend and fight (which personally I prefer, as do most pros). But I am saying if you want to tenuki and play a fast-paced development, it is better to play L4. Then you still get that fast development you want, but because L4 is closer to the lower right corner it is harder for white to separate it and use the thickness of the lower left effectively.
In case it is not clear, here is an example of how white can use that extra distance later. The 5th line move of 1 here poses black a difficult question, if he answers below it is rather passive and that exchange is helpful for white when approaching the corner.
But if black refuses to be meek and ignores to defend the corner, when white splits the K4 stone is rather weak, and white's group has some breathing space (a for eyes if needed for example) in front of the shimari.
If we compare this to the situation with L4, that fight is now rather less appealing for white as white's group is weaker and black's L4 is stronger.
-
Bill Spight
- Honinbo
- Posts: 10905
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 1:24 pm
- Has thanked: 3651 times
- Been thanked: 3373 times
Re: Kirby's Study Journal
Kirby wrote:Thinking for myself - Aside from advice for anybody, my own feeling from thinking for myself is:
* It is locally painful to tenuki after white's kick. White is very thick, and it makes invasion around the bottom left more difficult. White has a lot of potential on the left.
* If black tenukis and plays around the board, black has made a good position on the top and right sides. Black needs to benefit from the framework enough to compensate the profit white has gotten in the bottom left.
If I understand you correctly, here is where you might improve your way of thinking. You start with the feeling that tenuki would be painful. Your feelings are what they are, no problem with that, and they do and should guide your thinking. Go is not tictactoe.
FWIW, my feelings are somewhat different. Playing tachi would make me uneasy, because it is heavy. OTOH, allowing White to play F-04 is not attractive, either, because the exchange, B F-03 - W F-04, looks bad for Black. That is why I like the underneath hane, because it forestalls F-04 with sente. 
In my view, then, White's thickness is not a reason to play in the bottom left, it is instead a reason not to play in the bottom left. Again, if I read you right, it seems like you want to butt heads with your opponent, to match strength with strength, to deny him profit if you can. There is a time for that, but I don't think that it is at move 7, as a rule. If your opponent makes profit, you can still win if you make more profit than he does. If you play where your opponent is strong, you are likely to make less profit that he does.
Your second point about having to gain more from your position elsewhere than your opponent has already gained is a truism. But the fact that you state it makes me think that you are casting doubt upon a good play, not because of the play itself, but because of the profit your opponent has already made. Pardon me if I am misreading you.
But if I am reading you correctly, the you would do better to regard your opponent's profit as water under the bridge (or blood under the bridge, in Edward Albee's phrase
). Has Black made a mistake up to 
? Of course not. Then if White has profited from his plays, Black has profited at least as much. It may not be as obvious as White's profit, but that does not matter. Dismiss White's profit from your mind. Don't let it cloud your thinking.The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins
Visualize whirled peas.
Everything with love. Stay safe.
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins
Visualize whirled peas.
Everything with love. Stay safe.
-
Bill Spight
- Honinbo
- Posts: 10905
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 1:24 pm
- Has thanked: 3651 times
- Been thanked: 3373 times
Re: Kirby's Study Journal
Uberdude wrote:I'm not saying that k4 is unplayable. It's perfectly playable. If it is bad, which I believe so, it probably is less than half a point (for whatever scant meaning such metrics can be assigned to uncountable positions). When I say L4 is better I am striving to find the totally optimal moves, better than the mistakes pros sometimes makes. Yes those stats don't prove L4 is better, but 14 hits to 1 certainly says to me you should think about L4 seriously.
In the FWIW department, I decided to fire up my influence function and compare Black plays at K4 and L4. According to it, L4 is about 1/6 point better than K4. IOW, it is like a pro 4 dan play.
I should make such mistakes! 
I agree that 14 to 1 is not enough evidence even to say that pros in general have a definite preference for L4, and far from enough evidence to say that K4 is wrong. However, there is the general principle not to play too close to thickness, and I expect that that applies here. (FWIW, I tried my influence function on M4, and it said that it was even worse than K4. L4 make be the Goldilocks choice among these 4th line plays.
)The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins
Visualize whirled peas.
Everything with love. Stay safe.
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins
Visualize whirled peas.
Everything with love. Stay safe.
