- Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B Moves 84 to 88
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O O . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . O O O X X X . . . a . X . O X O . |
$$ | . . X X X . . . . X . . . . O , O O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . b . O . . O . |
$$ | . X . . X . . . . . . . . . X O O . . |
$$ | . X O O X . . . . . . O . X . X . . . |
$$ | X O . O X . . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . O O O O X . . . . c . X . . . . . . |
$$ | O . O X X X . . . , . X . . . , . . . |
$$ | . O X . . . . . . . O O O . . O O . . |
$$ | X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . d . . X e . |
$$ | . . X X X X X X . X . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . O O O O X O O O X . . . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
The real choice for me is between b and c in this diagram. And the analysis evolves about two questions
1) can you kill the black group
2) what if you can't kill it
The answer for b) is
1) not really, Black will run out around c
2) I can play at a, and take a big corner
The answer for c) is
1) not really, Black will run out around b
2) I can form some infuence in the centre, which faces Black's strong walls
Obviously, b) is the better choice here.
- Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$W Moves 84 to 88
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O O . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . O O O X X X . . . a . X . O X O . |
$$ | . . X X X . . . . X . . . . O , O O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . O . |
$$ | . X . . X . . . . . . . 6 . X O O . . |
$$ | . X O O X . . . . . . O . X . X . . . |
$$ | X O . O X . . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . O O O O X . . . 5 1 . X . . . . . . |
$$ | O . O X X X . . . 3 2 X . . . , . . . |
$$ | . O X . . . . . . 4 O O O . . O O . . |
$$ | X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . d . . X e . |
$$ | . . X X X X X X . X . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . O O O O X O O O X . . . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
Lizzie moreover showed that Black can cut in sente at
before running out and it's White who has a problematic group now.
The proverb says "attack for profit" or "make territory while attacking". In some of the Go books I've read, "profit" could also be influence. As bots continue showing us, influence is particularly useful when forming a sphere of influence, hence potential territory. Mere influence is not so profitable. Over the years, I have built an intuition to cap or otherwise surround the opponent, even if they can still escape, without really caring what profit I would get out of it. With the bots, I'm trying to modify that intuition and attack sideways. The attacking move is less vulnerable that way and more importantly, the profit is likely to be found there.