Life In 19x19

in the muddy banks of that other shore." - George Starostin on the Beatles 'Rubber Soul'

That quote has always stuck for me for one reason or another. I've even quoted it in school papers. You may think this doesn't seem to pertain much to go, but alas, it does!

I've been stuck at a certain level without improving for some time now. I never quite understood why players in Korea would quit being professionals when they have to go on military duty, but now I realize. I took a year-long break after I hit high SDK and I've never been able to find my momentum again. But now, I want to firmly embed the first foot in the muddy banks of that other shore. The dan shore.

Over the last few days I've been trying to run down my list of weaknesses in order to find what's wrong. I've gone back time and time again to old books - Kageyama, A&D, Opening Theory. I feel as if I've been making more progress because I've now started reading them by taking notes and playing out the diagrams instead of reading them straight.

As a result, I've come up with a study plan to help me burst through that impenetrable wall...

1. Reading - I've never quite appreciated reading because i've always found it quite easy to read 5-10 moves at a glance, a skill most of my opponents weren't able to do. That was my first mistake; handicapping myself.

Now I've decided to buckle down and increase my reading ability to 20 moves with ease, and to take breaks during pivotal points to actually read more than one or two variations (another problem I've mine; must be ADD or something, I can't seem to focus enough to read more than one or two branches before playing a move).

To do this, I've decided to re-do my LCH set over and over until I can solve every problem with ease. That means, every day I will solve 1 book (123 problems from Book I or II)/half a book (~60 problems from III orIV)/quarter of a book (~30 problems from V or VI). This comes first, before all else.

2. Opening - I've always had a ridiculously weak opening, but I didn't worry much about it because my midgame skill was far ahead of my similarly ranked opponents; ending fuseki behind by 30 points was no problem. However, now I plan to research how professionals play all of the Chinese variants (High, Low, Micro, Mini) and also the best way to play with/against sanrensei/double 4-4 (my favorite opening with white).

2a. Joseki - I've always abstained from studying joseki because I never really knew the point of it all. Now I've done a complete 180 and have been dedicating myself to learning joseki (note: LEARNING, not memorizing). However, I've decided something to help me out: memorize the final result of each joseki. That way I can save time reading by just hovering the final result over the board.

3. Fighting - A friend once remarked to me that (if i remember correctly), "you're a 4 dan in fighting, but 20k at the opening"; this is completely true. Well, maybe not. I am not 4 dan in fighting, but it is my forte. So why put it so high? Because playing 4 dans and 5 dans, and 1 dans and 2 dans has showed me my fighting isn't that good!

Of course, this will come with all the reading practice, but I'd also like to learn how to make better shapes, what the weaknesses of certain shapes are, and how to make and utilize thickness in a more a efficient way.

4. Judgement - I need to speed up my estimating ability; I can count the entire board in under a minute, but I think that's too long. I'm not a fan of the "this area looks bigger than this area" philosophy. I'd rather have (somewhat) concrete numbers.

I'd also like to increase my ability to discern who is leading in power and thickness, and how to use that power to take over a game/how to come back if I'm behind in power.

5. Fundamental concepts - This should probably come first, but I think I have a solid grip on the fundamentals and really only need a refresher every so often. I would like, however, to increase my ability to create and use aji the right way; I'm an aji-keshi master, and I don't even understand why or how!

6. Playing - I need to play three serious games a week and have at least one reviewed. I want to improve, but I feel I won't get much farther without having a game reviewed, but I hardly have any kifu because I haven't really hunkered to play "serious" games (serious in my book = 2+ hour game).

7. Lessons - Even though I've written this near 1000 word guide for myself, it certainly wouldn't hurt if a high dan would point out more weaknesses in my game, or how to improve the weakness I've already listed. I would like a regular teacher, but it's quite hard to find any affordable ones within my $8/hr wage.

8. Review - Lather, rinse, repeat.

I'd like to use this thread as a way to keep track of my studying. I feel it's the only way I can actually force me to study; to record. If you have any tips, they are greatly appreciated. In fact, I have a game that I'd like to have looked over. I won, but I feel I could have played better.

http://eidogo.com/#2M20G8u7

P.S. How can I paste the link into an SGF on here?

Download the SGF. Copy. Paste as in this post.

I have personally found it very difficult to make any sort of list of things I need to learn. To become better is to do the kinds of things you haven't done. Often you see some player wonder why someone else, having same rank as he, does so badly in some choice of joseki or shape, but yet manages to hold the same rank. The reason is that there are many paths to strength.

Finding mistakes can be tough too. Consider a game where you play inside opponent's moyo and end up getting killed. Was the mistake:
*Poor reading
*Poor principles of dealing with weak groups
*Poor choice of joseki earlier that allowed opponent to have such moyo
*Poor understanding / evaluation between reduction and invasion
*Something else?

Your opening is not so bad.

A few remarks:

Bill, as I understand it move 9 is standard with the mini-chinese like that. The idea is that you push White towards your framework with the intention of leaning on him to solidify it.

Shaddy wrote:Bill, as I understand it move 9 is standard with the mini-chinese like that. The idea is that you push White towards your framework with the intention of leaning on him to solidify it.

OC, if your purpose is to play the one space enclosure in the bottom right corner, then pushing White towards that corner first is choshi. But why in the world should that be your purpose in this position? (Especially with the Black stone on M-03 instead of L-03?)

I agree, playing the one-space enclosure should not be the goal. 10 at Q6 or Q9 is normally what you see. I don't know how the situation changes with the smaller mini-chinese, since I don't usually play it nor have I read much about it, but from vague memory of pro games it should be about the same.

