In the review, these diagrams show, or mainly rely on, sequences of determining 'current territory'.
1, 3, 4 (without move 7), 5, 10, 11, 12, 14, 17, 18 (marks after move 3), 24, 26i, 26ii.
(I sometimes disagree in details of shown or assumed sequences, amounting to a difference of up to ca. 1 point in total in a few diagrams.)
In particular, the imagined sequences for determining current territory rely on peaceful sente reductions, a nature of sente specific to sequences for current territory, passive replies by the defender in front of the attacker's moves, imagined supporting stones of the attacker and more of them later during the game, (partly) proper timing of the moves, subject to the other conditions minimising by the attacker and maximising by the defender.
The term current territory has been coined by me, but the concept is or has been used by Cho Chikun, Lee and others. As can be seen from their moves in positional judgement sequences, they have been aware of almost all the underlying principles written [4] by me, maybe except the principle about two infrequent, but necessary, exceptions and except that Lee also allows invasions.
For the following purposes, Lee suggests other methods:
- invasions, when the attacker's nearby stones are strong (it is unclear in the review whether deire counting is used in this context)
- defense versus invasion regions, which are (alternatively?) counted by deire counting
- territory in front of thickness, which apparently is counted by visual guessing
- moyos (not necessarily counted, but might be represented by 'alpha')
|
