Full of passionate intensity... S2W's Study journal

S2W · Post by **S2W** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:57 am

Game 15

A close-ish one. I really seem to loose in the late midgame. I'm thinking I need more higher level games if I'm going to get out of this 9k rut - so I've started a few 4k matches on dgs. Is anyone up for a dgs teaching game?

S2W · Post by **S2W** » Tue Sep 09, 2014 10:55 pm

Dig a hole, fill it up.

Bleh - been knocked back to 9k from 9k+. Fittingly enough I lost my last game by 3.5 as white in a 3 stone handicap match and a Komi of -5.5 against an opponent with 28000+ games. Which is to say ...?

I'm not sure if I'm getting stronger - I definitely lasted longer this time at 9k+ than the last time I was there, but I was so close to 8k a few weeks ago and now ...

It is frustrating. My frustration stems in part from loosing. Actually mostly from loosing if I'm honest. But I'd say a good part of it (or at least the part my self righteousness likes to fixate on) comes from the uncertainty regarding a solid metric against which to judge my progress. If I play against a club account does the rank reflect their strength? On one hand maybe not - they could be weaker or stronger. On the other hand these accounts don't seem unreasonably rated - for the most part I don't tend to loose by too much or win by too much either. My losses are usually self inflicted rather than preordained by my opponents vastly superior play. So perhaps the rank is an accurate reflection of the club zeitgeist (or perhaps just that X kyus play on the X kyu account).

Outside igs my in person games have been getting better. I can give our resident 6 dan a run for his money with 8 stones and can beat our club president a 1 kyu with 6 stones. In both cases though I feel that I'm getting better at besting their styles of go - against another two players who knows.

Oh well if the ranks are reliable then it shouldn't be too long before I get back to 9k+, and if they are not I shouldn't stress too much about the change - after all I'm playing the same level of opponent as before (an once I learn to beat one of them no one will be able to stop me and I will become a pro).

^{If I'm super honest - lack of sleep and a beer probably didn't help tonight's game either.}

Knotwilg · Post by **Knotwilg** » Wed Sep 10, 2014 12:47 am

Dig a hole, fill it up.

Bleh - been knocked back to 9k from 9k+.

In itself this is completely insignificant.

Fittingly enough I lost my last game by 3.5 as white in a 3 stone handicap match and a Komi of -5.5 against an opponent with 28000+ games. Which is to say ...?

Never mind. Did you actually change the metric of wins for a metric of close games OR wins?

I'm not sure if I'm getting stronger - I definitely lasted longer this time at 9k+ than the last time I was there, but I was so close to 8k a few weeks ago and now ...

There is not a single doubt in my mind that this is temporary variation in an overall increase of strength which will reflect itself in rank.

It is frustrating. My frustration stems in part from loosing. Actually mostly from loosing if I'm honest.

Then stop losing. Do what is required to start winning. One of these measures is not to throw away victories like the previous one, by allowing a corner to become seki. The major reason for this is "late in the game, strange things happen due to shortage of liberties". If you care about overall improvement, learn whatever you like. If you care about winning, focus on things that make a difference.

But I'd say a good part of it (or at least the part my self righteousness likes to fixate on) comes from the uncertainty regarding a solid metric against which to judge my progress.

Correct. If you can handle the "close losses + wins" metric, try it. Otherwise, do everything to win.

If I play against a club account does the rank reflect their strength? On one hand maybe not - they could be weaker or stronger. On the other hand these accounts don't seem unreasonably rated - for the most part I don't tend to loose by too much or win by too much either. My losses are usually self inflicted rather than preordained by my opponents vastly superior play. So perhaps the rank is an accurate reflection of the club zeitgeist (or perhaps just that X kyus play on the X kyu account).

If you care about this, then check out before accepting a game against them.

Outside igs my in person games have been getting better. I can give our resident 6 dan a run for his money with 8 stones and can beat our club president a 1 kyu with 6 stones. In both cases though I feel that I'm getting better at besting their styles of go - against another two players who knows.

Celebrate these victories, don't belittle them.

Oh well if the ranks are reliable then it shouldn't be too long before I get back to 9k+, and if they are not I shouldn't stress too much about the change - after all I'm playing the same level of opponent as before (an once I learn to beat one of them no one will be able to stop me and I will become a pro).

I'll comment on your game too, if you wish. Otherwise:

don't resign
don't lose on time
don't play in unfavourable conditions (time, kind of opponent)
count liberties and pay special attention in the endgame when liberties become scarce

Knotwilg · Post by **Knotwilg** » Wed Sep 10, 2014 3:31 am

Game review

S2W · Post by **S2W** » Wed Sep 10, 2014 9:00 pm

Knotwilg wrote:
Dig a hole, fill it up.

Bleh - been knocked back to 9k from 9k+.

In itself this is completely insignificant.

Only if you are a reasonable individual with a healthy perspective on the importance of the outcome of an anonymous game with a random stranger half way across the globe.

Knotwilg wrote:
Fittingly enough I lost my last game by 3.5 as white in a 3 stone handicap match and a Komi of -5.5 against an opponent with 28000+ games. Which is to say ...?

Never mind. Did you actually change the metric of wins for a metric of close games OR wins?

I guess what I wanted to highlight was that it's the uncertainty of not knowing what level I'm playing against that I'm struggling with and more broadly the uncertainty of judging my improvement.

Here and elsewhere I've read several players complain of sandbagging and the impossibility of playing against club accounts. Personally, (most if the time I don't really mind) - I play all comers with the hope I'll get stronger playing stronger players and will ~~beat up on~~ educate the weaker ones. But recently I have been getting that nagging thought - maybe you are stronger maybe you are playing against a secret dan or that one precocious 14 yr old who has the ghost of a long dead ... But I digress. Objectively though my games do not seem that unbalanced. Which then leaves my oscillating mind to the thought that I might equally likely be playing against weaker players - and still loosing. Indeed it seems that both possibilities are likely if a club has a single joint account. [/overthinking]

In any case given that club accounts exist how does one judge their performance against them? Are they truly harder, just more random, or pretty much the same as every other account? I had thought to check my own games - but I think the sample size is too small. Instead I'll try experimenting on unwilling voluntiers and pick my victims rather than auto-matching. If my theory holds that club accounts are relatively equally ranked I should come back with my tail between my legs (and go back to those easier club accounts). If there is a big disparity - 8kyu here I come.

---

In all seriousness knotwilg thanks for your words of encouragement - and excellent reviews which are more than I deserve. I had indended my original post to be a slightly pholosophical reflection on the source of my hopefully temporary frustration. On later reading though I realize it come across more as the petulant whining of a sore looser (which was probably accurate).

S2W · Post by **S2W** » Wed Sep 10, 2014 10:24 pm

Instead I'll try experimenting on unwilling voluntiers and pick my victims rather than auto-matching.

Hehe ... The best laid plans of mice and men ... I spent 20 mins challenging equal ranked players with under 1000 games but to no avail. Looks like it's auto match all the way.

Knotwilg · Post by **Knotwilg** » Thu Sep 11, 2014 12:36 am

S2W wrote:In any case given that club accounts exist how does one judge their performance against them? Are they truly harder, just more random, or pretty much the same as every other account?.

Don't think I don't know the feeling. It's more daunting to play an opponent with a free will than a bot. And it's even more daunting to play an opponent with a free will and unpredictable strength, I can imagine.

I'll always remember the quote by David Mechner "Really. Look; now I'm a 6-dan. Who cares how many games I lost when I was 5-kyu?"
See http://www.mechner.com/david/go/ in the section "attitude"

It's easier to say this when you are 6d. But if you believe that one day you should be able to make it 1d (and I'm absolutely certain anyone who is smart and diligent enough to appear on this forum, can) then the above quote should inspire you to treat those games against club accounts not as ego contests but as opportunities to play a wide range of players.

Back in the days where I started playing, the Internet didn't exist. We had to do with 6k masters in our club, only on a Monday!, or the occasional dan in a tournament. Be grateful your progress starts in an era of Go servers, anonymous and unpredictable as your opponents may be.

schawipp · Post by **schawipp** » Thu Sep 11, 2014 12:49 am

I know that feeling when a stupid endgame mistake loses a game, which should have been easily won. Just recently, I managed to let my opponent connect two big "dead" groups with each one eye in the last moment - a single move worth almost 100 points LOL (I thought about posting it in my "messy games" thread, however it's too embarrassing ;-)

).

However there is also a positive aspect: One of my local club members told me recently that a characteristics of strong players is that they instinctively recognize weaknesses of certain shapes / positions. If you learn about weaknesses "the hard way" such as the late corner seki in your last game, the memorizing effect is probably higher than if you just red about that shape in a book (I have to admit that I probably would have also fallen for the seki, but now I took a close look on that shape ;-)

). In short, those painful losses seem necessary for establishing a feeling for weak shapes and thus become stronger.

S2W · Post by **S2W** » Fri Sep 12, 2014 11:25 pm

I should not play on Fridays - two losses: 0.5 and 3.5 points. Need to work on crosscuts - that was all my opponent played in the first game and it tore me up - lucky the rest of his game was poor or I would have been well behind. In the second game I had a healthy lead but lost most of a corner (which should have been all of the corner but my opponent didn't press the advantage.

I'm thinking that reading is my biggest weakness at the moment in two regards:
1. The obvious: I need to improve my reading - it seems it's the key to getting better at any level.
2. The slightly less obvious: I need to apply my reading to my own groups not just those I'm attacking.

The basic pattern of my play at the moment is:
1. Muddle through the opening (I feel that I usually do ok and it is rare (though not unheard of) that I really muck up.
2. Do well in the early mid game
3. Obliterate my lead in the late mid game
4. Do ok (but not brilliant) in the endgame

1 2 & 4 could do with improvement - but my goal is to try to fix the biggest problems first. 3 I feel is symptomatic of my reading errors. Some of 3 is poor whole-board judgement - i.e. chasing after areas that are too small. More though it seems it is from a plan that goes bad or an "invulnerable" group that turns out not to be. Both of these problems seem to stem from a lack of tactical (small scale) judgement more than overall strategy. So better reading would help - but as important is applying that reading.

Thinking back over my last couple of games I've had moments where I've recognized a danger - but not checked it closely enough ("my group looks a little thin - hey I can attack over here!) the other symptom is not empathizing with my opponent - or underestimating them (" that's a funny looking move I wonder why he wants me to play there? Oh well let's play it and find out"). The silly thing is that usually my opponents intentions are pretty clear (hint: think of two words that sound like "kill everything") and yet I too often don't spend the time to work out how they intend to carry out their nefarious plans.

My plan:
1. Be a little less aggressive and a little more attentive to my own weak groups.
2. Respect my opponent's attacks and their potential attacks.
3. Try to appreciate the reasons behind their moves

In short my new strategy is to crush my enemies with peace, love and understanding.

S2W · Post by **S2W** » Sun Sep 14, 2014 4:00 pm

Game 16
Bout time we had a win. Actually after dropping down half a rank my win rate is up - not surprising really given how close my matches have been. I was thinking of posting this game under the title "remember your training and you will survive" ... And then I did the review...
It's not all bad - I did manage to incorporate a couple of nice little local plays I'd picked up from this site which I wouldn't have otherwise considered and I did pay a lot more attention to my opponent's intentions and the weaknesses in my own groups. However I still got too aggressive in the late mid game and created situations where I could easily have thrown the game away.

Still - I have to admit it feels good to crush my opponent after all those piddly losses.

Knotwilg · Post by **Knotwilg** » Wed Sep 17, 2014 12:51 am

Feels great huh to recognize a loose ladder, ignore a threat, win the ko AND kill the threat and its execution. Good reading wins games. Good decisions based on good reading wins more games. Well done.

S2W · Post by **S2W** » Wed Sep 17, 2014 9:36 pm

Nothing a good night sleep won't fix.

I had the day off on Monday - babysitting my infant daughter while my wife went to work. I decided to take the opportunity to play some go. Bad move. What I forgot to take into account was that I had only had 4 hours sleep the night before (and the night before that) and should not have been doing anything. 5 games and 4 losses later (two in a row at 1.5 points) I snapped. 4 games and 4 more losses (complete blow outs) after that I decided that it was time to put down the iPod and take a little break. Clearly self control is not my strong point when I'm tired.

