Life In 19x19 http://www.lifein19x19.com/ |
|
165 LexC vs EdLee http://www.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=5979 |
Page 5 of 13 |
Author: | EdLee [ Sun Jun 17, 2012 4:21 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Seems forced, and also the continuation. But let's see what he does. |
Author: | LexC [ Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:03 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 165 LexC vs EdLee |
What I read |
Author: | EdLee [ Fri Jun 22, 2012 1:32 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Taking seems to be better than connecting: B has the 2nd line atari, yes (not very useful), but B also lost the 5th line atari (which is useful). |
Author: | LexC [ Sat Jun 23, 2012 4:35 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 165 LexC vs EdLee |
This variation look better for white
|
Author: | EdLee [ Sat Jun 23, 2012 11:25 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Was expecting this:
Variation: Maybe not so good because W gets an extra sente move ?
Forced?
|
Author: | EdLee [ Sun Jun 24, 2012 10:44 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Forced? Interesting vars coming up. |
Author: | LexC [ Mon Jun 25, 2012 9:08 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 165 LexC vs EdLee |
What I read |
Author: | EdLee [ Mon Jun 25, 2012 11:18 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Forced? |
Author: | emeraldemon [ Mon Jun 25, 2012 11:22 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 165 LexC vs EdLee |
not for players: So is black's thickness well placed to attack the two white stones on the bottom? Or are whites stones on the bottom well placed to negate black's thickness? |
Author: | jts [ Mon Jun 25, 2012 11:39 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 165 LexC vs EdLee |
@emeralddemon Isn't the first question what happens to d16? It looks painful to sac d16 wholesale, but equally painful to run d16 out on dame while B gains more central strength. It's also a little odd to frame this game as W's territory versus B's thickness, since for now B has four corners. |
Author: | emeraldemon [ Mon Jun 25, 2012 12:13 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: 165 LexC vs EdLee |
The sacrifice sequence Ed posted looks like the only sequence for white to me. It is painful, but if it goes that way white will have sente. I think black is in a stronger position overall, but the lower left is still open for white to invade. I was specifically wondering about black's thickness on the right; if black caps or attaches on top of those two white stones, it looks like it could get big. |
Author: | illluck [ Mon Jun 25, 2012 12:39 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: 165 LexC vs EdLee |
Personally, I'd have checked some moves outside first before the last move because the following sequence might be a useful threat that forces black to back off. Exchanging 54 with 55 removes a possibly useful liberty:
Not saying that there are working outside moves because I haven't read carefully, but white should examine the possibility first. |
Author: | LexC [ Wed Jun 27, 2012 9:19 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 165 LexC vs EdLee |
What I read |
Author: | EdLee [ Wed Jun 27, 2012 12:12 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Continuation 1:
Continuation 2:
|
Author: | EdLee [ Thu Jun 28, 2012 4:23 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Not sure about this result. Not sure how to compare to this variation:
Also not sure how to compare to this variation -- but and seem to make W heavier than in the real game?
|
Author: | LexC [ Thu Jun 28, 2012 11:03 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: 165 LexC vs EdLee |
Black 29 White 28 not so bad White has three stones to worry |
Author: | EdLee [ Fri Jun 29, 2012 12:09 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Not sure about this trade -- B reduced upper left; W lower left. |
Author: | LexC [ Fri Jun 29, 2012 12:41 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 165 LexC vs EdLee |
White seems absolutely sente |
Author: | EdLee [ Fri Jun 29, 2012 2:28 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Still not sure. But it seems something like helps (a) area and puts pressure on the group:
|
Author: | LexC [ Sat Jun 30, 2012 10:19 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 165 LexC vs EdLee |
What I read, both seems good Read other path but looks worst for white
|
Page 5 of 13 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |