Gang Malkovich 1: Magicwand vs the Gang of Five

Dusk Eagle · Post by **Dusk Eagle** » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:30 am

Discussion for black 22

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wcm21 Prisoners: $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . m X X X . X . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . a X O X O . . , . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . c 1 O X O . d . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . h O i e . f . . . X . . . . . | $$ | . . . b . . . . . . . g j . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . k . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , k . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

[Dusk Eagle] I had thought of this move already, and I personally don't want white coming into our corner without a lot of compensation. As such, ''a'' is a natural move. But is it actually good?

Well, if white goes off to defend the right cutting point, we can play 'b' and we'll be able to connect out (See diagrams 22a and 22b). Or, if white defends against the left cut, we can then cut at the other and white is torn into two, which looks very bad for him (see diagram 22c). So ''a'' looks like a good move to me.

[JoazBanbeck] Without analyzing DE's suggestions - or my own - I'm going to suggest a move that I would play in a blitz game. We're strong, he's weak, ergo we must attack before he recovers. I suggest 'c'. It's thematic.

Having thought for a few minutes, I like the whole-board play of 'd' better than any of the other three.

[topazg] I'm also thinking about 'e' followed by 'f'. If he responds with 'g', both 'h' and 'i' cuts are huge. I'm not overly keen on 'c' because he gets at least as much as we do by pushing towards the edge. Will have a think about it.

[Dusk Eagle] I'm not a fan of peeping at a cutting point - it feels way too aji-keshi IMO. I think the direct cut at ''i'' is better than ''e''.

[JoazBanbeck] When I look at 'e', I think of it as a probe designed to make white heavy. Unlike most peeps, it aims in two directions, not one. It aims at the obvious play to the west, but it also aims at connecting with J17 to the north. Consequently, it is not aji-keshi unless he responds to it twice.

IMHO, the proper direction of play is to split white. So my preliminary vote is 50% 'd', and 50% 'e'. I await further diagrams.

[Kirby] We could consider cutting immediately at 'i'. Does the sequence below work for us? I don't know if it does - I haven't read it out completely (but it's an idea).

[topazg] This is such a complicated position to play. I'm beginning to lose faith that a cut at 'i' has enough impact on anything. It doesn't have enough pressure on the two stones to the right, and White can let the two stones above rot. He can play in the corner (and I'd atari on the other side, Kirby, I don't think why White wants a complicated liberty race when the atari on the other side is free secure points).

The more I assess it, the more 'a' or 'c' seem to have the most direct value. 'c' I think lets White fix everything for a huge wall of thickness, and I don't think that's aji we should leave.

For the reasons DE game with respect to the variation with a cut at 'i', I don't think White can connect easily even if we don't play 'd'. I really want something like 'j', aiming at either 'd' or one of the 'k' points. However, the corner feels more urgent. I think 'a' probably trumps it, as we can ignore a further White descent, and I think White playing 'a' is painfully huge. Afterwards we get to cut at 'h' if he plays somewhere else.

So, 0.6 for 'a', 0.2 for 'd', and 0.2 for 'e'. FWIW, I think with the voting system we can make it a bit more valuable by eliminating options one at a time. Both Joaz and myself have split 'd' and 'e' points because we think they are both interesting ways of working towards the same objective. However, it means as individual nominations they are each weaker than they could be. Really, my vote is 0.6 protect the corner, 0.4 split White. As a result, if either 'd' or 'e' look like they can't win, I would like the other to have the full 0.4.

[JoazBanbeck] A man ought to stand for something. This wishy-washy vote-splitting was making me dislike myself.

I change my vote to 100% for 'e'.

[daniel the smith] Wow, my first impression was either ''d'' or ''h'', and I think ''h'' is what I'd play if it were my game. I'll think about it, but ''e'' looks *horrible* to me at first glance, to destroy a cutting point like that is almost criminal. ''a'' feels too submissive. ''h'' helps all the variations where white tries to cut at ''m''. I'll say 100% for ''h'' if I don't get back here to change my vote later. (I'm glad I thought about this for a bit before reading the commentary here, otherwise I don't know if I would have thought of this or not...)

...a few minutes later: the more I look at this the more ''a'' seems like the only move. White can't fix everything in one move. I may change my mind vote to ''a'', but first I want to see what people think of ''h''.

