How to play as white in handicap games?

EdLee · **#21**

Ember wrote:

I'm not used to being ignored all the time <snip> This is irritating.

He ignored some of your moves. Did you study the properties of those moves ?

Your moves had nice follow-ups so locally (or even globally) you should've profited since he tenuki'd;
Your moves did not have nice follow-ups, so that even though he tenuki'd, he did not suffer big local (and/or global) losses;
There's probably a continuum in between the above two.

It's a learning opportunity. Which best describes your moves he ignored ?

If he ignored your move and you profited from his tenuki, then you were compensated --
he gained something (somewhere else) from his tenuki, and you gained something (locally and/or globally) from his tenuki.
You should've been satisfied or even happy with this trade. So what's the problem ?
If it was a fair trade, or even a good trade for you, why would you feel irritated ?

If he ignored your move and he profited from his tenuki, but your move did not have nice follow-ups (no "bite"),
then you can look at your move and study why it was ignorable. If your move was a mistake, you can learn from it.

What can you learn about yourself and your Go from these moves of yours and from his tenuki moves ?
If you can channel your irritation/anger to improve your Go, it is productive;
if your irritation/anger does not help you improve yourself or your Go, then it's not very productive.

Tenuki is part of Go. There are good tenukis; there are bad ones. Learn from all of them.

Focus on your moves (and his). Focus on improving your moves, your Go, and yourself.

EdLee · **#22**

Ember wrote:

To me, it just felt like another kick in the guts. First of all, I didn't ask his opinion because second it was such an obvious flaw in this game that there was simply no need to say that. That's why for me (!) it sounded pretty arrogant and not like a pointer (please keep in mind, that I was in a very bad state, emotionally, and it still upsets me at this very moment to write about this situation). Also, this sloppy way he adressed this matter was another point, let alone, that it was simply not a helpful comment at all. If he had pointed at something constructive that hadn't been so obvious as for example how I should have played in one of these corner situations, then this would have been a different story. That would have been more teaching game-like. But who am I to judge? I cannot look at all of this objectively because of this emotional state of mine.

As Bill already mentioned, we were not there, so it's difficult to assess the situation -- we don't know if he was being disrespectful or not. However:

In general, especially after a tourney game, it's best not to comment on the game or specific moves unless your opponent specifically requests it --
that is, both of you first agree to a review.
If you are still very upset "at this very moment to write about this situation", you yourself nailed it
that you probably "cannot look at all of this objectively because of this emotional state". You probably need some time to first calm down.
His intentions matter. Putting aside the fact that you did not ask for his opinion (first point, above),
if he meant well and sincerely wanted to help you with your Go, that is one thing.
But if he just wanted to make himself feel good or just to make you feel bad, that's another story. (Again, we were not there to assess the situation.)
You felt it was "such an obvious flaw" -- but apparently, it was not "obvious" enough that you missed it in the game.
How then was he supposed to know whether it was so "obvious" to you ?
Even if he meant well, he should've first asked you whether you wanted a review (first point, above).
Even if he meant well and both of you agreed to a review, it's still possible his presentation would rub you the wrong way.
Now we're talking about communication skills, teaching skills, presentation skills, social skills in general, etc.

EdLee · **#23**

Ember wrote:

Respect for your opponent. Only because you might be able to kill everything on the board, do you really have to play like that?

The previous posts already touched upon some of the related issues -- bullying, etiquette, intentions, communicating skills, social skills, etc.

To add to that list:

Look at it from his perspective. What if he feels he is being respectful to his opponent (you) by playing his best moves (if that means to kill everything that is killable) ?
That not playing his strongest moves would be dis-respectful to you ?
What if he lacks the ability (or skills) to not play his strongest moves (kill all that is killable) ?
Remember in that one episode in Hikaru, Sai wanted to be gentle with Akira, but Akira's moves gave Sai no choice but to "sever his head" ?
Certain board positions really give us no choice but to kill a big group (a big cap race, for example).

(Again, we were not there. Difficult to assess the situation. But, as we learn from Go,
we want to zoom out and also look at the bigger picture. So these are just some more ideas and possibilities.)

Bantari · **#24**

EdLee wrote:

Ember wrote:

Respect for your opponent. Only because you might be able to kill everything on the board, do you really have to play like that?

The previous posts already touched upon some of the related issues -- bullying, etiquette, intentions, communicating skills, social skills, etc.

