Page 1 of 13

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

Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2014 10:44 pm
by S2W
Hello and welcome to my study journal!

I'm hoping to use this thread to shamelessly profit from the collective wisdom of unpaid help, glory in my undeserved victories, publicly wallow in my private humiliation, share a few of my games.

But first a little about me - I've been playing go seriously for a little more than a year though I was aware of the game much earlier. I'm most often on IGS and DGS - I also play on wbaduk and very infrequently on ogs. Please feel free to friend me on any of them (I like playing friendly/teaching(if you can call my advice teaching) matches on dgs and I rant about my losses on my igs journal). My rank is all over the place: 9k Igs, 7k dgs, 16k wbaduk - the last one I save for after a beer or two when I'm tired.

My dream is to get to 1 dan before I'm 40 - which could be interesting as I'm 37 now, but it's fun to have a goal. Hopefully sharing a few games will help me to crush all that come before me, improve a little ... (no let's stick with the first one ;) ).

Anyway I hope you enjoy my games or at least get a laugh out of some of them.

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

Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2014 11:13 pm
by S2W
Kicking it off with a win.

In general I felt pretty good about this game against another 9k on igs (the name has been changed to protect the innocent). I have been trying to play more of a solid/patient game - aiming for points rather than trying to kill everything. Here I think I managed to do it - or at least do it a little better than my usual style of play (so much so that I was inspired to start this journal to see if I was on the right track). Of course now that I've shown it here I'm sure that I'll learn something different ;) . In any case all thoughts and comments are appreciated.

One thing I do need to improve is my ability to count - despite feeling pretty good about the game my rough estimate put me at ~4 points ahead near the end, but I finished up winning by around 16.


Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2014 11:36 pm
by EdLee

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

Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2014 12:25 pm
by Charles Matthews
S2W wrote:In any case all thoughts and comments are appreciated.


Up to :b57: I quite like the way Black is playing. Here Black really must try to separate White on the outside, for a strategic win.

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

Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2014 4:28 pm
by mitsun
This was a fine game for you, with very nice play in the opening. The first move I might quibble with is :b33:, which looks like a slight over-play. Getting the first play on the left side is a fine idea, but how far should you extend?

    Suppose you make a minimal extension to C12 or D12, and W responds with his own extension to C10 or D10. That trade would probably be fair, as both sides get proper extensions from their starting frameworks. Perhaps the result is slightly better for W, as he gets a bit more territory, backed up by his extra strength in that direction.

    Now consider extending just one line farther, to C11 or D11. Suppose W again responds locally with an extension to C9 or D9. Clearly this exchange is good for B, as the W position is too narrow and over-concentrated. Given this good result, there is no need for B to make a longer extension.

    The actual game move (D10) is so close to the W position that no W player will be tempted to respond locally at C8 or D8. So W will certainly consider invading, as in the game. The invasion leads to a difficult fight for both sides.

    Now go back to the idea of extending to C11 or D11. This time W will have a much harder time invading at C13 or D13. His invasion stone will come under much stronger attack, and the pincered B stone will be in much less danger, with room for a modest extension to C8 if needed.

Many times in Go you want to make a move which makes it hard for your opponent to find a good response, or which gives you a slightly better result if your opponent makes the obvious reponse. Extending to C12 or D12 is too cold, giving your opponent a simple and good option to respond at C11 or D11. Extending to C10 or D10 is too hot, making it obvious to your opponent that an invasion is called for, and that invasion leads to an uncertain result. Extending to C11 or D11 is just right, making it hard for your opponent to choose between extending (accepting a slightly inferior result) or invading (accepting a more difficult fight).

:b67: was a very nice dan-level move, extending your position while limiting your opponent. Somewhere around here would be a perfect time to estimate the score, to see if this is enough to win. Based on your score estimate, you can push harder if needed or play more conservatively if that is still good enough to win.

:b153: was almost the only blunder in the game. What would happen if W cut at C18 and started a ko? B risks losing a lot, while W risks almost nothing. The entire corner could conceivably die (W ignores a ko threat, B makes good on the ko threat, W then gets another move in the corner). This would be a sad result after outplaying your opponent most of the game. Falling back to C18 costs two points, compared to the actual game result, and is necessary to avoid the ko danger.

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

Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2014 9:11 pm
by S2W
Thanks for the great comments - and so fast - amazing!

Looking round the site a bit more I've noticed that people tend to embed comment when posting sgf - I'll try to remember to do that for future posts. Also this game was unrepresentative - I'll look for something to deflate my ego with next time (shouldn't be too hard...)

