It is currently Sat Sep 21, 2019 2:13 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 214 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next
Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Strength in Losing
Post #141 Posted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 9:29 am 
Honinbo

Posts: 8819
Liked others: 2601
Was liked: 3009
On that last point, the James-Lange theory of emotion comes to mind. Just as being afraid can make you run away, running away can make you afraid. (At least until you have run far enough away. ;)) Conversely, you don't have to develop your fighting spirit in order to fight, you can fight in order to develop your fighting spirit. :)

BTW, I still recommend playing stronger players at three stones and going for the kill. :)

_________________
The Adkins Principle:

At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?

— Winona Adkins

I think it's a great idea to talk during sex, as long as it's about snooker.

— Steve Davis

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Strength in Losing
Post #142 Posted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 10:20 am 
Lives in gote

Posts: 603
Liked others: 53
Was liked: 106
Bill Spight wrote:
On that last point, the James-Lange theory of emotion comes to mind. Just as being afraid can make you run away, running away can make you afraid. (At least until you have run far enough away. ;)) Conversely, you don't have to develop your fighting spirit in order to fight, you can fight in order to develop your fighting spirit. :)

BTW, I still recommend playing stronger players at three stones and going for the kill. :)


Yes!
I'll get many chances to fight stronger players when I'll be playing in Germany! I hope to learn a lot there.

Also, I just played a stronger player on OGS, giving him 3 stones. I'll be uploading it in the Game Analysis section for reviewing, I did some things good, and faltered in other aspects!


This post by Ian Butler was liked by: Bill Spight
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Strength in Losing
Post #143 Posted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:12 pm 
Gosei
User avatar

Posts: 1340
Location: Ghent, Belgium
Liked others: 188
Was liked: 591
Rank: Bel 2d KGS 3d TG 4d
KGS: Artevelde
Tygem: Knotwilg
We’ll play our next game h3

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Strength in Losing
Post #144 Posted: Sun Mar 24, 2019 5:00 am 
Lives in gote

Posts: 603
Liked others: 53
Was liked: 106
Knotwilg wrote:
We’ll play our next game h3


Let's!

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Strength in Losing
Post #145 Posted: Sun Mar 24, 2019 5:18 am 
Lives in gote

Posts: 603
Liked others: 53
Was liked: 106
Symphonies and whatnot
I'm going to throw around some thoughts I've had today. For me it always feels good to put them onto paper, or in this case, onto my study journal.
Some of these thoughts link together nicely, others are not really related.

----------------------------------------------

One can be the world's greatest music theorist, but to play the piano well, he'll eventually need to sit down and actually play the damn thing.
My head is full of symphonies, but when I sit down at a piano, my fingers can only keep up with 'Frère Jacques'

----------------------------------------------

Yesterday I watched an interesting video about a 5-6 dan. He showed numerous games of his Go-career, from 9 kyu to 3 kyu to 1 kyu to 4 dan. Showing his progression and his change in attitude/thinking.
At 9 kyu he was all about influence and only won or lost his games on a huge middle, so he won big, or he lost after his middle was destroyed. He had to completely change his way of thinking, realizing this is not the only/best way to play go. He had to go find a more balanced style.

----------------------------------------------

I played Leela this morning, a couple of times. Even with giving me six stones, she won. I played my first 3 stones in 3 corners, securing them, while she played 3 stones in the middle. I felt I couldn't possibly lose.
But I did.
A recurring theme in these games is that I am always being picked apart into many groups.
Divide and conquer, ring a bell?

There is something fundamentally wrong with the way I see a game of Go. I think I focus on points too much. I can't believe that white, playing 3 stones in the middle of the board and me securing solid territory in the corners, can win the game. Yet white does.
Maybe I've never become strong enough at attacking because a big part of me still doesn't believe it. Maybe I see territory too one-sided.
I need to put that out of my head and start believing it.
Dieter, my former sensei, always said Go is about strong groups, rather than territory (at least earlier in the game). While I have a basic understanding of that, I don't grasp the full meaning.
And that might also be because I never attacked well, thus I never learned to profit from weak groups. It's only in the other direction I see that it must be true.
So I must learn to attack for profit, to make my opponent weak and use that to my advantage. Instead of simply taking points.