-
Uberdude
- Judan
- Posts: 6727
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 11:35 am
- Rank: UK 4 dan
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: Uberdude 4d
- OGS: Uberdude 7d
- Location: Cambridge, UK
- Has thanked: 436 times
- Been thanked: 3718 times
Re: Kirby's Study Journal
Bill Spight wrote:That is why I like the underneath hane, because it forestalls F-04 with sente.
That result feels somewhat clumsy for black to me. How about this tewari?
After the 4 corners black plays 5 for Chinese, a great move. 6 is a bit strange, if you add a move to a 4-4 so early it's normally a knight's move, and here f3 side is a better direction to reduce the Chinese opening. Then 7 is a bit unusual distant approach, but seems ok. 8 is a solid answer, but should it be a pincer? 9 is then a calm reply, though I feel 4th line would be better. Then 11 for 12 is obviously a bad exchange for black, and 13 for 14 is also somewhat bad for black if he is not the one to get the next move here. Tallying up those minuses is not so easy, but the duff 11 for 12 feels like the biggest sin.
I can see the similarity with this technique where you don't play the 2nd line slide because you fear a pincer or outside attachment, and want to avoid standing and getting the checking extension of a cramped 2 space extension, but there is an important difference in that black gets another extension, and also if white does hane on top at a black won't extend at b like in your shape but connect at c to grab the big yose and activate the corner aji. Also this technique is typically used inside a white sphere of influence (e.g. white lower right), rather than when black is developing his own moyo.
-
Bill Spight
- Honinbo
- Posts: 10905
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 1:24 pm
- Has thanked: 3651 times
- Been thanked: 3373 times
Re: Kirby's Study Journal
Uberdude wrote:Bill Spight wrote:That is why I like the underneath hane, because it forestalls F-04 with sente.
That result feels somewhat clumsy for black to me. How about this tewari?
After the 4 corners black plays 5 for Chinese, a great move. 6 is a bit strange, if you add a move to a 4-4 so early it's normally a knight's move, and here f3 side is a better direction to reduce the Chinese opening. Then 7 is a bit unusual distant approach, but seems ok. 8 is a solid answer, but should it be a pincer? 9 is then a calm reply, though I feel 4th line would be better. Then 11 for 12 is obviously a bad exchange for black, and 13 for 14 is also somewhat bad for black if he is not the one to get the next move here. Tallying up those minuses is not so easy, but the duff 11 for 12 feels like the biggest sin.
This permutation of moves seems rather strange. As for pairing the stones, the exchange of
with 
seems good for Black. Why pair with 
? Why play at all? As for the exchange of 
with 
, we seem to differ. I think that it is a plus for Black as it is sente, preventing the Black descent. It also aims at the White weakness on the 3-3 point. Suppose that we pair the in between stones as having small effect, and look at this position.
is plainly too passive, no match for 
.As against that, these pairings are plainly bad for Black. Which is worse, the Black loss from these pairings or the White loss from the above pairing? IMO, Black comes out a bit ahead.
IMO, this is roughly even, as discussed above.
Edit:
Even better, perhaps, let's start with this position as roughly even (taking into account Black's extra stone
).Now,
- 
is bad for Black, but 
- 
is really bad for White.The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins
Visualize whirled peas.
Everything with love. Stay safe.
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins
Visualize whirled peas.
Everything with love. Stay safe.
-
Shaddy
- Lives in sente
- Posts: 1206
- Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 2:44 pm
- Rank: KGS 5d
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: Str1fe, Midorisuke
- Has thanked: 51 times
- Been thanked: 192 times
Re: Kirby's Study Journal
Bill Spight wrote:
1-2 is bad for Black. 3-4 is almost normal, but I wouldn't say it's better for Black.
-
Bill Spight
- Honinbo
- Posts: 10905
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 1:24 pm
- Has thanked: 3651 times
- Been thanked: 3373 times
Re: Kirby's Study Journal
Shaddy wrote:Bill Spight wrote:
1-2 is bad for Black. 3-4 is almost normal, but I wouldn't say it's better for Black.
I don't know that 1-2 is bad for Black, considering that White missed this play.
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins
Visualize whirled peas.
Everything with love. Stay safe.
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins
Visualize whirled peas.
Everything with love. Stay safe.
-
Kirby
- Honinbo
- Posts: 9553
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 6:04 pm
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: Kirby
- Tygem: 커비라고해
- Has thanked: 1583 times
- Been thanked: 1707 times
Re: Kirby's Study Journal
@Uberdude:
I watched the video lecture again, regarding the position we were discussing. As I said earlier, In-seong did give the variation I provided as a way to play.