Ed:
Move 23: I was a little worried about the double-hane with the pincer stone - but I guess the idea would be to just trap it if I got a ponuki.

Move 33: I was wondering about the two space jump - I definitely need to think more about moves where I can profit from an unequal trade and keep sente.

Charles:
I agree. Thinking back to the game the move was motivated by a desire to try to keep my group alive - I have a little PTSD from seeing too many good corners die.

Mitsun:
I like the idea of "Goldilocks" moves to work out what to play on the side - I'll be trying it out in the future!

And that ko - ouch - thanks for pointing it out.

Posted: Sat Aug 16, 2014 1:24 am
by EdLee
S2W wrote:Move 23: I was a little worried about the double-hane with the pincer stone
The double hane is normal. Good to study the variations and get used to them.

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

Posted: Sat Aug 16, 2014 10:28 pm
by S2W
Undeserved victory/ Drunken master

Two wins today - neither really worthy of review - the first was a two stone handicap that was an absolute train wreck for me from start to finish ... until my opponent resigned in the endgame. I'm guessing it was a wifi tesuji because he was having connection problems through the game. The second was a slightly tipsy blitz match on wbaduk which might be worth a quick look if I can work out how to get the gibo/kifu off my ipod. Mostly my play was my usual deer in the headlights blitz style - but I did manage to pull off a nice little invasion to carry the match by 4 points.

I can't boast too much - my rank on wbaduk is horribly depressed compared toy rank on other servers (17-16 kyu). In part this is because I don't treat it as seriously, but also I'm terrible at blitz games. Any advice on whether this is something to be concerned about, and if so how to get better at blitz?

Posted: Sat Aug 16, 2014 11:02 pm
by EdLee
S2W wrote:how to get better at blitz?
Blitz, 90 minutes, or 8 hours: work on the basics (fundamentals).

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

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2014 1:47 pm
by S2W
Handicap double header

Two back to back igs handicap games. In the first, a two stone handicap against a 7kyu, I blow a reasonably good opening by mucking up a fight in the upper right - poor direction of play and poor reading. In game 2, a three stone handicap I fair better - making good use of my thickness to drive down into his moyo.

Game 1:


Game 2


Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2014 2:53 pm
by EdLee
Hi S2W,

In game 1 with Xxxxa, if on :b6: you kicked at E3 as in your variation, and W replied with the normal extend F4 in your variation,
then you are happy about this exchange: W is very inefficient. Distinguish between helping W make good shape,
versus forcing W into an inefficient shape -- the :b6: E3 - :w7: F4 exchange is good for B, bad for W.
( :w5: was probably strange. ) After that, in your variation, :b8: at E6 feels a little slow. Tenuki instead.

:b10: did you consider K3/K4 area to attack W's only weak group ?

:b18: big but not urgent (F17 and E14 directions are miai -- you cannot get both anyway): did you look at Q9/R9 area ?
That's W's only remaining big area, there is no miai for that -- compare with the difference of F17-E14 miai.

:b20: this shape is not great: locally, C15 kosumi is better shape. Also, did you notice W has a weakness at Q9 ?

:b26: your comment was correct: this feels strange.

:b32: yes, reply locally. Did you consider the E7 hane (head of enemy stones) ?
Your :b32: is a big point, of course, but did you notice the 2 weaknesses at H17 and M17 (miai, again, for W) ?

:b34: unbearable.

:b42: did you consider E7 atari ?

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

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2014 3:31 pm
by Bill Spight
A few comments on game 1. :)


Re: Re:

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2014 8:36 pm
by S2W
Ed, Bill thanks again for the fast responses. Bill - I'm going over your review now and will post replies below.

EdLee wrote:In game 1 with Xxxxa, if on :b6: you kicked at E3 as in your variation, and W replied with the normal extend F4 in your variation,
then you are happy about this exchange: W is very inefficient. Distinguish between helping W make good shape,
versus forcing W into an inefficient shape -- the :b6: E3 - :w7: F4 exchange is good for B, bad for W.
( :w5: was probably strange. ) After that, in your variation, :b8: at E6 feels a little slow. Tenuki instead.

This is something I need to work on - intellectually I've heard the arguments for making your opponent over-concentrated, but in the heat of the game I find the allure of a future monkey jump is hard to pass up.

EdLee wrote::b10: did you consider K3/K4 area to attack W's only weak group ?

:b18: big but not urgent (F17 and E14 directions are miai -- you cannot get both anyway): did you look at Q9/R9 area ?
That's W's only remaining big area, there is no miai for that -- compare with the difference of F17-E14 miai.