----------------------------------------------

I sometimes see the Go board as too small. 3 stones spread out I see as territory. Tengen I see as intimidating and I feel surrounded.
The board is larger than you'd think. There are many opportunities that can be found if one looks for them.

----------------------------------------------

My opponents are not superhuman. Especially playing even games, they are capable of just as much as I am. So face a sword with a sword, not with a shield.

----------------------------------------------

I also realized that I'm finally "at peace" with my strength/my ranking.
Some part of me even believes this might be my permanent rank. While I think it unlikely and I think I can still grow stronger, perhaps even to Dan level, there is always the possibility that it is so.
And if it is so, I'm actually fine with it.
I am strong enough to enjoy Go. I have a basic understanding of Pro games and I love going over those games.
I of course long to grow stronger, and I'll continue to strive for improvement, but I've noticed it's just a good motivation, it's no longer a source of frustration.
I don't need to grow strong quickly to prove I'm smart, to beat someone in particular, to boost my ego... I just want to grow stronger to appreciate the game even more, and because I have an inner motivation to just become better at the game.

I think that's a very important change that's come over me, and I hadn't realized it happened.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Strength in Losing
Post #146 Posted: Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:51 am 
Honinbo

Posts: 8819
Liked others: 2601
Was liked: 3009
Ian Butler wrote:
I played Leela this morning, a couple of times. Even with giving me six stones, she won. I played my first 3 stones in 3 corners, securing them, while she played 3 stones in the middle. I felt I couldn't possibly lose.
But I did.
A recurring theme in these games is that I am always being picked apart into many groups.
Divide and conquer, ring a bell?


My girlfriend's father in Japan used to give me 7 stones. If I only lost two groups I could win the game. :lol:

Quote:
There is something fundamentally wrong with the way I see a game of Go.


Welcome to the club! :D

I tend to think that two players with a 5 rank difference play different games. Not fundamentally different, but still quite different. As a 2-3 dan I once took 50 pts. reverse komi from a pro and lost by 100 pts. As a 4 dan I once gave a 4 kyu 100 pts. reverse komi and won by 100 pts. Different games. ;) Pros often recommend playing against someone three stones stronger. They are strong enough that you can learn something, but weak enough that you can understand most of their game, IMO.

Quote:
I think I focus on points too much. I can't believe that white, playing 3 stones in the middle of the board and me securing solid territory in the corners, can win the game. Yet white does.
Maybe I've never become strong enough at attacking because a big part of me still doesn't believe it. Maybe I see territory too one-sided.
I need to put that out of my head and start believing it.
Dieter, my former sensei, always said Go is about strong groups, rather than territory (at least earlier in the game). While I have a basic understanding of that, I don't grasp the full meaning.
And that might also be because I never attacked well, thus I never learned to profit from weak groups. It's only in the other direction I see that it must be true.
So I must learn to attack for profit, to make my opponent weak and use that to my advantage. Instead of simply taking points.


Takagawa, who was not known for his attacks, once wrote that go is a game of territory, but territory is almost impossible to make. ;) He went on to explain that throughout most of the game, "territory" is not secure. There are almost profitable plays inside the opponent's territory. (Not that they are always profitable enough to play.) Secure territory, he said, almost always arises through skirmishes. (Today's pros are, IMO, more territorial than Takagawa's generation.) Based upon that, when I was coming along I never worried about territory, trusting that it would arise during the fighting. :)

In your recent three stone game your opponent made fairly strong groups and didn't give you much to attack until the end. That is partly why he lost, I think. Still, he managed to put three of your groups in peril, but failed to kill any of them. Then you still had a large moyo with a strong wall to contend with. A riskier approach might have worked for him, leaving some weak stones about. A strategy I used to call, "Just us women and children here in the fort." ;)

_________________
The Adkins Principle:

At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?