I listened to what he said, and basically he said, "as black, you can have this simple opening, and then when they invade on the right side, you can profit from attacking. If you like it, you can play this way."
Then he moved on saying something like, "If you don't like it, you can do this..." and he showed variations where black responded to the kick, white pincered, and they fought.
He actually spent more time on this.
So my feeling is probably that responding to the kick is definitely a popular choice, and In-seong brought up not responding as a simple option that you can consider if you don't like the pincer and complicated fighting.
I watched the video lecture again, regarding the position we were discussing. As I said earlier, In-seong did give the variation I provided as a way to play.
I listened to what he said, and basically he said, "as black, you can have this simple opening, and then when they invade on the right side, you can profit from attacking. If you like it, you can play this way."
Then he moved on saying something like, "If you don't like it, you can do this..." and he showed variations where black responded to the kick, white pincered, and they fought.
He actually spent more time on this.
So my feeling is probably that responding to the kick is definitely a popular choice, and In-seong brought up not responding as a simple option that you can consider if you don't like the pincer and complicated fighting.
be immersed
-
Kirby
- Honinbo
- Posts: 9553
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 6:04 pm
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: Kirby
- Tygem: 커비라고해
- Has thanked: 1583 times
- Been thanked: 1707 times
Re: Kirby's Study Journal
In other news, I played two games today.
The first one was against KGS 3d. I took two stone handicap. Sometimes I can tell before a game that I'm not going to do well. This morning's game was like that - I felt that way before I even before I logged on to KGS. The reason is probably because I stayed up quite late last night celebrating something, and I felt a bit groggy in the morning. I don't feel that this game is worth reviewing, because I had a bad mindset going in. I probably should not have played it.
Anyway, that wore off as the day went on, and I played one of the AYD matches, this time against KGS 1k.
I lost this game, too. I made some ridiculously silly reading mistakes. I got lucky and it became closer, but then in the endgame, I ignored his threat to cut my groups. I should have just connected. Anyway, I didn't, and he killed me.
Here is my review:
---
I lost this game, and there were very, very, very obvious reading mistakes. But unlike the game in the morning, I tried to read deeply. Even a few times I made reading oversights, I spent time trying to read what would happen.
On one hand that's embarrassing, because even when I tried reading hard, I still made silly mistakes. But overall, I feel OK, because I prefer to try hard to read and make a stupid mistake than to not try to read at all.
Does that make sense??
The first one was against KGS 3d. I took two stone handicap. Sometimes I can tell before a game that I'm not going to do well. This morning's game was like that - I felt that way before I even before I logged on to KGS. The reason is probably because I stayed up quite late last night celebrating something, and I felt a bit groggy in the morning. I don't feel that this game is worth reviewing, because I had a bad mindset going in. I probably should not have played it.
Anyway, that wore off as the day went on, and I played one of the AYD matches, this time against KGS 1k.
I lost this game, too. I made some ridiculously silly reading mistakes. I got lucky and it became closer, but then in the endgame, I ignored his threat to cut my groups. I should have just connected. Anyway, I didn't, and he killed me.
Here is my review:
---
I lost this game, and there were very, very, very obvious reading mistakes. But unlike the game in the morning, I tried to read deeply. Even a few times I made reading oversights, I spent time trying to read what would happen.
On one hand that's embarrassing, because even when I tried reading hard, I still made silly mistakes. But overall, I feel OK, because I prefer to try hard to read and make a stupid mistake than to not try to read at all.
Does that make sense??
be immersed
-
Kirby
- Honinbo
- Posts: 9553
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 6:04 pm
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: Kirby
- Tygem: 커비라고해
- Has thanked: 1583 times
- Been thanked: 1707 times
Re: Kirby's Study Journal
Some of the bigger mistakes
Position 1
I played the move above, because I thought the aji in the corner would let me cut his group in sente. But that may be a misconception.
His play was a big point. But now that he's made it, I should compromise. I can't get everything after he's played a good move.
Instead, I think I should just play this:
OR, later:
I need to learn to compromise when the situation is good for my opponent.
Position 2
Derrr... I can do nothing but cry.
Obviously this doesn't work. I am falling apart, because I am in two groups, because I resisted his good move. If I was so worried about the move, I should have played there first, but I didn't.
This is a disaster.
I cannot see a good variation in the top left for black, so it's already bad because of position 1.
But the fact that I didn't see that the move above doesn't work is... Ridiculous.
