Ian Butler's Broken Ladder Game

Ian Butler · Post by **Ian Butler** » Sat Apr 21, 2018 11:41 am

Question: What does Lee Sedol have, that I don't have?
Answer: A talent for Go!

Oh, that's probably why my broken ladder failed.

Well, well. Credit to EdLee for giving a great suggestion of playing my online games with a real goban in front of me.
I played calmly, thought everything out (broken ladder, check!) and I got a big lead at some point.
It was a fun game, too. I enjoyed it very much.

The broken ladder is pretty epic, though. A misread on my part, and then I thought I could still fix it! But... Well, you'll see.

Anyway, even though the end was a little blunder, I could play the Go I want to play, and I think that's a success given the past week with my online playing. I hope I'm over this "online" thing for now. Even though I lost again, I'm confident the losing streak can't last forever and if it does, I have a great book for 25 kyu players to get me started again

Any pointers are welcome. I have reviewed it myself a bit, too, comments in the file itself. At the last move I identify the losing move, but I have two suspects. I also have a crude variation / sketch of how white could've played things out smoother, at least I believe so.

Suggestions always appreciated!

EDIT: you may wonder why I resigned, though. First I believe white is just completely sunk. Running out a broken ladder so long can't be good (unless you're Lee Sedol!). Secondly, I know many of you say "DDK should never resign" and in a way, I agree. But for me Go is more than the game itself and I think the 'Art of Resigning' is equally important to Go than let's say, ladders.
At least this resignation feels right.
If I were to continue and stumble through this game, trying to come back from this big a loss and eventually lose on big points, wasting time of my opponent and so on... Wouldn't feel right.
Comebacks are epic and I have some history with coming back in a game after a loss. But I think my feeling is right that this one is irreparable. Hope you see my point and agree

If so, at least I have my 'art of resigning'-skill down to a Dan level!

EdLee · Post by **EdLee** » Sat Apr 21, 2018 11:45 am

bad habit.

tenuki.

Instead of (

,

), just R12 directly.

Ian Butler · Post by **Ian Butler** » Sat Apr 21, 2018 11:47 am

EdLee wrote: bad habit.

tenuki.

Even if it's basically a forcing move?

EDIT:

Instead of ( , ), just R12 directly.

Oh yeah. Wow. Cool move.

EdLee · Post by **EdLee** » Sat Apr 21, 2018 11:49 am

A forcing move in itself is just that: a forcing move.
It can be: good for you, neutral, or bad for you.
Many at this level play a forcing move for its own sake,
without evaluation.

Here,

is OK, but beware if you play it only because you think it's a forcing move, that's not right (and a bad habit).

Ian Butler · Post by **Ian Butler** » Sat Apr 21, 2018 11:51 am

EdLee wrote:A forcing move in itself is just that: a forcing move.
It can be: good for you, neutral, or bad for you.

In this case I thought it was good for me because it fixed the open skirt + it would give me sente right back. So worst case: nothing lost. Best case: avoided aji/reduction later.
Is my reasoning wrong? Or is it just simply a timing/effeciency issue?

EdLee · Post by **EdLee** » Sat Apr 21, 2018 11:55 am

nothing lost.

You lost one peep (S16) and potential to kill the entire corner if things change later. It's aji keshi. B wouldn't start crawling at T13 -- if he does, you're happy to cover him on the 2nd line.
So, nobody wants T14 ( not until later ).

Ian Butler · Post by **Ian Butler** » Sat Apr 21, 2018 11:58 am

EdLee wrote:
nothing lost.
You lost one peep (S16) and potential to kill the entire corner if things change later. It's aji keshi.

Interesting.
An inside peep like that and killing the corner that way is something that I'd probably never do. But I can kind of see how that extra "free" stone of the peep could help do that.
In that case, I understand removing that aji is not the best move.
So maybe I'd rate it as a neutral move

EdLee · Post by **EdLee** » Sat Apr 21, 2018 12:00 pm

Double check with Leela; maybe it likes

.

Ian Butler · Post by **Ian Butler** » Sat Apr 21, 2018 12:05 pm

EdLee wrote:Double check with Leela; maybe it likes .

She doesn't

She says O17, P16 or R12.

It actually drops my win percentage from 62 to 57.
I didn't realize it was such a "bad" move. I REALLy have to unlearn the descent, even if it's a reaction to my opponent's descent...

Bill Spight · Post by **Bill Spight** » Sat Apr 21, 2018 12:59 pm

Ian Butler wrote: Well, well. Credit to EdLee for giving a great suggestion of playing my online games with a real goban in front of me.
I played calmly, thought everything out (broken ladder, check!) and I got a big lead at some point.
It was a fun game, too. I enjoyed it very much.

