Page 4 of 14
Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2013 7:54 pm
by EdLee
ikkyu,
ikkyu wrote: I've been told that one of my problems is that I play moves that are "too safe."
Yes, this is the same problem for many of us --
if we play too safely, we are too slow, inefficient;
if we play too "fast," too thin, we overplay and leave weakness behind...
to find just the right move, not too slow, not too fast -- it's a never-ending quest.
Re:
Posted: Fri Jun 14, 2013 4:35 am
by ikkyu
EdLee wrote: ikkyu,
ikkyu wrote: I've been told that one of my problems is that I play moves that are "too safe."
Yes, this is the same problem for many of us --
if we play too safely, we are too slow, inefficient;
if we play too "fast," too thin, we overplay and leave weakness behind...
to find just the right move, not too slow, not too fast -- it's a never-ending quest.
Yeah, I know. But I look forward to it getting better. I listen to players giving lectures about, what seems to me, to be very esoteric positions, and they'll say things like, "The standard move is..." Granted, since I'm starting at an older age and I don't have a lot of time to devote to playing and studying, I'm not expecting to reach the same level as these people (mid dan amateurs, by in large), but I would like a little more assurance from familiarity. Of course, the best way to do this is play more, which I'm trying to do.
Re: #218 Quietimes vs Ikkyu
Posted: Wed Jun 19, 2013 6:47 pm
by quietimes
$$Bcm11
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm11Sorry for the delay. Life caught up.
So the following is for the diagram below. I was thinking just make a base for invasion and reduce the influence of the upper middle area for black. Didn't feel like an efficient move soooo
$$Bcm11
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm11Then I looked at it from this angle (below) and thought that was an even worse situation. It is called a wing? is it not?
$$Bcm11
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm11soooooooo I decided to go with this move (below) to keep pressure on black and persuade them to limit their growth.
$$Bcm11
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm11I value input on the correctness of this choice (b/t the two. I am sure there are far better moves I did not see). as always, to be reviewed after the game is over.
Re: #218 Quietimes vs Ikkyu
Posted: Wed Jun 19, 2013 10:10 pm
by Phoenix
quietimes wrote: Sorry for the delay. Life caught up.
It's a crying shame. If only life could stop happening and leave us eternally to play with our gobans.
Re: #218 Quietimes vs Ikkyu
Posted: Wed Jun 19, 2013 10:18 pm
by ikkyu
$$Bcm15
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm15No problem. I know how life can get. For example, "life" is the reason I can't sleep.
Re: #218 Quietimes vs Ikkyu
Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2013 7:05 pm
by quietimes
$$Bcm15
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm15
Re: #218 Quietimes vs Ikkyu
Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2013 7:14 pm
by The Intrepid
This move does not seem good at all as it helps Black secure territory in the top right while not making the White stone any safer.
$$Wc
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Wc
Re: #218 Quietimes vs Ikkyu
Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 5:57 am
by ikkyu
Terminology question (for anyone): I believe I've seen moves like Black 13 called something like "checking approach" or "checking extension." Is this case?
Re: #218 Quietimes vs Ikkyu
Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 6:13 am
by ikkyu
$$Bcm17
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm17
I must admit that I'm a little surprised by white 16 as it seems like it helps me more than it helps QT. When I played black 13, I was concerned that the space between it and my 4-4 stone was too open. This makes it a little more secure. Plus, depending on his response, I can see a few good follow-ups for me. I thought about responding with a hane, but the scenarios I envisioned made his group stronger towards the center than I wanted without much gain for me.
$$Bcm17
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm17or
$$Bcm17
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm17Granted, I've never been any good at correctly anticipating my opponent's moves, so I may be way off.
Re: #218 Quietimes vs Ikkyu
Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 7:31 am
by skydyr
A checking extension implies that the group being checked is already somewhat stable and is being prevented from expanding. In this case, it's more of an attack since white didn't have a base yet.
Re: #218 Quietimes vs Ikkyu
Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 8:28 am
by ikkyu
skydyr wrote: A checking extension implies that the group being checked is already somewhat stable and is being prevented from expanding. In this case, it's more of an attack since white didn't have a base yet.
So a checking extension would be something like move 1 here?
$$Bc
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bc
Re: #218 Quietimes vs Ikkyu
Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 8:36 am
by skydyr
ikkyu wrote: skydyr wrote: A checking extension implies that the group being checked is already somewhat stable and is being prevented from expanding. In this case, it's more of an attack since white didn't have a base yet.
So a checking extension would be something like move 1 here?
$$Bc
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$BcYes.
Re: #218 Quietimes vs Ikkyu
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 5:17 pm
by quietimes
$$Bcm17
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm17
Re: #218 Quietimes vs Ikkyu
Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2013 6:26 am
by ikkyu
$$Bcm17
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm17
Re: #218 Quietimes vs Ikkyu
Posted: Thu Jun 27, 2013 6:41 pm
by quietimes
$$Bcm20
Click Here To Show Diagram Code [go]$$Bcm20