To add to that list:

Look at it from his perspective. What if he feels he is being respectful to his opponent (you) by playing his best moves (if that means to kill everything that is killable) ?
That not playing his strongest moves would be dis-respectful to you ?
What if he lacks the ability (or skills) to not play his strongest moves (kill all that is killable) ?
Remember in that one episode in Hikaru, Sai wanted to be gentle with Akira, but Akira's moves gave Sai no choice but to "sever his head" ?
Certain board positions really give us no choice but to kill a big group (a big cap race, for example).

(Again, we were not there. Difficult to assess the situation. But, as we learn from Go,
we want to zoom out and also look at the bigger picture. So these are just some more ideas and possibilities.)

I think there is a misunderstanding here.
In my opinion, the source of irritation is not that White makes the best possible moves, but that he does not! Instead, he makes the trickiest possible moves, ones that he would never dare play against stronger player, but he knows he can get away against weak player. And while the strongest possible moves would assure a win by some margin as well as provide large educational value (not to mention show respect) - the trickiest possible moves are more contrary, although usually win by a larger margin. It is this perceived lack of respect that is irritating, I think.

Having said that, as others mentioned, there might still be value in learning from such moves.
But it is not a pleasant experience for the Black player, so I understand the problem he has.

Another issue is - it is often hard for weaker player to distinguish between the good and the tricky. Although usually there is some good feeling about the flow of the game.

EdLee · **#25**

Bantari wrote:

I think there is a misunderstanding here.
In my opinion, the source of irritation is not that White makes the best possible moves, but that he does not!

Interesting. May I ask how you came to this opinion ? It's possible I had not read all of Ember's texts so far and I missed something.
But again, we don't have the game record or the moves,
and we were not there, did not hear the conversation, nor the tones of voice --
difficult to assess the situation.

oca · **#26**

This is a handicap game I played as white :twisted:

... well, in my dreams...
I was actually black :blackeye:

and just got blown away... (but learned a lot)

MOVE :w45:

arg... My beautifull wall got broken !
MOVE :w89:

sniff... connect and die
MOVE white 107 - didn't know what to do to help my L group
cut at white 121 - didn't know how to manage that kind of invasion...
and so on...

EdLee · **#27**

Hi oca,

oca · **#28**

Quote:

Basics problems:
- Basic shape problems.
- Bad habits.
- Bad shapes.
- Broken shapes.
- Don't see ataris.

EdLee, Thank you so much for show me these problems, very valuable to me.

This bad habit (playing the marked stone instead of a)

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$ $$ | . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . X O O . . $$ | . . B a X O . X $$ | . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . $$ ------------------[/go]

is really clear to me now thanks to your examples.

On move 28 "Do you see the connect-and-die problems for W at (a) ?"

Well... not sur I really see it... May be something like that ? trying to reduce place for a base and to close all ways to the center so that I can kill the white group ?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$ | . . . . X . . 4 . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . 2 . 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X O O . . . X . . . . . X . . . | $$ | X X X X X O . X . . . . . O . . . . . | $$ | O X O O O 1 . 5 6 . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . O . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ----------------------------------------[/go]

MOVE 36 : may be that instead of :b1:

at

directly ?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$B $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . | $$ | . X . X O O . O . X X O O 1 2 X . . . | $$ | . X X X X O . X O . . X X O 3 . . . . | $$ | O X O O O . . O X . . . . 5 . . . . . | $$ | . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ----------------------------------------[/go]

joellercoaster · **#29**

THanks for this, EdLee! These are exactly the kinds of thing - basic shape, cuts - I am getting beaten up on at the moment. This is really helpful.

EdLee · **#30**

Hi oca and joellercoaster, you are very welcome.

oca wrote:

This bad habit (playing the marked stone instead of a)

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$ $$ | . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . X O O . . $$ | . . B a X O . X $$ | . . . . . . . . $$ | . . . . . . . . $$ ------------------[/go]

You have to be very careful:
There are situations where the tiger's mouth :b2:

is correct! :twisted:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$ ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? $$ ? ? ? ? ? ? ? . X O O ? ? ? ? ? ? ? $$ ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 2 . X 1 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? $$ ? ? ? ? ? ? ? . . . . ? ? ? ? ? ? ? $$------------------------------------[/go]

It has to do with the specific local and global situations.
If it is important for B to have the stone at :b2:

-- for example, it affects the left side --
then the :b2:

tiger's mouth could be a good and correct move!
( I put the dimmed out areas on purpose. )

In your particular game above, some of your tiger's mouths were bad habits.
But this not always true!!
Go is super super specific!! :twisted:

EdLee · **#31**

oca wrote:

On move 28 "Do you see the connect-and-die problems for W at (a) ?"
Well... not sur I really see it...

