Not for 10ks

daal · Post by **daal** » Thu Nov 04, 2010 4:14 am

To testify to the ability of the league to motivate weaker players, and to fulfill my strong desire to voice my elation, I won an even game playing white against a player 4 stones stronger. Without further ado:

Woooooo(o.O)OOT!

Here's the game:

[sgf-full]http://www.lifein19x19.com/forum/download/file.php?id=520[/sgf-full]

Website · Post by **Chew Terr** » Thu Nov 04, 2010 7:43 am

Congratulations, and good job! You had a lot of crazy fights, and played very lightly with some of your positions. You played moves like 6, which was gutsy but worked out for you. Notably, you beat someone 4 ranks higher, as WHITE. =D

I agree, surprising and awesome results can occur in the ASR league, which is part of what makes it so fun. I can't remember if I posted this here before or not, but this game also supports your testimony: (ALSO not for 10ks)

You did great, and congratulations!

usagi · Post by **usagi** » Thu Nov 04, 2010 6:45 pm

Chew Terr wrote:Congratulations, and good job! You had a lot of crazy fights, and played very lightly with some of your positions. You played moves like 6, which was gutsy but worked out for you. Notably, you beat someone 4 ranks higher, as WHITE. =D

You picked 6 as a gutsy move and it is, but the gutsyest move from the opening is easily q7. You keep thinking like that and you'll be shodan in no time.

Post by **Solomon** » Thu Nov 04, 2010 9:54 pm

Congratulations on the win, but...6 is not "gutsy", it's just "bad"

.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$ ---------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . X . . . . . . $$ | . . . 2 3 . . . . . $$ | . . . 1 . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . X . . . . . . $$ | . . . , . . . . . .[/go]

You wouldn't do this would you?

daal · Post by **daal** » Fri Nov 05, 2010 1:48 am

Araban - Thanks for the quick tewari analysis. What is your favored approach to the 3-4 stone when your opponent plays low chinese?

Chew - great game! Of course the kill was worth savoring, and you did a nice job with the ko, but I was particularly surprised that you had your opponent following you around the board like a puppy during most of the endgame. You was da Boss.

These sort of games have got me thinking. Obviously we can't play above our level all of the time, but what is it that makes these sort of wins possible? The motivation gap surely plays a role. Our stronger opponents had their guards down a bit and got caught cold when the weaker player pounced on a mistake, but I also suspect that higher level play might be a bit contagious (and the other way around). Thus we got inspired by our opponents quality moves to play some nice stones of our own, and some of our less pretty moves might have provoked a careless response.

Usagi - Thanks, but my play wasn't even consistently good in this one game, let alone over a longer period of time. There are still 7ks who use me as a rag to wipe their boards on occasion, but nonetheless, the simple realization that by and large I haven't been making a fool of myself against stronger players (though I did manage a self-atari in one game), has given me the confidence that I'm not yet at the end of the road.

topazg · Post by **topazg** » Fri Nov 05, 2010 3:01 am

daal wrote:These sort of games have got me thinking. Obviously we can't play above our level all of the time, but what is it that makes these sort of wins possible? The motivation gap surely plays a role. Our stronger opponents had their guards down a bit and got caught cold when the weaker player pounced on a mistake, but I also suspect that higher level play might be a bit contagious (and the other way around). Thus we got inspired by our opponents quality moves to play some nice stones of our own, and some of our less pretty moves might have provoked a careless response.

It's a good question. Firstly, it's possible of course that the stronger player was drunk / tired / ill / depressed or a whole bunch of things that can affect their play. I made the foolish mistake of feeling sufficiently concerned about the activity of my other division members that I forced myself to play three games between 11:30 pm and 2am earlier this week just to get some games in, despite having a fever and being sick. However, I suspect these situations are rare.

I think the majority of the time we simply put too much faith in rank. I was watching an 8/9k (or thereabouts) on ASR last month, playing a [-] player. I'd been keeping an eye on him for a while because he seemed insanely strong, and he twice destroyed the poor SDK. The SDK apologised for his poor performance, and then instantly felt better finding out that his opponent had been a Chinese 4 dan all along.

When I created johndoe69, I spent quite a while on 3k? (most of one of the ASR months, not playing rated games until the end of the month), and I'd have 3k and 4k players throwing the kitchen sink at me, and 1k players treating me as an easy opponent. The following month, as a 2d?, I played the same 3k to 4k players and it was like the will to live had gone or something, the games were walkovers. I would love to have an option on KGS to "mask" everyone else's rank so you don't really know for sure how strong your opponent is, and force yourself to just play the board. I think if this happened more often, there would be a lot more of these "upsets".

