mus v Boidhre

[Bill Spight]

...and if my opponent neglects the extension to form a base (it happens around 17k) I have a very nice target.

Don't play go like that! There are some games that strongly resemble rock-paper-scissors. Some of them I even love. (Diplomacy, for example.) Go isn't one of them. The sooner you ask "where would I play if W were much smarter than I am?" instead of "where would I play if W were much dumber than I am?", the more you'll enter into the spirit of the game.

Hmm, that's an interesting way to look at it. Thanks! I agree completely on the latter point, I meant it as a sometimes added bonus at my level rather than as a reason to choose this response to the low approach to 4,4. I try to play the game while assuming that my opponent is better than I am and tactically this is generally true though the temptation to ignore this approach is always there and is a very bad habit that I'm trying to expunge.

I quite agree. Slap-dash tactics can win games, but they can become a bad habit. Assume perfect play by your opponent unless that means that you will lose.

I don't think small edges for white or black in the opening really mean that much for weak ddks similar to how in chess small advantages in the opening can be pretty much ignored for the most part by beginners since it'll be a major tactical blunder(s) that'll decide the game not minor advantages built up in the opening.

This is true if you mean "I want to focus more on learning to avoid tactical blunders than on playing a perfect opening." This is false if you mean, "I'm going to keep playing openings that I know are bad because it doesn't affect the rest of the game." It really does matter, even if you don't have a clear sense of how much it matters, and it especially matters to the people reviewing your games, because they're trying to look at who is winning and who is losing, and how aggressively each side has to play to stay in the game. When we look at the midgame tactical blunder, the first thing we ask is "was there a way to avoid the blunder," the second thing we ask is "was there a way to avoid the dubious invasion that lead to the blunder," and the third thing we ask is, "was there a way to avoid the losing situation on the board that made the dubious invasion necessary."

I mean it exactly as you put it in the first sense. The perfect opening is of no use to me if I often make a few 30 point tactical blunders around move 100.

Oh, I don't know. Suppose that you make three 30 point blunders. At your level your opponent will probably only punish one of them, and you will still win, based upon your gains in the other 100+ moves that you play in the game. One of the names for go is the Long Game.

You remember a few weeks ago I advised you to play as a 15 kyu. That was not a bad guess, was it? I did not make that recommendation based upon your tactics. You were still putting yourself into atari. I made it based upon your feel for the game. Several years ago I read a review by a pro in a go magazine of a game sent in by the father of a 14 year old boy who had been playing for several months and was a 4 kyu. Somewhere in the late opening or early middle game the boy jumped into the center, and it was then that the pro remarked that the boy showed promise. That was the move that revealed a feel for the game.

There is a saying that chess is 98% tactics. (Probably an overstatement, eh? ) My guess is that go is about 1/3 tactics. There are many skills in go, many paths up the mountain.

I find fuseki interesting, so I devote some bit of time to it for enjoyment value, but it's not (and shouldn't be) my focus for a long time as best as I can make out. If I have a focus at the moment it's when to invade and when to reduce, as well as basic life and death, (I find myself risk adverse and very much inclined to play reductions over invasions whenever I'm unsure), though I haven't the faintest idea where to start learning about invasions other than play a lot of games and learn by making mistakes and getting reviews.

Here is a thought. For one month, whenever you have a choice between invasion and reduction, invade. That way you will learn something. (I don't mean make crazy invasions, but when you have a real question in your mind whether to invade or reduce. )

Bonne chance!

[Boidhre]

I quite agree. Slap-dash tactics can win games, but they can become a bad habit. Assume perfect play by your opponent unless that means that you will lose.

I read a very good line in "How not to play Go" by Yuan Zhuo where he was analysing a game of an 8 kyu player and pointed out a bad move that led to a good outcome for the player and remarked that so long as the player kept getting this result he would remain an 8k because he wasn't learning that his moves were bad.

Oh, I don't know. Suppose that you make three 30 point blunders. At your level your opponent will probably only punish one of them, and you will still win, based upon your gains in the other 100+ moves that you play in the game. One of the names for go is the Long Game.

You remember a few weeks ago I advised you to play as a 15 kyu. That was not a bad guess, was it? I did not make that recommendation based upon your tactics. You were still putting yourself into atari. I made it based upon your feel for the game. Several years ago I read a review by a pro in a go magazine of a game sent in by the father of a 14 year old boy who had been playing for several months and was a 4 kyu. Somewhere in the late opening or early middle game the boy jumped into the center, and it was then that the pro remarked that the boy showed promise. That was the move that revealed a feel for the game.

There is a saying that chess is 98% tactics. (Probably an overstatement, eh? ) My guess is that go is about 1/3 tactics. There are many skills in go, many paths up the mountain.

Things are definitely a lot more interesting in the teens rather than the 20s and I'm getting punished a lot and not getting away with coasting along by making bigger moves than my opponent. I am getting a rather hard crash course though on dgs on fuseki and tesuji though! Myself and mus are playing our next two games as even games, the result will be very predictable I imagine but it's interesting playing on an even footing against a kgs 10k. Hard enough that I'll almost certainly lose but not so hard as to make me feel like there's absolutely no hope to pull off a surprise victory.

Here is a thought. For one month, whenever you have a choice between invasion and reduction, invade. That way you will learn something. (I don't mean make crazy invasions, but when you have a real question in your mind whether to invade or reduce. )

Bonne chance!

I've been considering something like this. In general I've been trying to get involved in more contact play just so I can get more to grips with it. I'm far too standoffish by nature and this is often wrong in this game as far as I can tell and I need to remove my fear/aversion to it by exposure. I think if I'd spent a few weeks in the mid to high 20s I'd have gotten far more used to contact play than I am at present.

[mus]

thanks..finally i have time to look through the review of our game.thanks for the great advice and variation for a better play..sorry Boi cause took me a long time..=)

_________________________
I added cool smileys to this message... if you don't see them go to: http://s.exps.me