Life In 19x19 http://www.lifein19x19.com/ |
|
#159 - opex vs Nome http://www.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=5564 |
Page 1 of 4 |
Author: | opex [ Mon Feb 27, 2012 11:22 am ] |
Post subject: | #159 - opex vs Nome |
Hello! I'm playing Nome on two stones, AGA rules, 0.5 komi; no books, joseki dictionaries, etc. Hidden comments, as usual, should not be read by players until after the game, unless explicitly stated otherwise. This is my first Malkovich game ever, so I expect some new exciting experience. It should be really different from ordinary games to explain reasoning. I hope stronger players will find some time to comment on my thinking and help me grow ![]() So, Nome, お願いします (onegai shimasu) I naturally want to occupy an empty corner, so i need to choose the exact point. From my experience in handi games, it is hard to play calmly against two stones and build enough territory. So i want to play for thickness and find an opportunity to attack something. If i play san-san, i may expect black later to press me with 4-4 and gain nice influence, which will be hard to play against. I have nothing to say against komoku, but i think i should develop fast here, and hoshi feels right for this. I expect Nome to answer in the opposite corner ![]()
|
Author: | Nome [ Mon Feb 27, 2012 11:39 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: #159 - opex vs Nome |
Hey Everyone! I'm Nome and this is my first time playing this kind of game or using the life in 19x19 forums. I thought this format seemed interesting, and I think when I play normal games I find myself forgetting to think too often, so I think this is a good way to try and help correct that problem. opex already explained all of the rules and stuff, so I guess that's all for now. Have a fun game, opex.
So this move doesn't have anything to complicated behind it. I don't like playing double 4-4 as black, so I generally prefer to have at least one 3-4 stone on the board. If he approaches one of my 4-4 corners I can get sente to enclose my corner. If he wants to approach my 3-4 stone directly that is fine with me since it doesn't also allow him an extension from the one corner he has. |
Author: | opex [ Mon Feb 27, 2012 12:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: #159 - opex vs Nome |
Well, an asymmetrical move. If i recall correctly, the general fuseki theory gives priority to approaching non-symmetrical corners. So, i have to choose a kakari on the lower right corner. As we decided not to consult joseki dictionaries, I'll go with the most familiar move:
|
Author: | Nome [ Mon Feb 27, 2012 12:32 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: #159 - opex vs Nome |
With this approach, I'd like to play out this joseki because if opex completes it, I'll be left with sente to approach his open 4-4 stone and start trying to develop something. If he doesn't finish it then I will potentially have something to harass later. Obviously there are other possibilities after 4, but this is what I am familiar with so we'll see what happens.
|
Author: | EdLee [ Mon Feb 27, 2012 5:41 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
![]() |
Author: | opex [ Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:32 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: #159 - opex vs Nome |
EdLee wrote: ![]() ![]() I'm going to play r6 and expect r4 (the only joseki i know ![]() I have read somewhere that after r4 one may play a probe at o17 to select between q6 and q7.
the joseki is up to 11, after which as black i would like to enclose the corner with 12, and white would probably extend to 13, though this seems ok for white, so black will find another way ![]() If black replies with ogeima r13, then q6 o3 r10 will be the joseki. The point here is to keep black stone two spaces apart from white stone so that black can't threaten to invade severely into white's three space extension. Black may ignore o17 and play q6 himself... Then I should think about double approach at q14 or r14. I don't like this, therefore, this should happen ![]()
|
Author: | Sur [ Tue Feb 28, 2012 2:10 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: #159 - opex vs Nome |
I think this is very bad for white. ![]() |
Author: | EdLee [ Tue Feb 28, 2012 2:25 am ] |
Post subject: | |
opex, it means good game to both of you. ![]() |
Author: | opex [ Tue Feb 28, 2012 2:30 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: #159 - opex vs Nome |
Ah, thanks ![]() I'm glad to see that our game starts to get commented on, hope it continues ![]() |
Author: | Nome [ Tue Feb 28, 2012 9:13 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: #159 - opex vs Nome |
Not much to say here. This is what I wanted to play so far. I still want sente so I can play a move on the left side, but now I am debating whether or not to approach the 4-4 or if I just want to take C10. I think I might be leaning towards C10 as it would leave a play around F17 as an option.
|
Author: | Nome [ Tue Feb 28, 2012 9:14 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: #159 - opex vs Nome |
I didn't realize how tempting it is to want to read the comments. Also, Thanks to everyone who is watching or has commented so far. |
Author: | opex [ Tue Feb 28, 2012 9:16 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: #159 - opex vs Nome |
I'll venture the probe
|
Author: | Nome [ Tue Feb 28, 2012 10:19 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: #159 - opex vs Nome |
So he tenki'd here but like I said before I am fine with this since I think he will need to come back to these stones later. For now I am pretty sure I am content with just backing off here. If he resonds with 9 below, I will play away because pushing into my corner and allowing me to take 12 seems bad for him.
If he plays something like this, I still think I am okay because I think omitting 15 as white could create problems later.
What I am expecting (mostly because it's how I would play as white here) after 8 is for him to just back off or for him to tenuki somewhere. We'll have to see.
I also think trying to pincer here is problematic as well, if I play to get this wall, then he has sente to make the wall I built useless. I don't think I can omit 14 in this sequence either to try and capitalize on my wall either, so I'm just going to avoid the pincer.
|
Author: | opex [ Tue Feb 28, 2012 10:34 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: #159 - opex vs Nome |
Interestingly, what should i have done if ![]()
|
Author: | illluck [ Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:09 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: #159 - opex vs Nome |
I don't agree with Sur's comment that 13 is overplay and very bad for white, seems pretty normal to me.
|
Author: | Uberdude [ Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:41 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: #159 - opex vs Nome |
Indeed, 13 at k16 is fine, and indeed the most common pro move in this position, closely followed by k17 and then l17. Sure it leaves an invasion at m17 for later, but at this stage of the opening the left side is bigger (c14 approach after k16 is natural flow). k16 makes a good relationship with d16 and treats o17 lightly. Sure l17 hangs on to o17 more, but it's also a tad heavier as a black invasion at j17 could even be an attacking invasion on the cramped 2 space in the future. I had this shape in a recent game of mine: http://www.online-go.com/games/board.php?boardID=319135. |
Author: | Nome [ Tue Feb 28, 2012 2:04 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: #159 - opex vs Nome |
After seeing this move, I basically have been thinking about two different options. I'll go over the one I decided against first. This move is something I really would like to play, but unfortunately seems like it is probably unreasonable. Ultimately, there are a lot of flaws if I play this way I think. The bottom is too open at this point and I have said before I think the bottom and left sides are where I'd like to try to develop and playing this way counters that argument. Also, my first thought is that a move like this would pressure white's formation but the more I think about it, the less likely that seems, white's stones are still really annoying even after 10
So I think this is really the only playable move at this point. But even so, I still have to think about the follow ups. If black doesn't respond with 11, I will play here regardless of what he plays I think, even an approach on my bottom left. I think black will have to play here.
The question then becomes whether or not I can play elsewhere yet. My corner stones seem to be getting crowded, but I am not too worried about them I don't think. Even if we exchange 13 and 14, I think my stones are okay and he will probably want to respond after 14.
That's all I've got for right now.
|
Author: | opex [ Wed Feb 29, 2012 4:50 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: #159 - opex vs Nome |
|
Author: | EdLee [ Wed Feb 29, 2012 6:05 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Nome, Nome wrote: ![]() Also, my first thought is that a move like this would pressure white's formation... white's stones are still really annoying even after ![]() ![]() you would not put pressure on W; it's the opposite -- W could press you low AND you'd have a weakness at (a):
|
Author: | Uberdude [ Wed Feb 29, 2012 8:28 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: #159 - opex vs Nome |
Nome, Ed: Pincer on the side instead of defending the corner is playable, though should be 4th line. It is resisting white's plan of making r14 slightly misplaced: now you would rather it were r13 to aim at r8 invasion later. You don't need to be happy with Ed's proposed result as you can play better by cutting and attacking White. See viewtopic.php?p=86322#p86322. |
Page 1 of 4 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |