BlindGroup Study Journal

BlindGroup · Post by **BlindGroup** » Sat Aug 18, 2018 1:41 pm

Bill Spight wrote:What sequence does Leela project after our play?

Surprisingly, she expects the exact moves from the game up until

where she stops her analysis. I guess she disagrees with the idea that the running group is more valuable than the influence from surrounding white. And given that Leela seems to be less enamoured of influence than humans are, that seems surprising. Go figure!

Bill Spight · Post by **Bill Spight** » Sat Aug 18, 2018 2:47 pm

BlindGroup wrote:
Bill Spight wrote:What sequence does Leela project after our play?
Surprisingly, she expects the exact moves from the game up until where she stops her analysis. I guess she disagrees with the idea that the running group is more valuable than the influence from surrounding white. And given that Leela seems to be less enamoured of influence than humans are, that seems surprising. Go figure!

Verrrrrry interesting.

Live and learn.

I would have thought that a one eyed group running out while the opponent made territory was pretty bad, especially with bad shape to boot. And I like influence.

BTW, the idea that today's top bots like influence less than today's humans does not fit my observations. Just the opposite, IMO. They do challenge my ideas about thickness and influence, however. But that's not the same thing.

Example: The early 3-3 invasions of the 4-4. At first, that seems to say that the bots like territory more than influence, since those invasions had a bad name. But the now old joseki had the invader make a hane-and-connect on the second line to live in sente. In that same position today's bots don't do that, except perhaps in some special cases. Instead, they crawl once more on the second line. Doing so does not give up as much influence as the recently obsolete joseki.

I think that humans have a lot to learn about influence from today's bots, and the bots to come.

BlindGroup · Post by **BlindGroup** » Sun Aug 19, 2018 9:38 am

Bill Spight wrote:Verrrrrry interesting. Live and learn.

I would have thought that a one eyed group running out while the opponent made territory was pretty bad, especially with bad shape to boot. And I like influence.

I feel like this highlights the major weakness of AI -- We know it disagrees with us. We suspect that in this particularly situation Leela is more likely to be right that we are. But we have no idea *why* she likes this move. Is there a general principle involved? Does is critically depend on the details of the board situation? It's really hard to tell.

I have a lot of time for go this weekend, and I spent some more time on this. My best guess is that she sees the surrounded corner group as being less valuable than you do. Comparing the size of the corner group to the one in your sequence, D results in a larger group, C results in a similarly sized group, B results in a smaller group, and in A, white abandons the corner. Oddly though, D is only considered to be slightly worse than A (62.66pp vs 63.60).

Color me confused! But I'm going to declare this assessment to be over my head given my current skill set and move on... I trust both your and Leela's judgement over my own. So, when you all disagree, I'm at a loss

BlindGroup · Post by **BlindGroup** » Sun Aug 19, 2018 10:01 am

Not posting this to request comments on the entire game. (I'm trying to post as a commitment strategy to get me back into the habit of carefully reviewing my games.) But I do have one question below about a move that Leela does not like, but that seemed good to me.

Game:

Leela's winrate estimates:

There are two major areas where Leela felt I messed up:

1. Moves 13-14. Leela did not like the way I handled the non-joseki

. However, her preferred sequence is well beyond my reading abilities. So, I'm not going to worry about this right now.

2. Moves 85-111. My opponent and I both missed a weakness in my wall that was quite valuable and could have equalized the game. I think that this was in our skill set, and we should have seen it.

Questionable move:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wc $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . O X . O X . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . O X X . . . . , . . . X . X . O . | $$ | . O . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a . O . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . X 2 X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . 7 5 3 . . . . . | $$ | . X . . . . . . . . . 6 B . O . O O . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . O X . | $$ | . . X O . . O . O , . . . . . X X . . | $$ | . . X O . X . . O . X . . X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

I played the cap, and then the game proceeded as shown. Leela seems to prefer A (6 percent winrate difference). Interestingly, she predicted the same moves that were played in the game, except she would have played 6 and 8. And after A, she expects white to tenuki. Anyone see why A might be better?

BlindGroup · Post by **BlindGroup** » Sun Aug 19, 2018 10:40 am

If someone had time, I would appreciate thoughts on this one from yesterday.

My opponent staked out a seemingly reasonable but wide and thin positions in the fuseki. I decided to take a much more aggressive approach than normal in the early middle game and not surprisingly, fighting ensued. On the whole, I was very happy with my play. However, Leela was not very helpful because with the fighting she kept reading out sequences and expecting sequences that were beyond our level. But I think she generally agreed with my direction of play. The winrate is in black's favor almost the entire game. This is my third comfortable win against opponents who are usually ranked much higher than I am. I'm starting to wonder if I might be leveling up. We'll see...

Leela Winrate:

Game:

explo · Post by **explo** » Sun Aug 19, 2018 11:20 am

BlindGroup wrote:
Not posting this to request comments on the entire game. (I'm trying to post as a commitment strategy to get me back into the habit of carefully reviewing my games.) But I do have one question below about a move that Leela does not like, but that seemed good to me.

Game:

Leela's winrate estimates:
2018-08-19b W IGS 6k Leela WR.png
There are two major areas where Leela felt I messed up:

1. Moves 13-14. Leela did not like the way I handled the non-joseki . However, her preferred sequence is well beyond my reading abilities. So, I'm not going to worry about this right now.

2. Moves 85-111. My opponent and I both missed a weakness in my wall that was quite valuable and could have equalized the game. I think that this was in our skill set, and we should have seen it.

Questionable move:
$$Wc
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . O X . O X . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . O X X . . . . , . . . X . X . O . |
$$ | . O . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a . O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . X 2 X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . 7 5 3 . . . . . |
$$ | . X . . . . . . . . . 6 B . O . O O . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . O X . |
$$ | . . X O . . O . O , . . . . . X X . . |
$$ | . . X O . X . . O . X . . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wc $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . O X . O X . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . O X X . . . . , . . . X . X . O . | $$ | . O . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a . O . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . X 2 X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . 7 5 3 . . . . . | $$ | . X . . . . . . . . . 6 B . O . O O . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . O X . | $$ | . . X O . . O . O , . . . . . X X . . | $$ | . . X O . X . . O . X . . X . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]
I played the cap, and then the game proceeded as shown. Leela seems to prefer A (6 percent winrate difference). Interestingly, she predicted the same moves that were played in the game, except she would have played 6 and 8. And after A, she expects white to tenuki. Anyone see why A might be better?

"A" helps to develop the top side while keeping pressure on both white groups. Your marked move pressures one of the white groups but how is it exactly helping you make points is not that clear. It ends up on a neutral point. It doesn't threaten another group/start a double attack.

Bill Spight · Post by **Bill Spight** » Sun Aug 19, 2018 12:36 pm

A few comments, addressing a couple of questions.

Main focus: Avoid strengthening your opponent.

Actually, in this game it may have been more like, keep your opponent weak. You let your opponent strengthen himself in some instances.

Edit: I forgot to say, see variation at

.

Bill Spight · Post by **Bill Spight** » Sun Aug 19, 2018 12:59 pm

BlindGroup wrote: My opponent staked out a seemingly reasonable but wide and thin positions in the fuseki. I decided to take a much more aggressive approach than normal in the early middle game and not surprisingly, fighting ensued. On the whole, I was very happy with my play. However, Leela was not very helpful because with the fighting she kept reading out sequences and expecting sequences that were beyond our level.

Oh, darn!

This is my third comfortable win against opponents who are usually ranked much higher than I am. I'm starting to wonder if I might be leveling up. We'll see...

I don't know how responsive IGS's rating system is now. It used to be horrible in that regard. Still, it may be time to open a new account at 4 kyu and see how it goes.

BlindGroup · Post by **BlindGroup** » Sun Aug 19, 2018 1:08 pm

Bill Spight wrote:A few comments, addressing a couple of questions.

Main focus: Avoid strengthening your opponent.

Thanks, Bill! Those comments on the fuseki moves in the upper left were especially helpful.

Bill Spight · Post by **Bill Spight** » Sun Aug 19, 2018 1:57 pm

BlindGroup wrote:
Bill Spight wrote:A few comments, addressing a couple of questions.

Main focus: Avoid strengthening your opponent.
Thanks, Bill! Those comments on the fuseki moves in the upper left were especially helpful.

De nada.

I also edited the post just now.

BlindGroup · Post by **BlindGroup** » Fri Aug 24, 2018 5:45 am

Had some time to play last night. Since I had just ranked up in KGS with the rankings change, I decided to play there.

Played someone one stone stronger and it was a close game. I made some large mistakes, but my opponent failed to capitalize. In the end, I put the nail in the coffin with a 10+ point move in the late endgame.

Main problem was poor direction of play:
Move 17: I should have settled rather than leave a weakness that my opponent could take advantage of at move 44.
Move 33+: I should have aimed to keep white's groups separate.
Move 43: I split when I should have pressed.
Move 69: I should have more aggressively threatened white's upper right group.
Move 101: This was played WAY to deep. I misread the sector line...
Move 119: I shouldn't have split. Should have attacked from the outside and forced white to connect.