— Winona Adkins

I think it's a great idea to talk during sex, as long as it's about snooker.

— Steve Davis

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Strength in Losing
Post #147 Posted: Sun Mar 24, 2019 10:08 am 
Lives in gote

Posts: 603
Liked others: 53
Was liked: 106
Haha thank you, Bill, for your wonderful story. It's hard to accept one could lose with 7 stones, but one can be slaughtered to no end.
Against a pro, I do think I'd fare well with 25 stones :lol:

The 'women and childeren at the fort' reminds me of Go Seigen or Lee Sedol, giving the opponent something to attack.


Anyway, I do think my recent activity in Go has made me a stone stronger. Of course that's hard to say, but at the very least I'm in a more positive flow again. The game below demonstrates that. In my losing streak I even had difficulty against OGS 10 kyu. Now I think I'd win half my games at 8 kyu. Though we'll have to see to make sure, of course ;)
The game had rather tight time limits, and I lost 2 minutes after my connection failed, but despite that, I didn't play blitz. I played fast, but not blitz.
I made almost no thoughtless moves. That's not to say I didn't make bad moves :lol: But I faired all right, and in the end I was able to prevail!

Almost blundered my way into a huge loss after missing a shortage of liberties at move 145, but luckily my opponent also missed it :oops: :D
My main mistakes (that I gather from Leela) are playing smaller moves when bigger ones are available, and not responding to the hane often enough. My endgame was rather all right, with the disconnect at the top side for another capture. The capture in the middle was all decisive, linking together a weak group, another group and cutting stones.

My opponent played the same horrible move twice. (:w12: and :w18:)
Recently I had played a game where :w8: threw me off, so I looked up some possible answers, and this one felt okay.

:b25: is perhaps too assertive. Just defending is big.
:b31: again ignores the hane, but since it cuts, it's excusable.
:b35: is not the biggest play on the board, but I liked it, it had options of running, going in the corner, making a base on the right. And it revealed white's bad move with the empty triangle.
:b47: was not Leela's move, needless to say. It's perhaps a bit slow, but stealing that entire corner felt good.

I think I got off easy in the right bottom corner. White could've made life harder there.

:w92: perhaos white needs to give up the 3 stones, build strength and counter attack black's middle group. I had expected something like that.
Black 101 is doubtful. However, it does threaten to cut off and take a lot of stones.
The most beautiful double empty triangle move at 118 is premature. I can read liberties. This feeling safe is DDK. Just count!
Black 131 is doubtful. It offers white a moyo on the right. I just just keep him in the corner.
Lastly, black 193 was a nice move to find :)


Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Strength in Losing
Post #148 Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2019 3:54 am 
Gosei
User avatar

Posts: 1340
Location: Ghent, Belgium
Liked others: 188
Was liked: 591
Rank: Bel 2d KGS 3d TG 4d
KGS: Artevelde
Tygem: Knotwilg
I thought some more about "your case" and fighting spirit in particular. I realized there are two kinds of stubborn play: "I don't have to believe what my opponent is trying to tell me" and "I don't have to believe what the board (or Go wisdom) is telling me". The first type of resistance is proper fighting spirit, not giving the opponent what he wants. The second type is more adventurous, not necessarily to warn off, but more likely to be what kids call "random" these days

Borrowing from that game we played ...

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


When you played the developing B2 (not directly after) in the face of the solid stone at W1, saying "harmony between my stones", you were being original and adventurous, but you were defying common sense in Go, which is not to develop towards solid, low positions. Your move gave me the obvious thing to do, which was jumping into your corner. Had you played the more common sense move at 'a', I would not have such an easy decision.

However, when you played the light B4 in response to my descent at W3, you were doing the logical thing and giving me a hard time attacking this group wholesale.

And when you took a corner, up until B6, in response to my W5, you were saying "well, jump into my side, if you dare, I'm already strong on both sides AND I've taken territory"

These are good examples of fighting spirit, resisting the opponent's desire, by doing things that adhere to common sense.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Strength in Losing
Post #149 Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2019 4:37 am 
Lives in gote

Posts: 603
Liked others: 53
Was liked: 106
Interesting division you make there, knotwilg. Trying to not give the opponent what he wants is so paramount in Pro Games, yet not always easy to accomplish.

