I became frustrated at always losing since 16k's always paired with me in OGS. Recently, I've been titling my game offers "19k or above please" so I'm paired with people around my rank. To me, it's much more fun to play with folk around your rank. Whether this decreases or increases my rate of bettering my Go skill, I do not care. I'm all about fun.

pocketmad

OGS, by default, doesn't use handicap. If you don't already, I recommend when creating a game to include handicap stones, so that the games are even.

(I'm confused why this still isn't turned on by default...)

_________________
Go Books

I've had some cases where my opponent was angered at how I already had 4 stones on the board and pulling a rage quit. This led me to titling my games "handicaps enabled," and that led to it taking awhile for someone to join. But maybe it's worth the wait

I'd certainly recommend handicap stones. They make the game interesting for both players, and teaches both new things.

If you're having issues finding games on OGS, maybe another server? OGS is certainly a good server for newer players. If only they turned on the handicap...

On IGS (Pandanet), you should always be able to get a game, though their 17k/BC rank is pretty wide. you'll find everyone from 15k-25k there.

KGS is a bit rough to find games at the lower DDK (read: 15-25 kyu) players, but they have a strong community who are generally willing to play teaching games, if you can't find a game.

_________________
Go Books

Thanks for the information. I'll check them out.

I don't think a 15k OGS is really 4 stones stronger than a 19k OGS. There's no reason that scoring algorithms should necessarily work out that way; at beginner ranks, I think the handicap is too much. If you want to play even games, you can just use the "restrict rank" feature on OGS. But just losing a bunch of games isn't a bad thing; it helps not to focus on whether you're winning or losing when you're just getting the very basics of the game.

Actually, there is a very good reason, and that is that ratings calibrated by handicaps allow two players who do not know each other to set a handicap and have a good game. But online rating systems seem to be based upon the probabilities of winning or losing even games, and you can't necessarily set handicaps by those probabilities.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

okay, okay: "will necessarily work out that way"

I've been playing for over a month now and I have played well over a 100 games, I'm super frustrated that I can't even win a game on a 9x9 playing against people who are "the same level" I play against 25k players and get destroyed. Even thought it says on OGS I'm 23k, I have won 5 out of the last 50 games I have played. I can't even do the most basic Tsumego (on the Tsumego Pro app) without having to brute force it. It feels like someone threw me in the deep end and I can't tread water.

This does sound frustrating. I'm sorry your stuck after so much effort.

Would you feel comfortable posting one of your games? Perhaps the one that you feel you played best. That would give some of us a clearer idea of what's going on so that we can make suggestions.

This is the game where I felt I played my best but I know I made a ton of really stupid mistakes.

Hello

Black 9 is a big mistake I feel. Keeping your stones connected is very important. Connected stones form bigger groups, bigger groups are less subject to dying and can enclose more territory.

By playing 9 black allows white to cut him into two groups. If 9 is played at 10 instead black's groups will be connected and safe. As a bonus, the bottom becomes black's territory.

I hope this helps

I can see how you could play that and work it out. My problem is that I can't see what moves are helpful and which are not. I try to play things out in my head and I'm just wrong. It doesn't matter if its a problem or a game, I just don't understand the why this move is better than another. It might just be I have to lose 1000000 games, but I feel as thought I'm missing a key component that would help me understand what makes a move have more impact than another.

Are you saying that you don't see how at 10 is better than in the actual game?

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

I see why it is better, it stops white from completing a capture of a stone and it also allows black to cut white apart. My problem is why I don't see those moves unless it's way after the fact.

I think you might be better than you think. I see the following in your game:

1. You did recognize the need to defend your main group of stones and did a solid job of that. That is an important skill! Don't undervalue it.

2. To me, it seems like the major issue with the loss of the other two groups is the limited space on the board.

I can't help but wonder if part of the issue is that you are playing on the 9x9 board. Other than a handful of games, I don't have much experience with it. So, I'll happily defer to others on this. But to me, this kind of game is deceptively technical despite the fact that the small size makes the game look "simpler". The more limited the space, the more precisely one must play and the less space available to recover from mistakes. Lack of space makes seeing connections (like 9 at 10) more critical. It also makes creating two eyes to ensure that a group is alive much harder.

Have you tried playing on a larger board? Maybe 19x19 or even just 13x13? At your level, games on these larger boards -- particularly the 19x19 -- usually involve both players making and recovering from many mistakes. As a friend of mine once said when he was at your level, if you mess up in one area -- just start playing in another!

I was told by one of the 1d that were at my local go group to not bother playing a bigger board until I'm about 5k (or until my handicap was no stones on a 9x9 against him). It didn't sound right to me but even when I asked for game reviews on the Baduk subreddit I was told I'm not ready to play on a larger board.

I could be wrong, but that sound like bad advice. I started playing for the first time on 13x13 and shifted shortly there after to 19x19. That said, why not just try a game on a larger board and see how it goes? There isn't much downside to the risk and it might work well.

I say b.s.

I say b.s.

for me, the most painful part of the game is move 12. Seeing the two black stones get separated when they could have connected feels like losing a limb. Part of learning go is learning what hurts and preventing it from happening. Obviously, what hurts most is to see stones die, and the most basic way to prevent that is to keep them connected to each other. If they can't connect, they will have to live independently which can be particularly difficult in a 9x9 game if you have more than one group. If they are connected, they also often have the power to surround and quash an enemy group, which is what white did to you in this game. Also, the game is won by getting more territory, and at move 23 you didn't have enough, so I would have wanted to get some of that empty space on the top, perhaps reducing his left side as well. I would have played D7 and hoped either to connect back or to fight for life if I got cut off.

As to the advice not to play on bigger boards, I agree that they can feel overwhelming at first, so be prepared for that so try to take it in stride, and take a moment after the game to think about how it was won.

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.