I guess I'm always a little wary of taking the fight to white to early in a handicap game. My strategy is to play defensively because I found I tend to loose handicap games because I've let a big group get killed (case in point) or it's been isolated and had to run across half the board to safety. In the early part of this game I felt pretty good about my position on the top and lhs - and I had a living group inside whites moyo - so I was thinking I would save an invasion/reduction of white for later - or just profit from an extra move if white went to fix. That said I didn't even think of k4 and r9 was more what I was thinking about in terms of an invasion if it came to it.

EdLee wrote::b20: this shape is not great: locally, C15 kosumi is better shape. Also, did you notice W has a weakness at Q9 ?

Good to know that the kosumi is the better option - I'd wondered about it at the time but I was fuzzy on which was the correct choice.

EdLee wrote::b32: yes, reply locally. Did you consider the E7 hane (head of enemy stones) ?
Your :b32: is a big point, of course, but did you notice the 2 weaknesses at H17 and M17 (miai, again, for W) ?

For e7 see below (fear of loosing corner). I realized the actual point I played was weak, but I was hoping to invite an invasion and profit while running it out (not dying horribly would have been a much better response than the one I came up with though). Would playing at L16 been a better move locally?

EdLee wrote::b42: did you consider E7 atari ?

I was looking at it for a while, but I chickened out because I wasn't sure how alive my corner was. In the end I thought my opponent would either have to fix (and give me sente) or I'd hit it once the corner was 100%.

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

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2014 9:28 pm
by S2W
Bill thanks again for the review - I got a lot out of all of it (and I'm slapping myself even more over the corner).

I wanted to ask you about one point in particular. More than all the others your variation to move 10 made me aware of a big hole in my go knowledge.

Namely: When should you use a double approach?

I realized I don't really understand it's purpose other than as a response to a tenuchi. In the context of this game though is there something that makes it better than playing R6 directly? Or should I think of it as being a correction to a mistake made by playing move 10 the way I did?

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2014 10:20 pm
by EdLee
S2W wrote:When should you use a double approach?
Hi S2W,

A very common trap: I myself also fell into it the first few years.
I would also ask similar questions — see if you can spot the trap —
when to tenuki ? when to invade ? when to reduce ?
when to cut ? when to jump ? when to extend (nobi) ?
when to connect ? when to push ? when to hane ? when to connect solidly ?
when to fix with a tiger's mouth ? when to not fix at all ?!
when to attach (contact enemy stones) ? when not to attach ? ...
( the list is almost endless. )

This is the trap: I was looking for some general, nebulous
one-size-fit all answer. Because that would be so convenient !
Learn it once, apply forever, in many ( or ALL ) situations.

There is no such thing in Go.

A generic one-size-fit-all reply: when it's good for you.
Another version: it depends. ( Depends on what, you may ask. Reply: Exactly. )

Other common variations: when the trade is good for you;
when you gain more territory than your opponent;
when you gain more power than your opponent;
when good aji is more important (than other factors);
when it's better for yose (later);
when you cannot lose the cutting stones;
when you should just give up the useless stones;
when eyespace is more important (than other factors);
when no ko threats is more important (than other factors);
... the list goes on endlessly, again.

Adults ask questions like these. Adults love general patterns, general guidelines. Proverbs.

Kids don't (usually) ask these questions.
A teacher would show a double approach to a child; the child accepts it.
The next time, the teacher shows another double approach in another situation; the child accepts it.
Yet another time, the teacher shows when a double approach is bad in another situation; the child accepts it.
Over time, over tens and hundreds and thousands of different situations, the child gains experience.

This is how a child learns to walk. The child does not ask, "When do I put my left foot forward?"
"When do I put my right foot forward?" "When do I skip (instead of a regular step)?"
"When do I stop (all together)?!" "When do I step sideways? "
"When do I step backwards?" The child walks, and falls -- rinse and repeat.

This is a perennial discussion -- many many threads, thousands of words (and hours) have been spent
on this and similar topics here on this forum, on KGS, etc.
Some people would raise the point that learning to walk or to talk is fundamentally different than learning Go.
Others would point out that some general guidelines are useful for beginners;
or, when we reach a new "beginning phase," which happens repeatedly in our growth curve.

That's all good.

But the bottom line is this: in Go, the exceptions are the rule.

Corollary: the first (and only) rule in Go -- There is no rule. (Same in the martial arts. :) )

I'm sure Bill (and others) will have their brilliant replies, other ideas. This is my take, from my own experience,
and from watching the teachings and experiences of many other people.