I know you don't approve of the K4 (star point) move, and you're definitely right if you say there are objectively better moves on the board, but I still don't feel it's necessarily a bad move because it defies Go wisdom (though a saying I've never heard before, oddly enough)
Sometimes even good moves defy original Go wisdom. Wasn't it Go wisdom once that jumping in the 3-3 too early was bad?

OF course I'm not saying my move is anything like that :lol:

However, I do agree with your point about the fighting spirit. You can feel it from the board that the latter moves also felt easier and better to play. The K4 move was just a gut move, but I easily could've played 'a', too, and it'd be fine, too. And K4 doesn't feel like a move a professional would play, although professionals occasionally make moves that professionals would never play, too :D
With 4 and 6 on your diagram, they feel much better, though. Those moves feel right. 2 on your diagram feels daring and original, 4 and 6 feel strong and proper.

Interesting point, indeed.
I'd consider the counter-peep (game losing move) later in the game as another example of adventurous play :)

One remark, though, I don't like the term "random". I didn't play K4 at random. It's just personal, that I really dislike the word "random" about something like that :)

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Strength in Losing
Post #150 Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2019 7:12 am 
Gosei
User avatar

Posts: 1340
Location: Ghent, Belgium
Liked others: 188
Was liked: 591
Rank: Bel 2d KGS 3d TG 4d
KGS: Artevelde
Tygem: Knotwilg
If you have been questioning the Go wisdom that early 3-3 was bad, and played it regardless, then today you have been proven right :)

Still, I remain suspicious, and most of us do. If early 3-3 invasion is so good, then why would it be bad to defend early just there. Isn't even "the enemy's key point is yours" true anymore these days?

So, some healthy skepsis of Go Wisdom to be the fashion of the day, is due, but in general that kind of doubt is best reserved for study and discussion. If bots and pros think a move is good enough for them, it's likely good enough for us.

I think that, if you had followed up the criticized hoshi with another moyo developing move, like tengen, then I would have thought "wow, the guy doesn't believe me telling him my territory will be superior to his moyo; I'll have to prove him wrong!"

There was already a lot of good fighting spirit in this game. You didn't make it too easy for me. Let's play again soon.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Strength in Losing
Post #151 Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2019 11:11 am 
Lives in gote

Posts: 603
Liked others: 53
Was liked: 106
Quote:
Let's play again soon.

Certainly!

Remember my "promise": one day I'll beat you.
Not sure yet if it can be an even match, or a handicap game, or if I'm just going to have to cheat, but that is still my promise :lol:



Also, with this going to Germany and the In-Seong's camp, I'm studying hard in preparation. It's so much fun! I've never had to study for a particular event before, and it's so cool! It's extremely motivating to be like: I'm going to do this and this, and study this and this, do this before I leave, so I'm in form!

Love it!

By the way, my studying now consists of: daily L&D (and sometimes the exact same problems the day after in blitz tempo, to see if I remember them and also to correct the ones I was wrong about), picking up new techniques in Jump Level Up, doing Lessons in Fundamentals one chapter a day, replaying AlphaGo, Lee Chang-Ho, Go Seigen (Shusaku put aside for now for a more modern feel in preparation for the event).

Might also start Get Strong at the Opening again for a re-course.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Strength in Losing
Post #152 Posted: Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:16 am 
Lives in gote

Posts: 603
Liked others: 53
Was liked: 106
Already I'm 92 re-played Pro Game in 2019.
Every time I invent exercises to do during the game.

For instance.
This game, estimate score every 10-20 moves.
This game, watch out for light and heavy shape and when it's used.
This game, try to find the next move for each diagram.
This game...

And you know what, I haven't stuck to my plan a single time.
I always get caught up in the story of the game, every single time.
I don't mind too much, I enjoy the flow of the game a lot!

Did a lot of Shusaku, but last few days it's all about Go Seigen vs. Fujisawa in their jubango. Amazing stuff.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Strength in Losing
Post #153 Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2019 12:09 am 
Lives in gote

Posts: 603
Liked others: 53
Was liked: 106
Played 2 real bad games yesterday. In a way, it's unfortunate to have a bad experience with playing again so close to the 2-week Go camp in Germany. I don't want to go there with a bad feeling about my Go. But it's a week before I have to leave, so I still have some time to get the confidence back. Or, at the very least, to forget the bad feelings coming from this game.

So, why were they bad?

I played 2 3H-games against knotwilg. Since my focus was to learn to attack, divide and conquer was to be the creed by which to live by.
The first game, I mess up already at move 16. It's a joseki I don't know, I play the wrong move. Ironically, trying to divide and conquer, trying to split white and launch an attack on the cutting stones.
It goes from bad to worse, I mess up L&D and the game was over quickly.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B Not joseki, and for a reason
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . O X X X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . X . O X O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 X O . O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]


The 5-4 had already unnerved me, too. Having forgot any 5-4 joseki, I didn't want to approach it, because against a Dan player, going into it without knowing joseki, I had a feeling I'd be tricked anyway.

The next game felt even worse for me. However, in the review, knotwilg pointed out it wasn't as bad as a thought. Still, I felt constantly assaulted and pushed around, I played a pincer twice, joseki I really dislike because the bad aji it leaves, especially against such a strong opponent.
Before the 70th move, I started playing weird, weird things, crazy wild Go. The reason was: I thought I was behind so much that I needed a desperate plan to be able to succeed. At least I had the decency to resign soon after.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$ Position at move 57
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . O X X . . . . . . . . . . X O O . . |
$$ | . . O X . . X . . . . X . O X X O . . |
$$ | . . O , . . . . X , . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . O . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X O . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . O . |
$$ | . . O X . X . X X X . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . O X . O . O O X . . . O X X O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . X O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]


At the above position, I felt lost already. In the post-game review, we established the 3H stones have been erased, but the game is fairly even. White has a few more points on the board, black has more potential. In the game, I only saw white leading with territory and me with a lot more aji.

So there has to be something to learn here. Both on and off the board.

On the board
Divide and conquer is a powerful weapon, use it more effectively.

Unfortunately I don't feel I've learned a lot more on the board, just more of the same old lesson. And perhaps 2 new joseki.
Then, at least, allow me to learn something off the board. Because I think I lost the games mentally more than anything I did on the board.

Off the board
- Detach from the board. I have the habit of seeing the board really grim for myself and really optimistic for my opponent. This leads to incredibly bad judgement.
- Don't play when you are ill and tired. Not looking for excuses, but I think that might've also played a (small) role.
- Find a way to deal with fear. After the joseki "blunder" of the first game, I played my second game way too consciously afraid. With white being a dan player, he was able to pick on every single bad shape move I made to take control of the game. I started being afraid to play moves because I was certain white would completely ruin my position.
- "You have to divide and conquer this game" doesn't work for me. It gives me a one-track mind for the game and I start making bad decisions. Being "forced" to play aggressive against a way stronger opponent that tears apart any bad or non-good shape I make is just a set-up to crash hard, I believe.
Maybe it's the best way to learn to attack, but it's certainly the harshest, too. Because I never even got a chance to attack, I was being too busy being attacked myself.


So, all in all a less pleasant experience with playing. Unfortunate timing with the Go camp coming up in a week. I need to get over it before I head there, I really do. I need to find strength again, instead of a whimpering fear to play. A week is enough time. I won't play too many games, but I should play at least one or two, hoping to recover my form a little bit.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Weakness in losing, too
Post #154 Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2019 12:59 am 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 532
Liked others: 46
Was liked: 184
You shouldn't feel bad about losing a 3H game against a dan player. So far the best I could do is win a 3H game against 1kyus, but I lose much more often than I win.

