Page 2 of 8
Re: 121: Dusk Eagle (2d) vs. mw42 (1k)
Posted: Tue May 10, 2011 4:16 pm
by Kirby
mw42 wrote: ...
$$Wcm8 Diagram 3
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm8 Diagram 3I like Diagram 3, so it will be my plan.
If I were black, I would kick instead of playing
in the quoted diagram, aiming for this:
$$Wcm8
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm8 Or maybe, with the last move in the diagram above one space higher...
Is it worse?
Re: 121: Dusk Eagle (2d) vs. mw42 (1k)
Posted: Tue May 10, 2011 4:36 pm
by Dusk Eagle
$$Bcm11 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm11 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
That seems too thin. I could be wrong, but I think if he was planning to tenuki, he shouldn't have played
, which let me occupy the 3-3 point. Now his bottom-right group has fewer options. Anyway, I'm jumping in to split him. I'll probably post some variations once I see how he reacts.
Re: 121: Dusk Eagle (2d) vs. mw42 (1k)
Posted: Tue May 10, 2011 5:15 pm
by mw42
$$Wcm12 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm12 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
$$Wcm12 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm12 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0This jump makes the marked exchange look aji-keshi, but it's not a huge deal especially since (I think) I've already constrained black's development on the side. Black will almost certainly jump at (c) then I will jump at (d) aiming at (e). If B(f) then W(e) B(g) W(h) seems interesting.
Oh, and I didn't like (a) or (b), that's why I didn't say anything about them.
Re: 121: Dusk Eagle (2d) vs. mw42 (1k)
Posted: Tue May 10, 2011 8:47 pm
by Joaz Banbeck
Quickie tewari analysis.
If the board were like this:
$$Wc
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wc...none of us would play this:
$$Wc
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wc...because of the obvious play of black 2:
$$Wc
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$WcBut somehow, we got here anyway.
Re: 121: Dusk Eagle (2d) vs. mw42 (1k)
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 7:16 am
by Dusk Eagle
This...
$$Wcm1
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm1 or this?
$$Bcm1
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm1
Re: 121: Dusk Eagle (2d) vs. mw42 (1k)
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 7:40 am
by Kirby
I haven't decided on the follow up, but of the two options he selected, I like this one better:
$$Bcm1
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm1
Re: 121: Dusk Eagle (2d) vs. mw42 (1k)
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 6:00 pm
by yithril
$$Bcm1
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm1This is good. In fact a lot of things work here.
$$Bcm1
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm1White connects under at a price. The extension in the beginning was weird.
$$Bcm1
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm1Normal Shape.
Re: 121: Dusk Eagle (2d) vs. mw42 (1k)
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 6:40 pm
by Dusk Eagle
$$Bcm13 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm13 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
Ultimately I'm worried about something like this:
$$Bcm1
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm1So I'm going with the one-space jump, which doesn't let him build up strength on the bottom. Now I predict
$$Wcm1
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm1which looks fine for me, but I'm not sure where he'll play next.
Re: 121: Dusk Eagle (2d) vs. mw42 (1k)
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 6:49 pm
by mw42
$$Wcm14 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm14 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
Re: 121: Dusk Eagle (2d) vs. mw42 (1k)
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 8:45 pm
by Dusk Eagle
$$Bcm15 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm15 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
Extending with this group is important because it helps keeps his R11 stone separated from his O7 group. Playing an extension one space farther isn't that good because it places his R11 stone in an ideal location. I thought about playing as in the variation below, but if he jumps out with
it's hard to move my corner group into the center to keep him split and prevent me from being sealed in.
$$Bc
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bc
Re: 121: Dusk Eagle (2d) vs. mw42 (1k)
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 3:40 am
by Kirby
Dusk Eagle wrote: ...Ultimately I'm worried about something like this:
$$Bcm1
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm1...
I wouldn't worry about this variation so much. It seems like it might even be possible to kill white (though I haven't spent much time reading). I don't know exactly what to start with. Maybe this:
$$Bcm1
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm1
Re: 121: Dusk Eagle (2d) vs. mw42 (1k)
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 6:52 am
by mw42
$$Wcm16 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm16 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
$$Wcm1 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm1 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0So black's move seems to put more pressure on my (a) stone then my
group. I am happy to approach his corner and strengthen the stone. If black caps at (c), I can either kosumi at (d) or connect to (b) at (e). Maybe an extension of (b) to (f) is also possible, but it seems bad compared to
because, for one thing, it approaches a strong corner whereas I am approaching an open corner and it seems to me that if I want some presence in this area, I should contact the strong stone at (g).
