Abyssinica's Study Journal

Charles Matthews · Post by **Charles Matthews** » Wed Jul 30, 2014 12:58 pm

Abyssinica wrote:Me thinking about shape time:

Another idea from someone else was this move because cutting leads to the same result and it's farther from thickness:

$$c This is a label for the diagram.
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . X X O . . . . X X O O . . |
$$ | . O . X . X . O . . . . . . O X O O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . X X O . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . W . . . . . . . . X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . X . X X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . O . O O . . |
$$ | . . O . . X . . X . O . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$c This is a label for the diagram. $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . X X O . . . . X X O O . . | $$ | . O . X . X . O . . . . . . O X O O . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . X X O . | $$ | . . O . . . . . W . . . . . . . . X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . X . X X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . O . O O . . | $$ | . . O . . X . . X . O . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

This way looks better to me.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$c This is a label for the diagram. $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . X X O 2 . . . X X O O . . | $$ | . O . X . X . O . . . . . . O X O O . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . X X O . | $$ | . . O . . . . . O . . . . . . . . X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . X . X X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . O . O O . . | $$ | . . O . . X . . X . O . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

If ever

,

improves White's shape. So Black feels inhibited. Should make White happy.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$c This is a label for the diagram. $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . X X O . . . . X X O O . . | $$ | . O . X . X . O . . . . . . O X O O . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . X X O . | $$ | . . O . . . b . O . a . . . . . . X . | $$ | . . . . . . b . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . X . X X . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . O . O O . . | $$ | . . O . . X . . X . O . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

You'd expect Black to cap in this sort of position. Having jumped out, White is quite glad to have plays like a and b (?) to choose from. Seems significant that Black can't easily fence White in on the left with one play.

Abyssinica · Post by **Abyssinica** » Wed Jul 30, 2014 1:13 pm

ez4u wrote:What was your thinking behind the attachment at H17? It might be worthwhile to consider this beam before turning to the mote that is J15.

I wasn't playing this game; black is a random 4k.

ez4u · Post by **ez4u** » Wed Jul 30, 2014 4:06 pm

Abyssinica wrote:
ez4u wrote:What was your thinking behind the attachment at H17? It might be worthwhile to consider this beam before turning to the mote that is J15.

I wasn't playing this game; black is a random 4k.

In that case, apologies for the attempted hijacking! :oops:

Abyssinica · Post by **Abyssinica** » Fri Aug 01, 2014 4:31 pm

I really like the flow of the stones here. Maybe it strikes some people as unimpressive or mundane, but I like it.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$c This is a label for the diagram. $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . 3 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O O 4 . . 2 . , . . . O O , X . . | $$ | . . . . . X 1 O . O . . . O X X . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

ez4u · Post by **ez4u** » Fri Aug 01, 2014 7:00 pm

Look at the diagram carefully. Both Black and White end up peeping at both sides of bamboo joints. This isn't mundane; it is bad shape. If I were White, I think I would have answered Black 1 with a play at 3 to prevent Black from making shape. White is happy to let Black hane either above or below H3 because White already has the stone at K3 in support. The K3 stone ends up over-concentrated in the game.

Abyssinica · Post by **Abyssinica** » Fri Aug 01, 2014 7:06 pm

ez4u wrote:Look at the diagram carefully. Both Black and White end up peeping at both sides of bamboo joints. This isn't mundane; it is bad shape. If I were White, I think I would have answered Black 1 with a play at 3 to prevent Black from making shape. White is happy to let Black hane either above or below H3 because White already has the stone at K3 in support. The K3 stone ends up over-concentrated in the game.

I think I'll need to have a word with Mister Cho Hunhyun then. :rambo:

ez4u · Post by **ez4u** » Fri Aug 01, 2014 7:47 pm

Abyssinica wrote:
ez4u wrote:Look at the diagram carefully. Both Black and White end up peeping at both sides of bamboo joints. This isn't mundane; it is bad shape. If I were White, I think I would have answered Black 1 with a play at 3 to prevent Black from making shape. White is happy to let Black hane either above or below H3 because White already has the stone at K3 in support. The K3 stone ends up over-concentrated in the game.