As painful as my little tantrum was it made me reconsider my game play - which to be honest has been on a bit of a slow decline for a while. Frankly I think the best game I've posted was the first one. Going back over that game I was struck by how solid/defensive I was playing compared to my later games - and I think that's the key to where I've been going wrong. Anyway after a good night sleep and trying a more solid game style I've now got three straight wins under my belt. It's still a way to go to get out if the hole I've dug but I think I'm on a better track (cue the next loosing streak).

Charles Matthews · Post by **Charles Matthews** » Thu Sep 18, 2014 1:34 pm

S2W wrote:Game 16
Bout time we had a win.

(;GM[1]FF[4]SZ[19]AP[SmartGo Kifu:3.4.1]CA[UTF-8]
GN[j12345 - S2W]
PW[j12345]WR[7k]
PB[S2W]BR[9k]
DT[2014/09/14]
HA[2]
KM[-5.5]
RE[B+R]
RU[Japanese]
AB[pd][dp]CH[1];W[dd];B[pp];W[qn];B[nq];W[qq]
C[Seems like an overplay ];B[qp];W[rp];B[ro]
C[Elsewhere überdude, Bill, or Charles recommended blocking this way - let's see how it goes ]
;W[rq];B[qo];W[rn];B[so];W[or];B[pq];W[pr];B[pn]
C[I'm a little worried about the cut]MA[oq];W[ql];B[pm];W[qg];B[qe]
C[I was thinking this would let me try r11later];W[jc];B[qm]
C[Trying to build a wall];W[rm];B[pl];W[qk];B[nr]
C[Pretty sure this is sente];W[qs]
C[White thinks so too];B[cn]
C[Build on a large scale];W[gq]
(;B[iq]
C[Not sure about this ];W[kq]
C[White wants to make it complicated ];B[io]
C[I'm still worried about the cut but this seems more important];W[ko];B[go]
;W[dr];B[cq];W[cr];B[br];W[dq]
C[Thanks to knotwilg for pointing out the hane];B[cp];W[ep];B[eo];W[fp];B[fo]
;W[hr];B[cf];W[ch]
C[Build a wall, extend from the wall, white jumps in - seems we are setting up a pattern here]
;B[cc]
C[Not convinced this was the right idea];W[df]
C[This was strange though - I figure white is trying to get some influence]
;B[cd];W[ce];B[be];W[de];B[dc]
C[Top seems more important than my one stone.];W[bf];B[bd];W[cg];B[fc];W[cl]
(;B[bl];W[bk];B[bm];W[ck];B[mc];W[je];B[hc]
C[I wanted to rob white of a base and have a way to jump into whites potential territory]
MA[fd:he][gf];W[nc]
C[Erg contact play];B[oc]
C[There's not slit if territory in this game and I have Komi I want to keep my corner.]
;W[nb]
(;B[ob]
C[Too defensive];W[nd];B[jm]
C[Trying to surround white and make something in the middle];W[ir];B[jq]
;W[jr];B[lp]
C[Still worried about the cut - this doesn't fix but it helps]
(;W[kp];B[lm];W[mp];B[np];W[mo];B[nm];W[fl]
C[White us building on the lhs];B[qi];W[pi];B[pk];W[qj];B[pj];W[ri];B[oi]
;W[ph]
(;B[gj]
C[Too far - but I had a couple of ways to run];W[hk];B[ij];W[hj]
(;B[jk];W[hi];B[gf];W[fg];B[gg];W[gh];B[ff];W[fh];B[ef];W[eg];B[mf]
C[Too far/too soon]
(;W[kh]
C[White calls my bluff but I think this is a mistake];B[md]
(;W[ne];B[me];W[pf]