Concerning 5-4 points, here are some possibilities if you are afraid to make joseki mistakes:

1) Play 3-3. The 3-3 point is more "robust", so joseki mistakes are less problematic.

2) Don't approach the 3-3. Play elsewhere, and after some time, White will make a shimari and you'll get in a familiar situation.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Weakness in losing, too
Post #155 Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2019 1:18 am 
Judan

Posts: 6070
Location: Cambridge, UK
Liked others: 345
Was liked: 3265
Rank: UK 4 dan
KGS: Uberdude 4d
OGS: Uberdude 7d
Regarding the extend to fight in the first diagram, it's fine. Yes, hane on top to build the thickness is more common (and recognises the important point that by cutting on the inside you've made the corner already alive, so white only has the weak centre group), but extend to fight is ok too, and makes sense with your extra handicap stones. But you need to be aware of your liberty problems with white's 2nd line hane and cut after he extends, so black will normally make the sente hane there to defend that (descend in sente would be nice if white obediently answers it, but white can ignore and play on the outside as corner still a ko and has some liberties). Gu Li for example likes it, here he plays it against Lee Sedol in a game that interposed their 2014 Jubango, brief comments in GoGameGuru's Relentless book. http://ps.waltheri.net/database/game/69394/

P.S. Andrew Kay (who likes to fight) also likes it, here he plays it against me: viewtopic.php?p=220144#p220144 (last game of 3 in post). My resulting weak centre group and how I (mis)managed it was a major theme of the game.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Weakness in losing, too
Post #156 Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2019 1:25 am 
Lives in gote

Posts: 603
Liked others: 53
Was liked: 106
jlt wrote:
You shouldn't feel bad about losing a 3H game against a dan player. So far the best I could do is win a 3H game against 1kyus, but I lose much more often than I win.

Concerning 5-4 points, here are some possibilities if you are afraid to make joseki mistakes:

1) Play 3-3. The 3-3 point is more "robust", so joseki mistakes are less problematic.

2) Don't approach the 3-3. Play elsewhere, and after some time, White will make a shimari and you'll get in a familiar situation.


You are right, of course, that I shouldn't feel so bad. However, I don't feel bad about losing, it's more that I felt bad about how I played. I felt pushed around from beginning to end, never finding my own rhythm, rather than the pace being dictated by white because he was able to use my inferior shape to get ahead. At least that's how I felt.

3-3 might be interesting, keep that in mind.
Your second approach to the 5-4 is actually what I went for in the first game. I was waiting for white to make a shimari and then I'd block the extension, which seemed fine. But it never got to that. In the second game, I tried a joseki that white had shown me between the two games.

Uberdude wrote:
Regarding the extend to fight in the first diagram, it's fine. Yes, hane on top to build the thickness is more common (and recognises the important point that by cutting on the inside you've made the corner already alive, so white only has the weak centre group), but extend to fight is ok too, and makes sense with your extra handicap stones. But you need to be aware of your liberty problems with white's 2nd line hane and cut after he extends, so black will normally make the sente hane there to defend that (descend in sente would be nice if white obediently answers it, but white can ignore and play on the outside as corner still a ko and has some liberties). Gu Li for example likes it, here he plays it against Lee Sedol in a game that interposed their 2014 Jubango, brief comments in GoGameGuru's Relentless book. http://ps.waltheri.net/database/game/69394/


Wow, cool! I had no idea the hane against the corner worked so well. In the game, eventually I jumped 2 spaces from the 3 stones, but without the hane, and it was much weaker.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Weakness in losing, too
Post #157 Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2019 1:34 am 
Lives in gote

Posts: 603
Liked others: 53
Was liked: 106
You know, it often the case that I am a little too hard on myself. It's in my character and I do that too easily. Sometimes it's what drives me to push harder, but sometimes it's a bit destructive, too.