I think I'll need to have a word with Mister Cho Hunhyun then.

Give him my regards when you talk to him! But more seriously, since we can't really understand what players at that level were thinking when they made the choices that they did, how shall we decide which moves to admire and take away with us and which not to? I won't beat either Cho or Nie whatever I choose - that I can be sure of! But I will continue to happily be suspicious of peeping at bamboo joints. :salute:

Abyssinica · Post by **Abyssinica** » Fri Aug 01, 2014 8:19 pm

To be honest, I saw it as one giant inducing exchange. To explain my thoughts:

After black slid into the corner with e2, I cannot imaging him giving up the entire group. I didn't even think he would save the stone to begin with. When he bumps against the white stone with 1, because it is an attachment, it becomes urgent for white to respond. He can respond with a nobi or hane, and white chooses the nobi of two. Now I see that black is getting even more surrounded, so the 1-2 exchange induces black 3 rather than simply playing 3. Black 3 makes the push and cut for white look a bit dangerous in my eyes, so black 3 induces white to play 4 and defend himself which in turn induces black 5 - the whole thing for black to somewhat move out into the centre and stay connected.

That's how I saw it, and it might just be entirely wrong. Oh well.

skydyr · Post by **skydyr** » Sat Aug 02, 2014 11:40 am

ez4u wrote:
Abyssinica wrote:
ez4u wrote:Look at the diagram carefully. Both Black and White end up peeping at both sides of bamboo joints. This isn't mundane; it is bad shape. If I were White, I think I would have answered Black 1 with a play at 3 to prevent Black from making shape. White is happy to let Black hane either above or below H3 because White already has the stone at K3 in support. The K3 stone ends up over-concentrated in the game.

I think I'll need to have a word with Mister Cho Hunhyun then.

Give him my regards when you talk to him! But more seriously, since we can't really understand what players at that level were thinking when they made the choices that they did, how shall we decide which moves to admire and take away with us and which not to? I won't beat either Cho or Nie whatever I choose - that I can be sure of! But I will continue to happily be suspicious of peeping at bamboo joints.

If the shape for both is equally bad, it strikes me as a fair trade, at least. Whether one or the other side could have done better is an open question, however.

Abyssinica · Post by **Abyssinica** » Mon Aug 04, 2014 12:06 am

Even against a 3k (He is white with komi) W+10.5

This is fine since he is 3k and I made bad endgame decisions; I'm glad to have it close

Even against a 4k - I'm not paying attention and I should've connected something rather than deny him an eye and then have him live. This is before 50 moves in the game and he would have a 1 or no eyes 10-20 stone group that had to run. But I don't pay attention and he is just fine and now I am the one with the weak group and I resign later on.

Even against a 6k - I win comfortably.

Even against a 5k - Entering late endgame with a 20 point lead. I even say to myself that I should win if I don't do something stupid and die. I see a chance to trade 4 of my stones for 5 of his, so I take it. Too bad I completely missed the part where he falsified the eye of my group because of that and HE ends up with the 20 point lead.

Why are mistakes in Go like this so much harder to take well than anything else.

EdLee · Post by **EdLee** » Mon Aug 04, 2014 12:31 am

Abyssinica wrote:Why are mistakes in Go like this so much harder to take well than anything else.

Life In 19x19

Abyssinica's Study Journal

Re: Abyssinica's Study Journal

Re: Abyssinica's Study Journal

Re: Abyssinica's Study Journal

Re: Abyssinica's Study Journal

Re: Abyssinica's Study Journal

Re: Abyssinica's Study Journal

Re: Abyssinica's Study Journal

Re: Abyssinica's Study Journal

Re: Abyssinica's Study Journal

Re: Abyssinica's Study Journal

Re: Abyssinica's Study Journal

Re: Abyssinica's Study Journal

Re: Abyssinica's Study Journal

Re: Abyssinica's Study Journal