[JoazBanbeck] The one thing that I can say for 'h' is that it is consistent with our last move. The advocates of our last move claimed as its primary virtue that it created cutting points, and 'h' takes one of them.

Move 'a' feels too submissive to me too.

[topazg] I agree 'h' is consistent, and would support it, although my reading after White takes 'a' is that it isn't so good. The reason I am opting for 'e' is I don't believe that cutting point will ever be truly useful now. What can we do with it - capture two stones? Even at this stage it seems to have been demoted to big endgame already. 'h' is a much more valuable cut IMO.

However, whilst I feel the same that 'a' is submissive, I feel that it implies more as an earlier mistake that perhaps Joaz was right with move 18, and I should have trusted my first instinct to split then (although I wanted to instead of 'a' earlier

). Now, White taking the corner away from us with 'a' seems to make a mockery of our last few moves. I can't see anything we have severe enough to stop White from taking 'a', other than taking it ourselves.

[daniel the smith] I added diagram 22J.1 to discuss black ''h'', white ''a''.

[Dusk Eagle] Having read the discussion, I still think ''a'' is the best move (like Daniel mentioned, white cannot fix everything at once. Also, by keeping white out of the corner, it makes it a lot harder for him to settle his shape). However, ''h'' looks pretty good too, and ''c'' might be okay, though I fear white can get too many forcing moves along the outside which will make him stronger.

So right now, I'm sticking with ''a'', and I don't really feel like splitting my vote up. But ''h'' would be my second choice, for what it's worth.

[daniel the smith] Perhaps we should vote between side (''d''/''e''/''f''/''i'') and corner (''a''/''c''/''h''), and then narrow down the specific move. I feel rather strongly that something in the corner is correct: ''a'' is along the lines of "make a fist before striking", and ''h'' (tries to) fix a weakness by going on the offense. The moves in the middle all seem to leave a large problem in the corner without doing equivalent damage to white (the two stones feel light).

[topazg] Sounds good. I'm 0.6 corner, 0.4 side. If corner, I'm 0.7 'a', 0.3 'h'. If side, I'm 0.5 'd', 0.5 'e'.

[Dusk Eagle] I'm 1.0 for the corner. I like ''a'' the most, but I think ''h'' is also pretty good, and my third choice of all the moves proposed would be ''c''.

[daniel the smith] OK, that's already a slim (2.6) majority for the corner, so unless Joaz (or Kirby) has a new argument for the side, it looks like we'll be playing ''a'', ''h'' or maybe ''c''. I'll say .8 for ''h'', .2 for ''a''.

(Votes moved to bottom)

[JoazBanbeck] If you guys really want to play the left side/corner rather than the middle, I vote for 'h'. But my favorite is still to push into the middle with 'd' or 'e'. I still think that letting white have 'd' ( J15 ) is huge for him.

We obviously do not have a good understanding of this position, and it may be premature to vote.

I've got an idea: Let's play out the game multiple times from this position on KGS - sort of Monte Carlo method with people instead of computers. I can be arrange to be on KGS from 9:30AM to 11:00AM and again from 1:00PM to 4:00PM Pacific time tomorrow. I'll take either the white side with 'a', or the black side with 'd' or 'e', and maybe other variations. PM me to set up exact time if interested.

[topazg] I disagree. I think we have reached a point where voting is worth it. We've all considered the position a fair degree, and viewed a number of variations. I'm happy changing my vote to 1.0 for the corner if it breaks some form of stalemate and keeps the game moving. This game is interesting to me, but I certainly don't have the time to start doing prolonged analysis on KGS for it.

[Kirby] I liked 'i', but if we don't play 'i', I like 'h' second best. So I will vote 1.0 for 'h'.

[daniel the smith] Joaz, if I had any time I'd take you up on that, but I don't, so...

OK, it looks like ''h'' is winning so now would be a __really good time__ to bring up any counter arguments against it. I will try and come up with one on my way to work. I'd suggest that we keep the voting open until this evening, since it is a difficult position.

[Dusk Eagle] We've thought about this position long enough. To keep the game moving, I'll throw my vote to ''h''.

----

Current votes:

''a'': .7 (topazg) + .2 (dts) = 0.9?

