Life In 19x19

SoDesuNe wrote:Ha ha ha, that's a 2-dan problem on goproblems.com ^^

$$Bc Black to play
$$-----------------------+
$$ . . X . . . . . O . . |
$$ . . X O O X O X O X . |
$$ . . X O O O X X O X . |
$$ . . X X X X O O O X . |
$$ . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ . . . . . X . X . X . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bc Black to play
$$-----------------------+
$$ . . X . . . . . O . . |
$$ . . X O O X O X O X . |
$$ . . X O O O X X O X . |
$$ . . X X X X O O O X . |
$$ . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ . . . . . X . X . X . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |[/go]

This problem supports my theory that bad players are attracted to bad plays.

My first thought was to capture the lone White stone and make a dead shape. OC, then White can make an eye on the side, but that doesn't work because of damezumari.

Oops! White can connect instead, which also makes miai for the second eye.

OK, back up. Don't connect to make the dead shape, but play to connect underneath instead. White cannot block the connection, because of damezumari.

Double oops! White doesn't have to block the connection, because my stones are in atari.

OK, back up to the first play. Once I saw it, I wondered why wasn't that obvious?

Because I was attracted to the wrong play.

I learnt that the difficulty of a tsumego, you solve in an applet, depends on the obviousness of the first move.

The first move in the 12-kyu-problems is pretty obvious, so is White's first answer and your reponse. White's third move needs calculation but I guess a lot of player will click until now and then start reading : D

In quite some of the problems, I fail, I suffer from a different habit: I read all the way without clicking and when I'm sure it works, I blitz through. When I read correctly and didn't get caught off guard by missed responses, I do good. Other times I fail 11-kyu problems ^^ Now I try to pace myself while clicking, checking if my line really works.

In the second problem the first move is rather not "vital-point-ish", which makes it harder for the trained eye (see Treasure Chest Enigma and the problem "solve in three days to be a professional" (paraphrasing) ^^). Of course I read the capture first, too ; )

"Dead shapes" are a funny subject on their own, see the following problem:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bc Black to play
$$ +--------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . O O O O . . . . .
$$ | . X X X X O . , . .
$$ | . X O . X O . . . .
$$ | . . . O X O . . . .
$$ | . O O X X O . . . .
$$ | O X X X O O . . . .
$$ | . O O O . . . , . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Some recent happenings.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc Oh, them endgame blunders... lucky me : )
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X O O . . . . . O . O O . O O X |
$$ | . X . X X O . . . . X O X X X O O X . |
$$ | . . X X O O . . . , O . O O O X X X . |
$$ | . . . . X O . . . . . O X . O O . . . |
$$ | . . X X X O . . . . . . O O X O X . . |
$$ | . . X O X O . . . . . O X . X X X X . |
$$ | . X O O O O . . . O O X X . X . O O X |
$$ | . X X X X O . . . O X X O O X X X O 1 |
$$ | . O X X O O O O O X X X X O O O X O . |
$$ | . O O O X X X O X . X X . X O . O X O |
$$ | . X O X X X O . O X . . X O O O O X . |
$$ | . X O X X O O . O O X . . X . X O . . |
$$ | X X X X O O . O O X . . . . X X O O . |
$$ | . X O O . . . . . X . . . . X O X O O |
$$ | O O X O . . . O O O X X . . . , X X O |
$$ | . O X O . . . O X X . X . . . X . X X |
$$ | . . . . O . O X . X X . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bc Black didn't see the danger, enlight him! In the game, I lucked out
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . O X . . . . . X X . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O . X . X X X X O O O . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O . X . O O X O . . X O , X . . |
$$ | . . . . O X O O X O O . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . O O . . X . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . O . . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . 1 X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . |
$$ | . O O . . . . . . . . . . . . O X . . |
$$ | . X O O O . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . X X X . X . . . . . . . X . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

I've been through my last couple of games and one reoccuring theme I can pinpoint: I enter frameworks way too early and I'm terrible in making flexible shape (often in combination). Even if I manage to make good shape (more often than not with the help of my opponent), I then try to rescue cutting stones, which have done their job. Ending up with terrible shape yet again...