{snip}

Anyway, even though the end was a little blunder, I could play the Go I want to play, and I think that's a success given the past week with my online playing.

you may wonder why I resigned, though. First I believe white is just completely sunk. Running out a broken ladder so long can't be good (unless you're Lee Sedol!). Secondly, I know many of you say "DDK should never resign" and in a way, I agree. But for me Go is more than the game itself and I think the 'Art of Resigning' is equally important to Go than let's say, ladders.
At least this resignation feels right.
If I were to continue and stumble through this game, trying to come back from this big a loss and eventually lose on big points, wasting time of my opponent and so on... Wouldn't feel right.
Comebacks are epic and I have some history with coming back in a game after a loss. But I think my feeling is right that this one is irreparable. Hope you see my point and agree If so, at least I have my 'art of resigning'-skill down to a Dan level!

I guess I'm the main guy to say that DDKs should not resign.

The great Sakata was known for not resigning. In one of his commentaries on his own game he said that he did not resign because he wanted to see how bad the result was after he had made 6 mistakes.

(He lost by 6 pts.)

Bill Spight · Post by **Bill Spight** » Sat Apr 21, 2018 2:00 pm

A few top of the head comments.

I would recommend R-12 now, given your style of play. Moi, I would probably play the attachment at P-16. The cutting point at S-15 could be telling. And after

I don't need to save the

stone. (Glad Leela does not disapprove.

)

Does not do much to protect the cutting point at R-13. The problem is that the previous exchange,

-

has bolstered Black but leaves a weakness for White. It is harder the sacrifice the two stones than the one stone, especially with no play against

and

.

The problem is Black's 3-3 invasion.

Atari at S-04. If he makes ko, ignore his threat. Early kos are typically large.

I like the fact that you like this play. But it is not so good here. First, White's position on the right side hinders Black's development with his stones in this corner. So Black is not really threatening to play on this point now. Second, the 7 point gap on the bottom is too easy to invade. The top side looks big now.

Better on the previous move. But now N-06 is big for both players. If you play there and he ignores it, the atari at P-06 is good.

How about B-04? You don't really want Black to invade the corner, do you?

Tempting, but it allows Black to connect underneath. The simple solid connection at D-08 looks good.

N-06 still looks good.

N-06.

Eliminates the Black cutting point at P-06. K-05 is better. One good turn deserves another.

Atari at O-17. If Black connects at N-16, now atari at Q-17. Then after P-18, R-17, threatening S-17, R-16, and O-18. Very difficult for Black.

Horrid. This play not only strengthens Black, it weakens White.

BlindGroup · Post by **BlindGroup** » Sat Apr 21, 2018 4:52 pm

I had the following thoughts going through this:

1. I think 26 should be at N6. Black has to respond to avoid being enclosed.

2. Move 28. You played A, but I think continuing to press on the right might be better since I think black has to respond to avoid being enclosed. I'm imagining something like this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wc $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . a . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . X . X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O X X | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 8 . 6 . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 4 . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . 5 1 X . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X X . . . | $$ | . . . O . O . . . , . . . O O O X X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

Ian Butler · Post by **Ian Butler** » Mon Apr 23, 2018 9:11 am

Haha awesome that you already know "my style" of play

thanks for reviewing so many of my games and helping me so often!
I see your point on move 26.

was the toughest decision in the game (besides the actual ladder). But I felt if black got that point, my 3 stones were even weaker.

@BlindGroup
A sequence like that would've been much better, you're right. Thanks!

Bill Spight · Post by **Bill Spight** » Mon Apr 23, 2018 12:25 pm

BlindGroup wrote:I had the following thoughts going through this:

1. I think 26 should be at N6. Black has to respond to avoid being enclosed.

2. Move 28. You played A, but I think continuing to press on the right might be better since I think black has to respond to avoid being enclosed. I'm imagining something like this:

$$Wc
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . a . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . X . X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O X X |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 8 . 6 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 4 . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . 5 1 X . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X X . . . |
$$ | . . . O . O . . . , . . . O O O X X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wc $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . a . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . X . X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O X X | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 8 . 6 . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 4 . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . 5 1 X . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X X . . . | $$ | . . . O . O . . . , . . . O O O X X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

I agree with

, but

is problematic.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wc $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . X . X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O X X | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4 . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . 1 X 3 5 X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X X 6 . . | $$ | . . . O . O . . . , . . . O O O X X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

-

cuts Black in two. Black is in trouble.

BlindGroup · Post by **BlindGroup** » Mon Apr 23, 2018 4:31 pm

Bill Spight wrote: - cuts Black in two. Black is in trouble.

That's nice! After

where would you play as black then? My first thought was 4, but maybe P7 would be better? Both start to make eye shape, move black out, but in each case white can destroy any eye potential. However, after 4, white Q7 destroys the eye in sente. While the destruction of the eye with P7 would be gote.

Life In 19x19

Ian Butler's Broken Ladder Game

Ian Butler's Broken Ladder Game

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re: Ian Butler's Broken Ladder Game

Re: Ian Butler's Broken Ladder Game

Re: Ian Butler's Broken Ladder Game

Re: Ian Butler's Broken Ladder Game

Re: Ian Butler's Broken Ladder Game

Re: Ian Butler's Broken Ladder Game