Congratulations to both of you on your wins. Every win is deserved and earned, and use it as a lesson that you really can beat anybody, if you just play like you actually believe it

Koroviev · Post by **Koroviev** » Fri Nov 05, 2010 3:48 am

topazg wrote:
daal wrote:When I created johndoe69, I spent quite a while on 3k? (most of one of the ASR months, not playing rated games until the end of the month), and I'd have 3k and 4k players throwing the kitchen sink at me, and 1k players treating me as an easy opponent. The following month, as a 2d?, I played the same 3k to 4k players and it was like the will to live had gone or something, the games were walkovers. I would love to have an option on KGS to "mask" everyone else's rank so you don't really know for sure how strong your opponent is, and force yourself to just play the board. I think if this happened more often, there would be a lot more of these "upsets".

Interesting! As a weaker player I certainly crumple with fear when I see a higher rank.

lorill · Post by **lorill** » Fri Nov 05, 2010 4:15 am

Remember, kids! Everytime you're proud to beat a higher ranked player, he is frustrated to lose against a lower ranked one. So keep your rank low and be happy

gromit · Post by **gromit** » Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:10 am

Koroviev wrote:Interesting! As a weaker player I certainly crumple with fear when I see a higher rank.

Me too: my results are far better with white than with black, even though I always play with the right handicap. It would be nice to be able to ignore my opponent's rank, but it's hard (and possibly unwise) to ignore the black stones that are on the board before you start.

Bill Spight · Post by **Bill Spight** » Fri Nov 05, 2010 8:16 am

Congratulations!

Just a couple of quick impressions:

First, I did feel like your opponent underplayed. That does not take away from your win. We all rely upon our opponents' mistakes.

Second, also felt like you raised the level of your play, as Billie Jean King likes to say.

Technical merit aside, your play seemed enterprising and energetic. Is that your usual style? If not, maybe you should make some changes in that direction.

Bonne chance!

Mark356 · Post by **Mark356** » Wed Nov 10, 2010 9:32 am

Here's my theory: The ranking system is only accurate to within about 4 levels. That is, anyone within 4 ranks of you, either way, should be able to play evenly with you. The ranking algorithm is just so problematic in general, what with so many people being underrated or overrated, that that's about all you can do. Ranks are more a very rough guide to the probability of win than anything else.

Btw, I'm terrified of [-] people; they're always crazy strong.

That said, congratulations! I am not strong enough to comment on the game, but it looks like a great game from here. And whatever I might say about 4 ranks really being equivalent to 1 stone, it's pretty awesome to beat someone 4 ranks ahead of you!

Shaddy · Post by **Shaddy** » Wed Nov 10, 2010 1:23 pm

i think that may be true in ddk ranks, mark, but in my experience (i wasn't on kgs when i was ddk) the sdk ranks and dan ranks are pretty much dead-on, with the exception of sandbaggers. oh, and aphelion.

stalkor · Post by **stalkor** » Wed Nov 10, 2010 2:22 pm

i think normally when ranks get closer you have a bigger chance of winning. if youre for instance 2 or 3 stones weaker you have about 20% chance of winning so upsets are always possible when ranks are reasonably close <--less then 3 stones.

Koroviev · Post by **Koroviev** » Thu Nov 11, 2010 4:46 am

I beat a 9kyu by resignation in an ASR game the other day. :mrgreen:

(However, I get the feeling she resigned out of frustration at her poor play - I think she would have turned it round to a win if she'd stuck at it.)

Website · Post by **Chew Terr** » Thu Nov 11, 2010 8:20 am

Koroviev wrote:I beat a 9kyu by resignation in an ASR game the other day.

(However, I get the feeling she resigned out of frustration at her poor play - I think she would have turned it round to a win if she'd stuck at it.)

It's hard, but you can't let yourself rob yourself of victories by talking yourself out of feeling good. If your opponent resigns, you outplayed her. If your opponent misreads a big life and death situation, it's not your mistake. If you both miss the fact that 20 stones are in atari for half the game, you still deserve the win if you notice first. Feel good, you outplayed somebody strong!

Life In 19x19

Not for 10ks

Not for 10ks

Re: Not for 10ks

Re: Not for 10ks

Re: Not for 10ks

Re: Not for 10ks

Re: Not for 10ks

Re: Not for 10ks

Re: Not for 10ks

Re: Not for 10ks

Re: Not for 10ks

Re: Not for 10ks

Re: Not for 10ks

Re: Not for 10ks

Re: Not for 10ks

Re: Not for 10ks