''h'': .3 (topazg) + .8 (dts) + 1.0 (Kirby) + 1.0? (Joaz) + 1.0 (Dusk) = 4.1

----

%%%%
%%%%

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wc Diagram 22A $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . X X X . X . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X X O X O . . , . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . O O X O . a . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . 4 . . 3 O 1 . . . . . . X . . . . . | $$ | . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wc Diagram 22B $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . X X X . X . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X X O X O . . , . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . 3 O O X O . a . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . 4 O 1 . . . . . . X . . . . . | $$ | . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wc Diagram 22C $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . X X X . X . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X X O X O . . , . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . O O X O . . . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O 2 . . . . . . X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wc Diagram 22D continuation of 22C $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . X X X . X . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X X O X O . . , . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . O O X O . 3 . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O 2 . . . . . . X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |[/go]

[JoazBanbeck] This looks good for white. In typical MW style, white is connecting up his weak groups, controlling the center, and building a gauntlet for our upper right group.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Bc Diagram 22E continuation of 22D $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . X X X . X . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X X O X O . . 7 . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . O O X O . O 5 . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O X . 8 6 9 . . X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . O . 1 . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 2 . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . a 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |[/go]

[Dusk Eagle] I think white's connection is actually very weak, and we can cut it like this. If white doesn't respond with W4, we can always attack his group with ''a'' (which duals as an extension from our hoshi stone). I think this looks quite nice for us.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Bc Diagram 22F continuation of 22D $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . X X X . X . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X X O X O . . . . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . O O X O . O . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . O X . . . . . . X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . O . 1 . x . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 2 . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . a 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |[/go]

[Dusk Eagle] This is perhaps a safer way to play. I'm not exact on the placement of B5, but it seems easy to cancel out white's center influence, and white needs to spend a move to fix his connection. Now that I've posted it, I like this variation more.

[JoazBanbeck] I don't prefer this variation, but if we did play it, I'd want to see 5 at 'x'.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Bc Diagram 22G $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . 0 . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . 9 4 2 X X X . X . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . 7 3 X O X O . . , . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . 5 6 O O X O . . . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . 8 . . . O 1 . . . . . . X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Bc Diagram 22H continuation of 22G $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . 6 . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | 3 O 2 1 5 X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X O O X X X . X . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . X X X O X O . . , . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . X O O O X O . . . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . O . . . O X . . . . . . X . . . . . | $$ | . 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |[/go]

[Kirby] Can we get away with this?

[JoazBanbeck] Maybe. See next diagram.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wc Diagram 22I continuation of 22H $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . O . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | X O O X X X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X O O X X X . X . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | 4 X X X O X O . . , . . . X . X . . . | $$ | 3 X O O O X O . . . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | 2 O 1 . . O X . . . . . . X . . . . . | $$ | . X 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . 6 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Bc Diagram 22J $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . m X X X . X . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X O X O . . , . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . O O X O . . . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . 1 O . . . . . . . X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . k . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , k . . |[/go]

[daniel the smith] Makes it difficult for white to cut at ''m'', even after a white response. I think. Likely continuation?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Bc Diagram 22J.1 $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 3 X X X . X . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 2 X O X O . . , . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . O O X O . . . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . 1 O i . . . . . . X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |[/go]

[daniel the smith] If this happens, 1 is still full of aji and ''i'' is suddenly a valuable cutting point. Does white have a better 4?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Bcm22 Prisoners: $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . X X X . X . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X O X O . . , . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . O O X O . . . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . B O . . . . . . . X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

mw42 · Post by **mw42** » Mon Mar 28, 2011 10:10 am

What a surprise move.