Position 3
No!!! Bad Kirby!!! Honestly, I tried reading this out to make sure it worked before playing the move. In fact, I "read" out to here:
And this one, too:
But I was only checking whether 'b' would work for white. Since black had enough liberties, I could then play 'c' and win, right?
Of course, I forgot that the first sequence I read was no longer valid since is present.
Ug.
So instead, I should play this:
This is clearly better.
Position 4
Obviously, I should play at 'a', instead, because that group is bigger than white's top right group. He answered, but if he played at 'a' after that, I'm just dead bigger than he is.
Position 5
I thought the game was close, so I needed to grab big points before he did. So I didn't connect at 'a'. Clearly, that's better, though.
Why didn't I connect? Why didn't I connect? Why didn't I connect???
---
Learning Points
1. When the opponent plays a good move, or gets a good position - I *cannot* get as much as usual. I must learn to acknowledge his move, and play properly.
2. Avoid obvious reading mistakes.
3. Connecting is good
---
By the way, I still can't read a way to kill or get ko with this shape... But I feel like I should be able to. No?
Position 1
I played the move above, because I thought the aji in the corner would let me cut his group in sente. But that may be a misconception.
His play was a big point. But now that he's made it, I should compromise. I can't get everything after he's played a good move.
Instead, I think I should just play this:
OR, later:
I need to learn to compromise when the situation is good for my opponent.
Position 2
Derrr... I can do nothing but cry.
Obviously this doesn't work. I am falling apart, because I am in two groups, because I resisted his good move. If I was so worried about the move, I should have played there first, but I didn't.
This is a disaster.
I cannot see a good variation in the top left for black, so it's already bad because of position 1.
But the fact that I didn't see that the move above doesn't work is... Ridiculous.
Position 3
No!!! Bad Kirby!!! Honestly, I tried reading this out to make sure it worked before playing the move. In fact, I "read" out to here:
And this one, too:
But I was only checking whether 'b' would work for white. Since black had enough liberties, I could then play 'c' and win, right?
Of course, I forgot that the first sequence I read was no longer valid since
is present.Ug.
So instead, I should play this:
This is clearly better.
Position 4
Obviously, I should play at 'a', instead, because that group is bigger than white's top right group. He answered, but if he played at 'a' after that, I'm just dead bigger than he is.
Position 5
I thought the game was close, so I needed to grab big points before he did. So I didn't connect at 'a'. Clearly, that's better, though.
Why didn't I connect? Why didn't I connect? Why didn't I connect???
---
Learning Points
1. When the opponent plays a good move, or gets a good position - I *cannot* get as much as usual. I must learn to acknowledge his move, and play properly.
2. Avoid obvious reading mistakes.
3. Connecting is good
---
By the way, I still can't read a way to kill or get ko with this shape... But I feel like I should be able to. No?
be immersed
-
skydyr
- Oza
- Posts: 2495
- Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2012 8:06 am
- GD Posts: 0
- Universal go server handle: skydyr
- Online playing schedule: When my wife is out.
- Location: DC
- Has thanked: 156 times
- Been thanked: 436 times
Re: Kirby's Study Journal
Kirby wrote:In other news, I played two games today.
The first one was against KGS 3d. I took two stone handicap. Sometimes I can tell before a game that I'm not going to do well. This morning's game was like that - I felt that way before I even before I logged on to KGS. The reason is probably because I stayed up quite late last night celebrating something, and I felt a bit groggy in the morning. I don't feel that this game is worth reviewing, because I had a bad mindset going in. I probably should not have played it.
I often have a sense of how I'm going to do in games on a particular day as well, before the games even start. It's much more frustrating when I am playing in a tournament that day, and pretty much know I'm going to go 0-4 before I start, but the reverse is always nice. I do wonder if it is to some degree a self-fulfilling prophecy, however. If you've convinced yourself that you're going to lose anyway, maybe you just phone it in for the game/games so to speak?
-
Kirby
- Honinbo
- Posts: 9553
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 6:04 pm
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: Kirby
- Tygem: 커비라고해
- Has thanked: 1583 times
- Been thanked: 1707 times
Re: Kirby's Study Journal
Probably, skydyr.
Sometimes on such days, I recall being in the middle of the game thinking, "Why am I not trying harder?", but usually, I just continue :-p
Sometimes on such days, I recall being in the middle of the game thinking, "Why am I not trying harder?", but usually, I just continue :-p
be immersed