C[Another bad move by white];B[nf];W[oe];B[nh];W[kj]
(;B[ji]
C[This was silly but I got lucky]
(;W[ki];B[ii];W[ih];B[jh];W[jg];B[ig];W[hh];B[kg];W[jf];B[lg];W[kl];B[jl]
;W[km];B[jn]
(;W[kk];B[kn];W[ln]
(;B[mm];W[ik];B[jj];W[ho];B[hn];W[hp];B[gn];W[hg];B[if]
C[I figured that right was bigger than left if I could get my stones out]
MA[ia:kc][lc:lf][jd:jg][kd:kf]TR[fd:gf][ee:ef][gg];W[hf];B[ie];W[id];B[he]
(;W[ge];B[hd];W[fd]
(;B[gd]
C[Played here to try to connect my x stones and keep sente - well one of those was true]
MA[cc:cd][dc][fc][hc:he][bd:be][gd][ie:ig];W[ee]
(;B[mb]
C[I kept sente];W[ec];B[eb]
C[Ko - nuts];W[fb];B[ed];W[im]
C[Yup that's a threat];B[in];W[ec];B[ic]
C[I figured I couldn't keep it all but I might keep both groups alive this way]
(;W[jd]
C[White wants it all];B[ed]
(;W[dn]
C[Not a threat];B[fe];W[do];B[dm];W[en];B[em]
C[Loose ladder about the first time I've identified and played one in game]
;W[cm];B[bn];W[ma];B[la];W[na];B[lb]
(;W[pb]
C[Was expecting this];B[qb];W[oa];B[pe];W[of];B[pc];W[pa];B[rc];W[qa];B[ra]
C[Alive now I think];W[rf]
(;B[re];W[sb];B[rb])
(;B[rd]
C[Paranoia - but end of game]))
(;W[qc]
C[Does 33 kill?];B[qb]
(;W[pb];B[pc])
(;W[rc];B[rb];W[re];B[rf];W[sf];B[rd]
C[Maybe not ])))
(;W[pb]
C[A threat]))
(;W[gc];B[jd];W[db];B[cb];W[ea];B[ba];W[ab];B[ac];W[ae];B[bb]
C[Seems ok]))
(;B[ec];W[mb]
(;B[lb];W[lc];B[kc];W[kb];B[ld];W[la];B[lc];W[ka])
(;B[kc];W[kb];B[lb];W[la];B[lc];W[ka])
(;B[kb];W[kc];B[lb];W[lc]
(;B[ib];W[jb];B[ja];W[ka];B[la];W[ma])
(;B[jb];W[ib];B[ic]
(;W[ia];B[hb]
C[This works])
(;W[hb];B[jd]
(;W[ja];B[kd];W[ka];B[ld];W[la];B[ia];W[ha];B[gb];W[ia];B[ga];W[ma])
(;W[kd];B[ke];W[id];B[gc];W[ja];B[ld];W[ka];B[jd]
C[Also ok]))))))
(;B[mb];W[ec];B[eb];W[gc];B[gb];W[fb];B[fa];W[hb];B[ga];W[ha];B[ea];W[db]
;B[fc]
C[Ko fight and who wants one of those]))
(;W[hd];B[ge];W[gd];B[fd]))
(;B[mn]))
(;W[kn];B[kk];W[lk];B[ll]))
(;W[jj]
(;B[ki];W[ii];B[ik];W[li];B[jh];W[jg];B[ih];W[ig])
(;B[ii];W[ik];B[jl];W[ih];B[ki])
(;B[ik];W[ii];B[jh];W[jg]
C[Loose ladder - no way out]
(;B[ih];W[ig])
(;B[ki];W[li]))))
(;B[ii]
C[Better I think];W[ih];B[jh];W[ji];B[jg]))
(;W[me];B[ne];W[le];B[mb];W[oe];B[nf];W[od];B[pf]))
(;W[md];B[le];W[ld];B[ke];W[kd];B[jg];W[ng]
C[White has this];B[mg];W[jh]
C[And this]))
(;B[ii])
(;B[ik]))
(;B[gk])
(;B[fj])
(;B[hk]
C[Too soft])
(;B[fk]
C[Oooh maybe even a contact play];W[gk];B[gl];W[fj];B[hk];W[gj];B[hj];W[hi]
;B[ii];W[ih];B[ji];W[gh];B[gf]))
(;W[oq];B[op];W[np];B[no];W[mp];B[mo];W[mq];B[lq];W[mr];B[lr];W[ns];B[kp]
))
(;B[nd]))
(;B[cj]
C[I considered this also];W[el];B[ej]
C[But jumping out seems to hurt me as much as white]))
(;B[eq];W[jq]
C[Not sure how to respond also there's still the cut]
(;B[ko];W[lq];B[lp])
(;B[lq])))

Black seems to play well enough to deserve the win here; but there are many points of technique.