Magicwand · Post by **Magicwand** » Mon Mar 28, 2011 10:46 am

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wcm21 Prisoners: $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . X X X . X . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 3 X O X O . . , . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . O O X O . . . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . X O . . . . . . . X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Post by **Joaz Banbeck** » Mon Mar 28, 2011 11:54 am

@fellow gang members:

Magicwand · Post by **Magicwand** » Mon Mar 28, 2011 2:14 pm

mw42 wrote:What a surprise move.

it surprised me also :shock:

my initial feeling is an overplay on black.
my next sequence is simple a or b.
either way i think i got out of the hole and maintaining the balance.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wcm21 Prisoners: $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . a 4 X X X . X . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 3 X O X O . . , . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . 5 O O X O . . . . O . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . X O . . . . . . . X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . b . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Shaddy · Post by **Shaddy** » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:26 pm

Obs.

crux · Post by **crux** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 2:41 am

Magicwand · Post by **Magicwand** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:03 am

Joaz Banbeck wrote:@Magicwand: I think you got lucky here. I wanted to play J15 but the gang outvoted me.

i always wanted to play you 1-1. i think i can win in 2 stone.
i will play you 2 stone after this game if you accept.

fyi, J15 look pretty bad to my eye :lol:

topazg · Post by **topazg** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:53 am

Obs + MW:

mw42 · Post by **mw42** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 6:02 am

@topazg

topazg · Post by **topazg** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 6:08 am

mw42 wrote:@topazg

Perhaps a better method would be to have the five of you develop a strategy and a sequence starting from ONE move they would like to play. Then submit that move along with their variations to SL along with the four others. Then you vote on only the five moves instead of allowing every flitting fancy to cover and confuse the board. This would be more formulaic: each member of the collective decides on a move and posts it with a short description of their intent along with variations (unlimited) then voting commences.

mw42 · Post by **mw42** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 6:27 am

topazg wrote:
Yeah, that probably would be better. However, it would still suffer from the same problem - we'd all be likely to prefer our own sequence to the others. I may really really suck at the timing for splitting groups, but be absolutely convinced on a split that doesn't work, and advocate a bad idea really strongly. If I'm convincing, we may make a sub-optimal move. I'm convinced that the last cut was not good, but the other 4 players gave it 3.8 out of a total of 4 voting points. I'm not even sure why, as it was the last move discussed and one without variations. I think it's the sort of thing I often do in RL games - analyse 4 perfectly good moves and then at the last minute go "Oooh, look at that one" and play another move entirely immediately, without good enough assessment.

Over the course of a normal game, my sucky bits and my good bits average out to around KGS 2d now, but I'm sure some of my sucky bits are at best 1k. If we could really evaluate the area each of us is best at, and assign work accordingly, we could probably play a really strong game. However, I suspect pride will get in the way of that even if we tried.

That's not to say this won't be fun anyway In fact, I strongly encourage everyone to keep an eye on the sensei's page and the awesome arguments we'll be having, I'm sure there will be a lot of entertainment there!

topazg · Post by **topazg** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 6:33 am

mw42 wrote:
Require a unanimous decision to proceed. If you don't like a move you can act like Henry Fonda in 12 Angry Men. It's true that for any given move you may have 5 different strategies, but it would be your task to look objectively at the position and try to decide what is the best way to proceed out of the five and not worry with thoughts of "well, maybe this would better..."

mw42 · Post by **mw42** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 6:35 am

topazg wrote:
With us lot, that could turn the game into a fortnight per move. I'll be an old man before the game finishes

EDIT:

@The Collective

daniel_the_smith · Post by **daniel_the_smith** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 6:51 am

Life In 19x19

Gang Malkovich 1: Magicwand vs the Gang of Five

Re: Gang Malkovich 1: Magicwand vs the Gang of Five

Re: Gang Malkovich 1: Magicwand vs the Gang of Five

Re: Gang Malkovich 1: Magicwand vs the Gang of Five

Re: Gang Malkovich 1: Magicwand vs the Gang of Five

Re: Gang Malkovich 1: Magicwand vs the Gang of Five

Re: Gang Malkovich 1: Magicwand vs the Gang of Five

Re: Gang Malkovich 1: Magicwand vs the Gang of Five

Re: Gang Malkovich 1: Magicwand vs the Gang of Five

Re: Gang Malkovich 1: Magicwand vs the Gang of Five

Re: Gang Malkovich 1: Magicwand vs the Gang of Five

Re: Gang Malkovich 1: Magicwand vs the Gang of Five

Re: Gang Malkovich 1: Magicwand vs the Gang of Five

Re: Gang Malkovich 1: Magicwand vs the Gang of Five

Re: Gang Malkovich 1: Magicwand vs the Gang of Five

Re: Gang Malkovich 1: Magicwand vs the Gang of Five