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$ | . . . . X . . 4 . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . 2 . 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X O O . . . X . . . . . X . . . | $$ | X X X X X O . X . . . . . O . . . . . | $$ | O X O O O 1 . 5 6 . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . O . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ----------------------------------------[/go]

Hi oca, you're over-thinking.

All I meant was if B takes the ko with :b1:

, W cannot connect at (b) --
which also happened in your game: your move :b44:

.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$B $$ | . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X O O . . . X . . . . . X . . . | $$ | X X X X X O . X . . . . . O . . . . . | $$ | O X O O O a . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | 1 O b O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ----------------------------------------[/go]

Bantari · **#32**

EdLee wrote:

Bantari wrote:

I think there is a misunderstanding here.
In my opinion, the source of irritation is not that White makes the best possible moves, but that he does not!

Interesting. May I ask how you came to this opinion ? It's possible I had not read all of Ember's texts so far and I missed something.

By talking to other players taking high handicap and by playing them.
Also by observing what play gets them annoyed and angry and what does not.

I really suck and high handi games as White, so when I play such games I try all kinds of different things, just to stay above water. Some of them might be honest best moves I can make, some of them might be tricky moves, some of them might be overly tricky moves and huge overplays. I never have had anybody getting upset after they lost honestly against good moves, even when they lost big. I often got people upset after they play against trickery and huge overplays, even when they win.

From what Bill said, other players feel the same, slighted even if they win. Sometimes it might not be rational, but there it is anyways.

Thus - my conclusion. I think players can sense such things, maybe subconsciously, its the flow of the game.

However the particular situation of the OP might be, I think my statements are general enough to be applicable, so I brought it up.

EdLee · **#33**

Bantari wrote:

However the particular situation of the OP might be,

Ah. I was talking about Ember's irritation specifically in that one tourney game, not in general.
Mis-communications.

Ember · **#34**

@ EdLee: Bantari nailed it. I didn't mean to say anything at all against good moves, be they aggressive or not, but against constantly trying to trick your oponent and looking forward to kill as much in that way as you can instead of having a real plan like closing one group in and using that strength you get there to attack another black group - like you would play in a game against someone of your own strength. See this quote from post #19 here:

Ember wrote:

I didn't want to say anything against attacking moves where you have a plan like closing in in sente, splitting your opponent or the like - this is the game and what makes it interesting!

However, what I for my part dislike is only attacking without really having a plan apart from "Killkillkill!!" and just hacking away at someone with unreasonable moves that actually cannot possibly work. If your only plan is "I'll try to kill the group by playing there - although I know it won't work if he answers correctly. If it won't die it's not a problem, there are three more corners I can try, someting is bound to die". I think this is especially true when you're already past that point where you have more than caught up with your opponent and are already leading. That's what I originally meant with "Know where to stop", you don't have to go all out at this point anymore. Keeping sente and getting (most of) the big endgames usually is usually enough to wrap up the game. Of course, if in the game suddenly a chance arrises for you to kill a group and finish the game - finish the game. But harrassing someone like I just explained in this paragraph in my opinion is bad style and not very helpful for either player (in the sense of learning something).

lordish · **#35**

"All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near" Sun Tzu The Art of War

I don't get why trick moves getting you upset but i would avoid playing handicap games since they dull your play.

schawipp · **#36**

Hi Ember,

Ember wrote:

I didn't mean to say anything at all against good moves, be they aggressive or not, but against constantly trying to trick your oponent and looking forward to kill as much in that way as you can instead of having a real pla

I would try to not consider handicap games (especially with 4+ stones) as real competitive games but rather as teaching games with high learning opportunities. This attitude could help to be more indifferent to the actual game score (which is anyway not very meaningful in high handicap games IMHO) and rather focus on the game contents.

Thus, if your opponent uses many trick plays, you can analyze them afterwards - maybe together with stronger players - and try to find the best refutations. That could be of much help in similar situations in future games.

If your opponent plays strong, solid moves, the learning opportunity could be rather focused on your direction of play (or why you missed the biggest / most urgent points) or on bad shapes etc.

That's just my 2 ct...

Bantari · **#37**

EdLee wrote:

Bantari wrote:

However the particular situation of the OP might be,

Ah. I was talking about Ember's irritation specifically in that one tourney game, not in general.
Mis-communications.

Yeah, sorry. It is probably my fault for not reading properly. I skimmed through the thread and these were the thoughts that popped into my head. It is hard for me to understand somebody getting upset that their opponent gives his or her best, so I most likely just blanked this part out.

How to play as white in handicap games?

Who is online