Maybe that was also the case for these games.
However, now I've simmered down the "disappointment" one level:

Yesterday:
- I was not disappointed by losing
- I was disappointed at playing inferior shape

Today, with a little more perspective:
- I am not disappointed at losing
- I am not disappointed at playing inferior shape. (it's a 8 kyu against a 2-3 dan, what would I expect?)
- I am disappointed at how quickly I despaired and thus ruined any chance I had to make the game harder for white

See, progress! :lol: :lol:


This post by Ian Butler was liked by: Bill Spight
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Strength in Losing
Post #158 Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2019 1:42 am 
Honinbo

Posts: 8819
Liked others: 2601
Was liked: 3009
Ian Butler wrote:
- "You have to divide and conquer this game" doesn't work for me. It gives me a one-track mind for the game and I start making bad decisions. Being "forced" to play aggressive against a way stronger opponent that tears apart any bad or non-good shape I make is just a set-up to crash hard, I believe.
Maybe it's the best way to learn to attack, but it's certainly the harshest, too. Because I never even got a chance to attack, I was being too busy being attacked myself.


For you, as for most people, the learning task should offer around a 50-50 chance of success. So playing with the proper handicap, or even a slightly higher one, since you are departing from your usual style, is indicated. :)

_________________
The Adkins Principle:

At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?

— Winona Adkins

I think it's a great idea to talk during sex, as long as it's about snooker.

— Steve Davis

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Weakness in losing, too
Post #159 Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2019 1:59 am 
Honinbo

Posts: 8819
Liked others: 2601
Was liked: 3009
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bc Approaching the 5-4 stone
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . b a c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . O X X X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . X . O X O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 X O . O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]


Yes, "a" is usual, but the other moves are also playable. "d" may look strange, but top level players played it a few hundred years ago. "c" and "d" have the advantage of working with the closest handicap stone. If I were taking 3 stones, "c" would be a frequent choice. A pro would know how to reply to "d". Most amateur dan players do not know. ;)

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bc What's your plan?
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . O X X . . . . . . . . . . X O O . . |
$$ | . . O X . . X . . . . X . O X X O . . |
$$ | . . O , . . . . X , . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . O . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b . |
$$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X O . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . X . c . |
$$ | . . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . O . |
$$ | . . O X . X . X X X . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . O X . O a O O X . . . O X X O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . X O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]


Neither side has any weak group to attack nor moyo to invade. Black needs to make a plan. He has to forget the proverb about not using thickness for territory. Where else is he going make it? It is important to find White weaknesses to exploit. Then moves like "a", "b", and "c" suggest themselves. If Black can build a large enough moyo White may invade it, and Black can attack the invasion. Black may even be able to build a large enough moyo so that White is unsure whether to invade or not. ;)

_________________
The Adkins Principle:

At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?

— Winona Adkins

I think it's a great idea to talk during sex, as long as it's about snooker.

— Steve Davis

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Ian Butler's Journal - Weakness in losing, too
Post #160 Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2019 2:49 am 
Lives in gote

Posts: 603
Liked others: 53
Was liked: 106
@Bill
Now that you say it, d makes perfect sense as an approach to the 5-4. If white still makes his shimare, d is perfectly placed.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bc Approaching the 5-4 stone
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . b a c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . O X X X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . X . O X O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 X O . O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]


However, approaching at c with black responding at d sounds sensible, but amateurs will probably play at a. Then do you consider the approach at c as light, or do you have a good follow up? Potentially at b? Or do you play on d then anyway?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bc What's your plan?
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . O X X . . . . . . . . . . X O O . . |
$$ | . . O X . . X . . . . X . O X X O . . |
$$ | . . O , . . . . X , . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . O . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b . |
$$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X O . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . d . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . X . c . |
$$ | . . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . O . |
$$ | . . O X . X . X X X . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . O X . O a O O X . . . O X X O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . X O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]


My analysis during the game was that the right side didn't hold much territory for anyone, since it was undercut by white from both sides. Though I'd have to mention (I showed this to knotwilg during the review) that I didn't think c was a valid move. I couldn't read far enough to know white can't push up there.
Honestly, the best I had was forgetting all wisdom and trying to build territory with my influence starting at d or something.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 214 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bki and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group