Life In 19x19

Bill Spight wrote:

kirkmc wrote:Taking territory is now a "land grab"?

Wasn't Land Grab a kind of German nobility?

Landgraf ^_^

Jonas wrote:

Bill Spight wrote:

kirkmc wrote:Taking territory is now a "land grab"?

Wasn't Land Grab a kind of German nobility?

Landgraf ^_^

Oh, thanks.

Grab = grave, right?

The theory sounds nice, but the examples seem randomly chosen, so I think there's no consistent idea here. Take the first game: k3 is the first example, and it has nothing to do with usagi's explanation. He says the land grab is huge, but isn't sente or ignores a honte move.

Look at the game: white's next move isn't sente either. And I don't think there's a honte move in either case (as far as I know, honte has to do with avoiding weakness, playing steadily. Both moves are steady.)

In the opening, one doesn't always play sente. Is taking an empty corner sente? Making an enclosure?

usagi wrote:I call it the 1 kyu land grab.

In the first game I would be more critical of a move like O15 which really is a land grab and an unsuccessful one as well.

In the second game it feels a bit like you are the one grabbing land. Instantly playing S6 e.g. (I mean D14 doesn't grab anything but intends to be a sente reduction.) In comparison to the moves you're critical on Q5 really looks bad to me.

(About the same level, although less sure that land grabbing is always bad. I often lose against what feels like land grabbing to me.)

I'm not sure I understand what you're talking about. After looking at the games and reading your explanations, it seems like you are over simplifying the reason they lost. Not many games at our level are lost by one or two moves.

As for the examples, in the first game it doesn't seem like your opponent played bad moves in the opening. He just didn't attack you very well, he didn't know how to use the stones he played... But the moves themselves were not bad.

In the second game D14 is questionable, he should probably defend on the bottom right. I think that C14 was a good move, admitting that playing in the bottom right anymore is a waste of time. In fact your your continuation on the bottom right actually made his position better imo

I think trying to say that the difference between 1k and 1d is X isn't worthwhile. Some players don't even know the L+1 group at 2d AGA, whereas others know every basic corner and side L&D shape. Different players have different weaknesses at all levels.

usagi wrote: ..... First, in Ota Yuzo-Shusaku, played August 13th 1843, Ota Yuzo played nikken tobi on the lower right side. This is what I would call a land grab move and as a result Shusaku was able to take the initiative. I am sure the nikken tobi was a strong move but it was clearly not sente in Shusaku's eyes.

If John Power's "Invincible" is correct then I guess you mean the game played on August 13th 1842. Game 6 in the book. Move W62. Indeed a move I wouldn't dream to be wrong.

I don't know. These large moves, or "land grabs" or "moyo moves", are important moves in the opening. Pro's play them constantly. Just look at databases like MasterGo. You'll find a lot of "land grab" moves at the beginning. In fact pro's - nowadays - rather play a large move than enclosing a shimari (e.g. Kobayashi or Chinese Fuseki) which goes against conventional wisdom and shows that a "land grab" move is considered superior to a local strong move by now. Why? Because it builds more pressure on the opponent and more pressure means more chances. So I don't think the "land grab" stuff has anything to do with it. Land grabbing moves are state of the art. The 1d wins against the 1k because he plays more consistent, i.e. he has a few less "blunder games", that's all. I was 1k and 1d KGS...and I played on the same level...but as a 1d I had one or two games less where I "messed it up".