In this game, I am trying to put a lot of though into the efficiency of stones which is why, e.g. I didn't play the honte move of (h). I didn't think white can severely attack my group and that I could treat (b) lightly. Also, it is why I am not worrying about black's cap on my
group. If you are going to run, it is best to run through as narrow of a space as possible, I think (so long as you are not giving more away to your opponent by doing so and because of my (a) group I feel his cap won't be able to coordinate well with the top).
Re: 121: Dusk Eagle (2d) vs. mw42 (1k)
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 7:05 am
by ez4u
Regarding W4
mw42 wrote: I am exercising my right to play an unusual move.
$$Wcm4 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm4 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0$$Wcm4 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm4 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0My explanation of
: I want to play at (a), but if black just extends to
and I play at (b) to complete the corner, either immediately or a little later, black has already occupied my optimal extension. So, if I play
then black avoids the corner, I will play (a). Not only will this make approaching the corner more awkward for black, but it will give me the option of playing at (b), enclosure cum extension. If he takes the corner at (c) or (d), my approach at (e) or (f) will be nicely supported by
. If he plays at (b), then W(a). If B(g),
occupies his optimal extension.
I'm sure this is a ridiculously horrible move.
for Obs
White indulged in a classic bit of over-thinking here, manufacturing reasons to hope to play where he wants to rather than carrying his analysis through to the logical end. Consider the bottom side...
$$Wc
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wc White expects B2 in response to W1. If then W3, B2 is well placed to limit the development of the shimari. This is a reasonable thought. But having thought this far... why does White still want to play W1???
In shifting W1 to 2 in the diagram, White is still trying to get the chance to play at 1 later. White imagines first that if Black plays elsewhere, White can return to play at W1. This ignores the fact that after a play by White at 2, the most interesting place for Black to play is the lower left corner. It is unrealistic to assume a Black play anywhere else. OK, White solves that dilemma by going on to analyze that if Black plays in the corner, the result will not be that good for Black. For example, White assumes that if Black indeed plays in the corner at 3, a White play at 1 will leave Black disappointed. Yet if this were true, we would expect to find the following W3 in our joseki books (the order is different but the result is the same)...
$$Wc
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wc In fact, we do not. While Black is less comfortable with W3 on the board than without it, W3 is too loose a play to bother Black to any great extent. Black can even afford to tenuki here without any great fear.
The correct course of action after White decided that W1 could lead to an unattractive result was to reject W1 as the place to play in the corner and choose an alternative... in the corner. The basics of corners before sides were not changed by anything in White's analysis.
Who among us has not given in to the trap of imagining that our opponents will forget for a moment that Go is a competitive game and kindly look the other way while we complete some dream structure? Sadly on those happy occasions when our opponent does cooperate, we normally discover that it was only because our dreams were not quite as clear as our opponent's reading
Re: 121: Dusk Eagle (2d) vs. mw42 (1k)
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 6:52 pm
by Dusk Eagle
$$Bcm15 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm15 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
I want to keep the pressure up on white. To do that, I considered my actual move and the underneath keima below.
$$Bcm1
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm1I think this makes him stronger on the outside though, so I ultimately rejected it.
Re: 121: Dusk Eagle (2d) vs. mw42 (1k)
Posted: Fri May 13, 2011 4:23 am
by mw42
$$Wcm16 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm16 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
$$Wcm1 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wcm1 Prisoner Count: B-0 W-0This is the sequence I expect. I may consider playing
at (a). Then B(b) &c.
in the quoted diagram, aiming for this:
, which let me occupy the 3-3 point. Now his bottom-right group has fewer options. Anyway, I'm jumping in to split him. I'll probably post some variations once I see how he reacts.
it's hard to move my corner group into the center to keep him split and prevent me from being sealed in.
group. I am happy to approach his corner and strengthen the stone. If black caps at (c), I can either kosumi at (d) or connect to (b) at (e). Maybe an extension of (b) to (f) is also possible, but it seems bad compared to 
because, for one thing, it approaches a strong corner whereas I am approaching an open corner and it seems to me that if I want some presence in this area, I should contact the strong stone at (g).
at (a). Then B(b) &c.