Teamovich 2

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Fri May 13, 2011 6:12 am

@Redundant (and White team may read as well)

Mnemonic · Post by **Mnemonic** » Mon May 16, 2011 7:58 am

Suggesting

I'm going to pick R6. I'm not too sure what we can get when we invade the upper left right now so I'm just going to put that decision off. Black has to spend at least one, rather two, more moves to make any of that into territory so it's not too urgent. We still have a lot of aji up there and I want to wait until the situation is a bit clearer.

So why don't we protect the upper right corner then? In my opinion it is just too slow. The only reasonable enclosure we have is the 33 point which isn't even the ideal enclosure for a 45 point. What's even worse is that there is a big, fat black stone sitting right in our direction of play :sad:

Since we missed our chance to pincer the black group, that also means we missed our chance to take the top left corner. I say: let black invade! Let him have the corner! We are going to have influence facing the right side so we need stones there to use it.
The real question is which approach to use. I quickly dismissed the two wishy-washy move and am left with the R6 approach and the two space high approach.

The R6 Approach
The pros of this move are abundant. This is the approach my team members are most familiar with. It is also threatening to slide/jump into the corner and destroy blacks territory. It is also the severest approach in that a double approach is very painful. And if black plays passively we get exactly what (I?) want.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Bcm15 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0 $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . O X X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O , X . . . . X . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . X . . . . . 4 . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . 3 . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

The thing that worries me are pincers. I had previously declared that black has an advantage in any running fight because of the tengen and that pincering would be a nice tactic I still believe that, but I'm not too afraid.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wcm16 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0 $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . O X X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O , X . . . . X . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . X . . . . . 7 . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . 1 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . 4 . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

This joseki allows white to build a wall towards tengen while sealing blacks group in. It's probably not optimal because we don’t have a lot of territory, but the corner is still open and I'm comfortable with influence based games anyway.

Questions to my Teammates:
1) Would you go with a two space high instead in fear of a pincer?
2) What is your assessment of the black group on the upper side?

@Marcus: remind me to never play a Rengo game with you. We two seem to have completely different styles :mrgreen:

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Mon May 16, 2011 10:44 am

@Mnemonic: I'm not even sure what style I do play, so you're probably right in that.

Also, my game is changing lately, so I don't know exactly what style of game I prefer to play anymore.

I don't think we're as far apart as you might expect, though. Rengo is very different from this Teamovich thing ....

robinz · Post by **robinz** » Tue May 17, 2011 5:48 am

WIC:

I just realised I haven't actually got round to a suggestion yet. And as my time on the forum is about to go down considerably from tomorrow, now seems a good time...

So, my suggestions is:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wcm16 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0 $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . O X X . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . | $$ | . . O , X . . . . X . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . X . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Firstly, I agree with Mnemonic that there's no point rushing into black's 4-space extension; I'd prefer to just leave it there to worry them later, and hopefully build up some strength near it. However, I disagree with him as to where the biggest move on the board is. For all the reasons I gave when first discussing the possibilities here, I still prefer playing in the upper right.

That still leaves the choice of where. Mnemonic's suggestion of the 3-3 is not bad, and might be better than this - while it does feel a little inconsistent with playing 5-4, it would at least be secure territory, while still keeping plenty of access to the centre (which seems to be the general plan for us here, if I'm interpreting Marcus' comments correctly - at any rate, I think that's a good plan even if it's not what the captain wants

). However, the normal 3-4 does all this just as well, while also having a bit more influence to hopefully aid in a later attack. Mnemonic said he was worried about black playing at R13, but having taken another look, I'm sure we can pincer this with relative impunity. OK, we have an open skirt which black might be able to dive into and live, but he won't get that much territory there and we'll build up quite a bit of thickness to nullify what black's aiming for (and to aid with a later invasion of the top). I'm not sure if this is better or worse than just playing at the 3-3, but it seems more fun :lol:

Of course, if black doesn't approach straight away, we can always play in that area ourselves and have an enormous corner ;-)

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Tue May 17, 2011 6:08 am

Is Rafa still around?

robinz · Post by **robinz** » Tue May 17, 2011 7:15 am

I'm not sure. It's apparently been almost 2 weeks since he was last on the forum, but that doesn't mean he might not be back soon. Perhaps one of us should PM him (which I think will send him an e-mail, so he should see even if he's not still using the forum) to find out what's happening. After all, black got a substitute, so there's no reason we shouldn't be able to - although I'd want to give Rafa the benefit of the doubt for a while longer. I think this is something the team (and perhaps the black team too) should make a collective decision on though.

I take it from your comment, though, that you're not happy with either of the suggestions you've had so far ;-)

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Tue May 17, 2011 10:13 am

robinz wrote:I'm not sure. It's apparently been almost 2 weeks since he was last on the forum, but that doesn't mean he might not be back soon. Perhaps one of us should PM him (which I think will send him an e-mail, so he should see even if he's not still using the forum) to find out what's happening. After all, black got a substitute, so there's no reason we shouldn't be able to - although I'd want to give Rafa the benefit of the doubt for a while longer. I think this is something the team (and perhaps the black team too) should make a collective decision on though.

I take it from your comment, though, that you're not happy with either of the suggestions you've had so far

You can infer what you wish ( :mrgreen:

) ... I just don't want to accidentally drop Rafa from the game. His input is welcome.

SinK · Post by **SinK** » Sun May 22, 2011 1:38 pm

Bump.

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Sun May 22, 2011 4:15 pm

I sent a PM to Rafa, no response.

lesenv · Post by **lesenv** » Wed May 25, 2011 5:31 am

well, do you want to look for another team-member or do you just want to move? i think we mentioned a 3-days-per-move limit, but not everybody said if it was ok.

by the way: starting saturday i'm on holidays for two weeks, no internet, so feel free to move without me, i'll join you again once when i'm back.

lesenv · Post by **lesenv** » Wed May 25, 2011 5:32 am

well, do you want to look for another team-member or do you just want to move without Rafa? i think we mentioned a 3-days-per-move limit, but not everybody said if it was ok.

by the way: starting saturday i'm on holidays for two weeks, no internet, so feel free to move without me, i'll join you again once when i'm back.

Mnemonic · Post by **Mnemonic** » Wed May 25, 2011 7:16 am

The problem is that ddk aren't that consistent when it comes down to posting frequently. Personally I can't think of another ddk that is interested in Malkovich games. I guess we could ask Monodalogy since he seems to be at least lurking regularly. Or ask one of the newer members like Inkwolf but we don't know if they just quit after a few months

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Wed May 25, 2011 7:48 am

Will move tonight.

robinz · Post by **robinz** » Wed May 25, 2011 10:20 am

Is this really a DDK game any more? I'm about 8k, I think Mnemonic is about 7k, and the black team has Jordus who I think is 8/9k. I'm not sure about the other team members. But I think there's no need to restrict it to DDKs

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Wed May 25, 2011 2:26 pm

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Bcm11 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0 $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . O X X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O , X . . . . X . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . X . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

If we want to add another player to this team, we should do so. Redundant, your thoughts?

WIC:

Life In 19x19

Teamovich 2

Re: Teamovich 2

Re: Teamovich 2

Re: Teamovich 2

Re: Teamovich 2

Re: Teamovich 2

Re: Teamovich 2

Re: Teamovich 2

Re: Teamovich 2

Re: Teamovich 2

Re: Teamovich 2

Re: Teamovich 2

Re: Teamovich 2

Re: Teamovich 2

Re: Teamovich 2

Re: Teamovich 2