I still trace that back to my weak fighting skills in general. Often my opponents end up with a framework because I live small somewhere clumsily, giving my opponents impressive outwards facing structures.

The other - more recent - is: Misplaying a (more complicated/fighting orientated) joseki and ending up seriously behind.

I guess more experience and awareness is needed - so patience? : D

Played a 4-stones-handicap-game in todays club meeting and ended up just a little behind... but with a lot of good will from Black, so... : D

There was one instance of my favourite weakness nowadays, making flexible shape:

How it came to be...

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . O . . O X . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . X . X . O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . W . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . O . X . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . X O X . . 1 . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . X . X X X O O . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X O . . . 2 . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

I guess, the marked stone had its virtual "plonk"-value but nothing more. Black played solidly and cut me apart. With I was ready to start a fight but Black had other plans with ^^

So, if I make a flexible shape now, keeping the aji of the cutting stones in check, I should still have a game!

Yes, that happened:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bc :w2: pass, :w4: pass
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . X O O X X . O O O O O X O . . X X |
$$ | . O . O . O X X X O X X X X . . X X O |
$$ | O O X O O O O X O O X O X X X X X O O |
$$ | X O O X X O . X . O X O X . . X O O O |
$$ | X X O X . X X X X O O O X X . X X O . |
$$ | . X X X . X O O X O X O O X X O O O . |
$$ | . . . . . X X O O 7 8 . . O O O X X . |
$$ | . X O . O . X X O . X X O . . O . . . |
$$ | . X O . . . X O O O O X O . . . O . . |
$$ | . O X O O X X X O X O O X X . O X . . |
$$ | . X X X O X O O O X O X O O O O O X . |
$$ | . . X O X X X O O X X X . O X O X X . |
$$ | . X X O X X O O X . . X O O X X O O X |
$$ | X X O O O X X O X X X X O X X O O O . |
$$ | O X O X X X X O O X O . X . . X X O . |
$$ | O O O X X O O O O O X . . X . X O . . |
$$ | 3 5 O O X O O O O X X . . O X X O O . |
$$ | . X X O O O X X X X . . . . X O O . . |
$$ | 6 . 1 9 O X X X . . . . . . X X O . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Please find a better move for : )

Oof, that resonated with me on a spiritual level.

(Assuming you're playing white) I commend you for passing and not connecting at 7 yourself. As Yuan Zhou said about Go Seigen (paraphrased): "Go Seigen didn't just care about winning, he cared about finding out the truth."

Regardless of whether that actually was Go Seigen's mindset, it is one that I respect

Farodin wrote:Oof, that resonated with me on a spiritual level.

(Assuming you're playing white) I commend you for passing and not connecting at 7 yourself. As Yuan Zhou said about Go Seigen (paraphrased): "Go Seigen didn't just care about winning, he cared about finding out the truth."

Regardless of whether that actually was Go Seigen's mindset, it is one that I respect

It wasn't just Go Seigen. When I learned go in Japan, I was taught that the purpose of reading was not to win, but to discover the truth.

Yes, I was White and it was even a won game ^^

The curious thing is, I did read that -cut from the beginning but I totally missed the atari with his corner group. I also totally missed that I could atari and capture other stones without any snapback worries.

I guess I'm a bit wiser now?

All my games lately...

Maybe more coffee.

When Bill says it's good to be consistent, I don't think he meant like that.

So, I'm enjoying blitz even more nowadays (1/5*20). I mentioned it elsewhere that I think more time does not benefit the majority of players when they are not strong enough to make use of it. In my case more time leads to reading a lot of bad candidate moves and often times I convice myself that one of them is actually good (sunken cost fallacy?).

My chess trainer once told me that if I can consistently read three moves ahead (thus not falling for a two-move-tactic) I would be master level. Since according to studies strong chess players don't necessarily read deeper than weaker ones but focus on the good moves and therefore come to better conclusions faster, I believe playing blitz games can be quite promising.