On the plus side, I did manage to out-read my opponent a few times:
Move 101+: I managed to get my too deep invasion to safety.
Move 147+: I made shape by avoiding an immediate connection at E12.
Move 201: Although I stupidly played a smaller move first, this set up the game ending move 205.

Leela's persective:

She thought I took an early lead, but then sqandered it: first by not attacking white's upper right group properly and then by invading too deep with move 101. I then earned the lead back by outplaying my opponent in the end game. Leela pointed out that I missed some big endgame moves, but then she missed black 205

Edit: I had mistakenly uploaded an earlier version of the game. Latest one is now provided.

BlindGroup · Post by **BlindGroup** » Fri Aug 24, 2018 5:47 pm

Tried two new things today:

1. At Bill's suggestion, I created a new account and tried playing on IGS at 4k. The game went quite well! I played someone at 3k+ (who seems to normally be 2k), and managed to win by 9.5.
2. I tried reviewing with Lizzie rather than Leela. Not sure I'm strong enough to really appreciate the difference though

The Game

Lizzie's Assessment

Review

In the review I did by myself, the only move that I could find that I didn't like was black 18. Looking up the sequence in pro-games, players in this situation seem to treat the high approach stone lightly and build influence with the group attached to the low approach stone with A.

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

At the time, I was very happy with black 46, but Lizzie makes it clear that any influence I gain from the move could be quickly eliminated. Lizzie thinks I should have played to strengthen my running group. I think I can see that now.

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

Turns out, though, that Lizzie really liked black 62.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wc $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X O O . X O . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . X . . X . O . . . . . O . . . . . | $$ | . X O O O X . . . O . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . X . . . X . . . . . . O . . . . . | $$ | . . X O O . . . . O . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . X O . X . . . O . . X . . . . . | $$ | . . . X O . . X . X O . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X O . O O . X . . 6 . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . X O . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . O . . . X O . X . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . O . . X . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . | $$ | . O . X . . . . . , . B 3 2 . X . . . | $$ | . . O . . X . . X . O 1 5 O . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

Overall, Lizzie seems to think that I was initially ahead, but fell behind by not doing enough to defend my running group. Once that group is settled and following black 62, the game tilted back in my favor for good.

BlindGroup · Post by **BlindGroup** » Sat Aug 25, 2018 11:47 am

Another game at IGS 4k and another win!

Lizzie's take:

I misplayed the joseki in the upper left. Lizzie didn't think the initial mistakes were too bad, but move 37 really set me behind. White then misplayed in the upper right creating a weak group, and according to Lizzie, I was back on top by move 87. We then ended up in a running fight. I built a lot of territory on the right, but Lizzie points out that I needed to play more solidly to protect my running group. Most of the decline in win rate starting around move 125 were due to white having an opportunity to take advantage of my weakness. In the end, I came out a bit ahead in the fight and had what looked to me like a solid 10 point lead. My opponent then failed to make eyes when he should have been able to do so, and the kill ended the game.

Things I did well:
1. Following the mess in the upper left, I think my overally direction of play was fairly good.
2. I had some good reads: the play in the lower left corner, getting into white's territory starting with move 163, and finally, killing white's group.
3. I was rightly cautious about going for the kill of white's group. White could have lived until move 210.

Things I did poorly:
1. I had some serious shape problems. Most notable were moves 37 and 89.
2. I needed to do a better job of keeping my running group solid. White could have done very well if he had attacked it correctly.
3. My play in the upper left corner.

ez4u · Post by **ez4u** » Sat Aug 25, 2018 8:02 pm

BlindGroup wrote:Another game at IGS 4k and another win!
...

Things I did well:
...
2. I had some good reads: the play in the lower left corner, getting into white's territory starting with move 163, and finally, killing white's group.
...

The lower left is dead if White cuts at D2, so better shift this to the "did poorly" list?

Bill Spight · Post by **Bill Spight** » Sat Aug 25, 2018 10:58 pm

Congratulations.

Added a few comments.

Second Dave.

Edit: Added some more variations.

Life In 19x19

BlindGroup Study Journal

Re: BlindGroup Study Journal

Re: BlindGroup Study Journal

Re: BlindGroup Study Journal

Re: BlindGroup Study Journal

Re: BlindGroup Study Journal

Re: BlindGroup Study Journal

Re: BlindGroup Study Journal

Re: BlindGroup Study Journal

Re: BlindGroup Study Journal

Re: BlindGroup Study Journal

Re: BlindGroup Study Journal

Re: BlindGroup Study Journal

Re: BlindGroup Study Journal

Re: BlindGroup Study Journal

Re: BlindGroup Study Journal