:b14:

basically helps White.

:b22:

Just play

(123 principle), if anything here.

:b46:

The play at J2 is enormous, and is sente too with the threat of F2.

:b48:

Not quite sure what I'd play here (but not 3-3). One point jump at E14 can't be bad. Contact at D12 looks interesting. At C16 aiming to set up a ko is my style: White is so thin elsewhere.

:b50:

Too kind to allow White some good shape. I'd play one point below and let White figure out what to do.

:b54:

No, connect at B14 threatening to cut first.

:b56:

Actually small: go to F17 immediately.

:b60:

Why? This is too early and you could have lost sente.

:b64:

is good go.

:b66:

But J2 is ever more urgent.

:b78:

is not that big. How would White cope if Black now invaded at R11?

:b86:

You have to play Q12 or R12.

At :b92:

White has no vulnerable groups, having potentially had three! At Black 124 it looks like the wrong atari, but Black has demonstrated some spirit, and White is suddenly in a mess. So the game turns around.

Uberdude · Post by **Uberdude** » Thu Sep 18, 2014 2:43 pm

The push of 14 is a very common beginner mistake: You should block as below (or sometimes 1 at 2). The very important point is white is not alive in sente here, he needs to spend a move to live in gote (as an exercise how to kill if tenuki?) If you played the marked stone at a instead to pressure the outside stones more then white can tenuki as b in sente helps the corner live.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$B $$ . . . . . . . . . . | $$ . . . . . . . . . . | $$ . . . . . . . O O a | $$ . . . . . . . X X B | $$ , . . . . 3 X X O b | $$ . . . . X 2 . O O . | $$ . . . . 1 O . . . . | $$ . . . . . . . . . . | $$ --------------------+[/go]

Why did you push? Because it is sente? That is not a good reason. As you noted it doesn't even fix the cut in your knight's move. It actually achieves next to nothing for black, or maybe even worse than nothing in losing a liberty and ko threat. As a simple tewari, where would you rather black had a stone: a or b?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$B $$ . . . . . . . . . . | $$ . . . . . . . . . . | $$ . . . . . . . O O . | $$ . . . . . . . X X X | $$ , . . . . . X X O . | $$ . . . . X . b O O . | $$ . . . . a O W . . . | $$ . . . . . . . . . . | $$ --------------------+[/go]

P.S. o2 in the game was not sente (black only threatens a multistep ko)

S2W · Post by **S2W** » Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:14 pm

Charles - thanks for the review - that j2 move in particular - so big and obvious (after it was shown) - it's hard to believe we both ignored it for so long.

Your point about strengthening my opponent's weak groups is also well taken - and a weakness in my game. I need to avoid attacking just for the sake of free moves - which also feeds back into überdude's comment.

Life In 19x19

Full of passionate intensity... S2W's Study journal

Re: Full of passionate intensity... S2W's Study journal

Re: Full of passionate intensity... S2W's Study journal

Re: Full of passionate intensity... S2W's Study journal

Re: Full of passionate intensity... S2W's Study journal

Re: Full of passionate intensity... S2W's Study journal

Re: Full of passionate intensity... S2W's Study journal

Re: Full of passionate intensity... S2W's Study journal

Re: Full of passionate intensity... S2W's Study journal

Re: Full of passionate intensity... S2W's Study journal

Re: Full of passionate intensity... S2W's Study journal

Re: Full of passionate intensity... S2W's Study journal

Re: Full of passionate intensity... S2W's Study journal

Re: Full of passionate intensity... S2W's Study journal

Re: Full of passionate intensity... S2W's Study journal

Re: Full of passionate intensity... S2W's Study journal