Still me and my opponents blunder our fair share of ddk-l&d-stuff but losing is learning and one of these days I will also learn to attack correctly and not to force my opponent to solidfy a 100-points-moyo.

SoDesuNe wrote:My chess trainer once told me that if I can consistently read three moves ahead (thus not falling for a two-move-tactic) I would be master level.

That's 5 ply (5 go moves), right?

Humans are better at depth first search than breadth first search. But if you have read to depth 5 in, say, 5 different region of the board you can often stitch those moves together into a deeper whole board search without too much loss of accuracy. OC, that means reading locally to depth 5 by either player at each node, which is no mean feat.

SoDesuNe wrote:So, I'm enjoying blitz even more nowadays (1/5*20).

A great man once said "Above all, study what you like."

I mentioned it elsewhere that I think more time does not benefit the majority of players when they are not strong enough to make use of it. In my case more time leads to reading a lot of bad candidate moves and often times I convice myself that one of them is actually good (sunken cost fallacy?).

Analysis paralysis is a real trap I have seen with beginners. But you're a 1 dan. Surely you have a decent intuition of good candidates. Whether they apply in the situation at hand, which is the best one, or if none of them satisfies you (hence tenuki), requires reading. Myself I'm thinking to abandon my standard game setup of 5+5x30 into something that allows for more reading.

But as a great man once said ...

Bill Spight wrote:

SoDesuNe wrote:My chess trainer once told me that if I can consistently read three moves ahead (thus not falling for a two-move-tactic) I would be master level.

That's 5 ply (5 go moves), right?

Humans are better at depth first search than breadth first search. But if you have read to depth 5 in, say, 5 different region of the board you can often stitch those moves together into a deeper whole board search without too much loss of accuracy. OC, that means reading locally to depth 5 by either player at each node, which is no mean feat.

Correct, that's where candidate moves and experience come in handy, I guess. You don't read unnecessary moves and you don't read sequences leading to unfavourable results. But expertise in both can't really be trained unless you play a lot and try a lot and hopefully remember a lot, too - is at least my take for the moment ; ) (Somewhat refreshing from force-feeding my way through tsumego-book-cycles)

So I play blitz to play a lot, I try a lot, I remember... well hard to tell

Knotwilg wrote:Analysis paralysis is a real trap I have seen with beginners. But you're a 1 dan. Surely you have a decent intuition of good candidates. Whether they apply in the situation at hand, which is the best one, or if none of them satisfies you (hence tenuki), requires reading.

To quote Jay-Z on Numb/Encore: "Thank you, thank you, thank you, you're far too kind!"

But I would argue chosing which candidate move requires experience or more precise judgement (not talking about primarily tactical situations now). Reading - for me - primarily longs to go... into the unknoooooown! Into the unknOoOoOoOoOwn! (It was a long week) For me a candidate move implies a sense of continuation, why else would it pop up in this situation? If it is totally uncalled for that should point to (lack of) experience.

Now the crossroad might be whether you think either proving yourself right or wrong by checking (reading) is more beneficial than playing it out and learning through experience (both to an extent of course, I do imagine stones now and then, too). It could also end in which way you enjoy more, of course. I did my fair share of reading and longer games. Didn't bring me much short of time trouble in midgame and arguably my fast games now follow the same patterns as my slow games. Only in the fast games I don't read the moves my opponents don't play

Play fast, review slow was some advice I got a long time ago (maybe here?) and the longer I play the game and the stronger I get the more it makes sense to me. I think there certainly is some merit to the idea of not thinking of reading when playing as the same as when reviewing or doing problems. The latter two are you internalising of patterns that your brain will "quick-fetch" when playing and throw up as the candidate moves along with some lines already read out. I say some merit as you will have to "read the hard way" in games sometimes, but it probably shouldn't be our go to as kyu or low dan players. YMMV.