Playing hyper-aggressive opponents

[Tapani]

This is maybe not the best example, just the most recent one.

Maybe what I mean is: my opponent was not really trying to make his own territory, just attacking whatever I try to build.

Maybe I am too fond of overextending myself, using 3-space extensions sometimes. Should try to use 2-space ones instead.

[BlindGroup]

Yes, I think this example just doesn't fit. I know exactly what you mean, but this is not it. In this case, your opponent was not trying to build territory. He was justifiably only trying to take away yours. If someone (like you did) tries to take too much territory with too few stones, invading is a good way to keep people honest.

[BlindGroup]

Here is an example of a player who is a bit too focused on killing one of my early groups, and how I usually try to take advantage. Starting with move 54, he plays three stones against a group to which I don't have to reply. Using these three free moves, I build up my frame work and then approach his corner. Interestingly, I ended up making a mistake and not responding to a much later move against these stones and lost them (move 174 -- I should have played 175 in defense of the top group.) However, I had such a large advantage by that point that losing the entire group did not change the outcome of the game.

Fighting Example.sgf

(4.77 KiB) Downloaded 1864 times

[Schachus]

Fighting Example.sgf

[Schachus]

game.sgf

I tried to fix the sgf-viewer link.

[6keys]

I used to really struggle with this type of opponent - and to a certain extent I still do. I think the thing that helped me the most was realising how large a part psychology plays in this style. When your opponent only takes a few seconds per move and plays very aggressively, its easy to get stressed. You start relying on instinct and respond in kind. This is what your opponent wants. So my advice is to just slow down. Use your time and don't be forced into playing at your opponents pace.

[Biokabe]

If you haven't already, read "Attack and Defense" by Ishida Akira and James Davies. There's plenty in that book to help you out, more than a forum post could ever go over.

If the game you linked (and Schachus helpfully reposted) is symptomatic of what you're talking about, then I'd say that you've developed the opposite problem from hyper-aggressiveness: You're hyperterritorial and hyper-protective. You act as if areas where you've invested one more stone than your opponent should be yours, and you fight tooth and nail to jealously guard the scraps that you have identified as yours.

It's not uncommon to see one trait or the other to develop right around the transition from DDK to SDK. At that level, the fastest improvements often come from maximizing your instincts around either fighting or protecting your territory. In between 12k-8k, you start hitting a wall where it's no longer enough to simply maximize your strengths; you also have to learn to overcome your weaknesses.

For a hyper-aggressive player, it's learning when to take a step back from the attack and make some living groups before becoming overextended and dying a horrible death. For hyper-protective players, it's learning when to let go of an area that you thought was yours and shifting your focus to take profit elsewhere.

So, in your games, I would focus on trying to keep your opponent weak and building strong groups from which you can build solid territory. For example, in the linked game:

At move 19, playing E3 helps solidify your corner. White would then like to play F4, you would then play C6 - but here's where your payoff comes. White's ideal point would be K4, but you're already at K4, so he has to make a suboptimal extension - J3, perhaps, to build a base. Black can then block at J4 for center influence, or at K3 to keep White weak.

At move 43, playing K17 keeps White's two groups split apart. His low group is still not alive, and his K16 stone becomes floating. You can get some more forcing moves out of attacking the N17 group (you probably can't kill it) to solidify your top group, and then use that strength to come into White's area in the top left and really do some damage.

At 73, your move is the kind of move that you play if you're trying to kill White's group, but by this point White can't be killed. Better to use that move to solidify another group or to attack any of White's many weak stones. K10 and D10 are both very weak, and attacking either of them could help you build something bigger while depriving White of a steadily-solidifying territory.

At 105, you did have some ko threats - you just need to think bigger. R16, for example, threatens S15, which captures the stones at S16 and cuts off the base from the three stones at R14. It's huge. Your move at E2 was also a valid ko threat, and your opponent was wrong to ignore it. After he ignores it, F2 is a possible follow-up to cut the base out from that White group. You might lose a bit in the corner, but it puts White on the defensive and gives you something to attack.

At 114, descend at K2 instead of O2. You can't prevent that stone from linking up to something, so better to let it link to something that's already strong than to let it link to and strengthen an already weak group. K2 keeps the White group to the left baseless and under attack, and you can attack it to gain life for your stones.

I'll stop at that point, but those are good examples of how you deal with a hyper-aggressive player. Going on the attack that much leaves weaknesses behind, and hyper-aggressive players count on you being too overwhelmed to spend the time to pick their moves apart. By invading over and over, your opponent is just creating weak group after weak group. So when you respond, work to keep them separated, and don't be afraid to give up a few points to make groups that can't be attacked.

[mongus]

I think there may also be a cultural aspect to this. I play on IGS quite a bit and I find the Japanese players do have a much more aggressive style of play to the western players.

My theory is that in Japan Go is much more prevalent, so they grow up surrounded by Go problems which gives them an innate fighting ability.