Thank you for the comments Bill, they are very much appreciated

For some odd reason, I play overly tight when I take black. As white I'm usually much more lethal. Also, I'm a Tygem noob, so when I tried changing the time settings (to 20 minutes main time) I accidentally hit "Accept" and had to play with 5 minutes main time. But I see now where some moves were complete headscratchers (the top right was hilariously bad!).

I'm still trying to figure out how to play all these Mini/Micro/whatever the hell they're called Chinese openings. I found a nice blog post by Cho Hye Yeon that sort of describes it, but she mostly just gives pro game examples with much, if any, explanation. Does anyone know of books specializing in the latest developments of the Chinese variants. I have Sung-Rae's book, and there seems to be some info about it, but I haven't reached that section yet.

Toge wrote:I have personally found it very difficult to make any sort of list of things I need to learn. To become better is to do the kinds of things you haven't done. Often you see some player wonder why someone else, having same rank as he, does so badly in some choice of joseki or shape, but yet manages to hold the same rank. The reason is that there are many paths to strength.

Finding mistakes can be tough too. Consider a game where you play inside opponent's moyo and end up getting killed. Was the mistake:
*Poor reading
*Poor principles of dealing with weak groups
*Poor choice of joseki earlier that allowed opponent to have such moyo
*Poor understanding / evaluation between reduction and invasion
*Something else?

I plan to go back to my games and evaluate them at certain junctures; the status of groups at the end of the fuseki, balance of territory/power after 50/60 moves, biggest endgame plays etc. I feel like this could help in ultimately mentally conditioning myself so I can go "ok, this won't work" in an instant without having to try and read it out.

****************************************

Anyway, I spent most of my study time today just flipping through pages of my old favorite books, underlining sentences/marking positions that stuck out to me.

Some of my favorites are listed below:
"Enclosing a corner takes priority over a side extension." - Opening Theory Made Easy, Principle 1.

I never quite thought about this really. I was always "big point, big point!" when it came to fuseki, but after reviewing a few pro games over the last few days (mostly Meijin title matches from last year and example games from Kim Sung-Rae's opening book), it became painfully obvious how true this is. "Walk before you run"...

"Before getting caught up in the subject of attack and defense, accordingly, we ought to make sure we know what the basic purpose of the middle game is. It is not to attack or to defend; these are means rather than ends. It is to be found, instead, in two fundamental balances, which also correspond to human drives: the balance of territory and the balance of power."

"Whenever the fighting dies down and you find yourself wonder what to do next, it is a good idea to start by estimating the balance of territory." both from Attack and Defense.

Even in my slow games I would hardly ever do this; my only objective was spotting weaknesses in my/my opponent's position and try to protect/exploit them. I liked playing thick moves, but I did so blindly. Now that I start to think about it, this is probably the biggest hurdle keeping me from advancing; it's especially obvious in the game I posted, plunging headlong into White's position without using the dual-purpose moves Bill pointed out.

"They are the people who cannot be bothered to 'read'; who try to capture the uncapturable group because it just looks as if it can be done or because they figure they can muddle through somehow, and so they rush headlong into disaster. They are also the people who, when they face a slightly stronger opponent, do not try to capture the capturable group because with their fuzzy reading they are afraid of messing it up; who innocently add unnecessary stones to their own already-alive groups; who take fright without cause; who tremble when they sit down at the go board; who play through the whole game with a sullen expression; who lose every fight; who eventually come to hate go "

It had been a while since I read Kageyama. When I came across this paragraph it smacked me in the face with a force so strong I actually felt something. Not often that writing does that. It's like those songs you think are written about you; I feel like this was written about me, even if it was written decades before I was born. This is exactly my predicament.

Overall all of this reviewing has been a bit boring, as most of it is elementary (no surprises), but there is always a nugget to be dug up that was previously tread over before. That is my purpose with this reviewing system. Hopefully I can uncover a whole goldmine to lead me past the threshold...

I played another game on Tygem and defeated another 2d, but it was quite the sloppy game. It was a blitz where I ended up killing a large group, a necessary task considering I made no points in the opening

I played a cleaner game today on KGS against a 1k, winning with a tricky tesuji I set up sixty moves prior.



It seems everyone likes to throw a stone at R10, instead of the usual R11, so I'm not as well versed in dealing with that. But I tried something different this time, and isn't that the spice of go? Then again, it would help if I remembered what I was supposed to play; I got mixed up in what a friend show me a few weeks ago and stupidly play Q8 for some reason. I meant to play R14, then Q6 after white extends two spaces. Bleh!

This win pushed me up to 1k on KGS, but then again it helps that I hardly play any rated games

I joined the ASR league the other day and just now finished playing a good game against Cidar. I want to say "great", but I lost by 0.5

I have a few questions...



28: I spent some time on this move, trying to figure out which direction to take: either invade right away or play more simple. I chose the simple path first. Does this seem like an apt move?
62: I think I might have been a bit too ambitious here.
98: What's a better way to deal with Black's placement?
122: The losing move! I don't know what happened to me when I decided to play it, but I was definitely not myself. An extremely embarrassing moment. But that's my style. Solid play and then 30k mistake. Gah!

After 122, I couldn't quite keep the rhythm going and lost by a half a point. I think if I didn't make this blunder I could have won. Thoughts?

******************

I feel good, even though I lost; a 0.5 loss as white to a 1d is a good result in my opinion, especially considering where I was just a few weeks ago. I'm going to go review what I've been studying lately and keep at it. I can see the horizon... finally...

Also: at 22, I feel like white chose the wrong joseki. I'd be more comfortable playing the jump-up one, since this one gives black thickness that works well with the other thickness.

Thanks for the comments Shaddy.

I thought 22 was a good idea because I could take sente, but his territory on the bottom was too large. I definitely should have jumped up one.