[Schachus]

What I thought of when I read the title was more the guys, that cut a lot, and after dying(should it happen) continue to play with their seemingly dead parts in order to look for aji/trick the opponent. It can be very exausting to play against if you always have to keep track, which groups have how many liberties left, and I often lose in the end. Here is a game I just played, where it ended well for me (the part I was refering to starts around move 120 or something, the play in the beginning did not seem hyper agressive to me)

[Tapani]

Here is an example of a player who is a bit too focused on killing one of my early groups, and how I usually try to take advantage. Starting with move 54, he plays three stones against a group to which I don't have to reply. Using these three free moves, I build up my frame work and then approach his corner.

Thank you for your suggestions. Playing elsewhere, and try to create territory there even when it costs me
a few stones is something I have tried.
It usually results in me losing the stones and then getting reduced to nothing in wherever I tenukied

I think the thing that helped me the most was realising how large a part psychology plays in this style. When your opponent only takes a few seconds per move and plays very aggressively, its easy to get stressed.

Yes! Also in real life go, they play instantly and slam their stones onto the board very loudly
(just as in Hikaru no go). And that adds to the psychological pressure.
Getting killed by tactical plays over and over also has psychological effect.

If you haven't already, read "Attack and Defense" by Ishida Akira and James Davies. There's plenty in that book to help you out, more than a forum post could ever go over.

If the game you linked (and Schachus helpfully reposted) is symptomatic of what you're talking about, then I'd say that you've developed the opposite problem from hyper-aggressiveness: You're hyperterritorial and hyper-protective. You act as if areas where you've invested one more stone than your opponent should be yours, and you fight tooth and nail to jealously guard the scraps that you have identified as yours.

Welcome to the forums BioKabe, and thanks for the advice!

You are right that I probably have gotten myself a way too territorial style.

In my last few games I have tried to use less 3-space extensions and fourth
rank plays, and instead use 2-space and third rank stones more. Let's see how
that works out for me.

That book you mention, is it really on a good level for a DDK?
(Many old Japanese books, are often pages full of diagrams with 40+ moves on them,
and variations concluded with "and white lives" without further explanation -- in
positions where I would be more than capable of dying with the white stones ...)

I think there may also be a cultural aspect to this. I play on IGS quite a bit and I find the Japanese players do have a much more aggressive style of play to the western players.

Yes, but what I have heard Japanese players are still less aggressive than Chinese or Taiwanese ones ...

What I thought of when I read the title was more the guys, that cut a lot, and after dying(should it happen) continue to play with their seemingly dead parts in order to look for aji/trick the opponent.

Schachus, first thanks for fixing the SGF. No idea why mine had problems, even tried downloading
an SGF validator -- which said my file was fine.

Those players are the ones I ment when I posted. Too bad my game was not a good example of it.
Almost as if those players are playing against several stones of handicap, even when it is an even game.

[Tapani]

Just ran into another one, this one is probably a better example.

Maybe he is not *the* most aggressive I have seen either, but quite aggressive and good at confusing and counting.

This game I tried to keep my groups connected and think about shape over making large territorial claims. Result: miserable failure. =/



EDIT: How to make IGS sgf files working?
EDIT2: Fix the link, omit "mode=view" parameter

[schawipp]

Black to play and kill

[Tapani]

Black to play and kill

Gash! There is a kill?? Spent a few minutes (while playing) looking for one!

EDIT: Think I see it now.

[Biokabe]

That book you mention, is it really on a good level for a DDK?
(Many old Japanese books, are often pages full of diagrams with 40+ moves on them,
and variations concluded with "and white lives" without further explanation -- in
positions where I would be more than capable of dying with the white stones ...)

I'd have to go back and read it again, but my recollection is that it's at a very nice level to take you from low DDK to mid SDK. My copy is dog-eared and practically falling apart, but I think I picked it up when I was about 12k. They're more focused on using concrete examples to illustrate solid principles rather than stressing the details of the particular sequence; the longest diagram I remember them putting in was about a 30-move sequence to illustrate that trying to kill a group that you can't kill is the same as playing a ladder that doesn't work.

They also spend time going over the specific types of moves that you would use for attack and defense - contact moves, shoulder hits, knight's moves, etc. - and how to use them correctly. Really, the most technical section of the book deals with invasions into three-space extensions; that's really the only part of the book where they deal with specific sequences for the sake of those particular sequences.

[swannod]

Just ran into another one, this one is probably a better example.

Maybe he is not *the* most aggressive I have seen either, but quite aggressive and good at confusing and counting.

The issue here it seems to me at least is not that your opponent is aggressive - I would just characterize their play as just lacking in fundamentals. You could easily handle these kinds of games by A) gaining familiarity with a few basic joseki (specifically understanding why White's opening moves in this game aren't good ideas and how to go about punishing them), B) improving your judgement about the weaknesses of your own groups, C) studying basic life & death.