Too influence oriented?

Aidoneus · #1

I have no Go club or neighbors to ask for comments. I have been reading and watching videos wherever I can find them on the web, but I need beginners to play against. I have tried KGS, though its hard to find many people online at my level. And when I try playing against computers, such as my copy of Many Faces of Go, I get slaughtered. (Unless I take so many stones against MFG that it feels like cheating. :oops:

)

I have uploaded two recent games, the first against a human on KGS and the second against a (weaker) program on Tygem. I know the human made many wasted moves defending his (4!) corners, but I think that I played pretty good. (Relatively, that is. I am sure good players could demonstrate what a patzer I am.)

Against the computer, I gave up all four corners again, and I was soon outplayed. Should I try to hold corners? (I haven't studied any Joseki.) Also, does it seem like I let myself get "led around" too much? Any slight help in directing me to the path of enlightenment will be greatly appreciated.

Mike Novack · #2

Let's discuss this.

MFOG what version? Set at what playing strength?

Nor should you consider handicap stones "cheating". If you are taking a large number of handicap stones and still getting slaughtered what that means is you have not yet learned how to maintain connection between your stones, have not yet learned how to make use of stones already on the board, etc. And maybe just my opinion, but perhaps those lessons need to be learned before you tackle joseki.

pwaldron · #3

I smiled a little when I saw the title of your thread. In my experience, beginners often think they're playing for influence or perhaps that they're using influence badly. In reality it's more common to find the opponent scooping out all the territory so that influence is all that's left.

The game against the human is instructive; you're already stronger than the computer. Initially your opponent takes all four corners. You have some influence but you also leave behind a lot of cutting points. Bit by bit your opponent starts cutting your groups into two and capturing pieces of them. Bit by bit you lose the chance of taking any points in the corners and on the edges and all you're left with is the hope that you can make points in the centre.

The major issue you have to deal with is your tactics and life & death. Your stones are getting split in ways that they shouldn't and you aren't making the most of the tactical opportunities you do have. When you are able to remedy some of those issues, I think you'll find that real territory becomes available to you.

quantumf · #4

Tempting though it may be, I would not focus on broad strategic aspects such as how influence oriented you are. You're losing these games for the sake of some important and reasonably straightforward tactical errors. I find that progress at Go is largely made by acquiring new tactical skills. For instance, in the silver star game, when you played M17, that was the wrong timing. You *must* finish the local sequence by playing E17. Then, a few moves later, you played O16 - at least you are aware of the need to protect the cut, but you chose a complicated way - the simple, correct and only way to play is P17.

For strategy, just remember to keep your stones connected. Always consider whether your stones are in danger of being isolated and disconnected. Had you played D9 instead of C12, the game would have been won. The corollary is to try and keep your opponents stones disconnected.

Aidoneus · #5

Hi Mike, I have MFG 12.022. And taking 9 stones to have a chance of beating it does feel like cheating (or that I am an idiot!). And, no, I had no intention of studying (or memorizing) Joseki, yet. At my age, remembering to zip up my fly is doing well...

Hi pwaldron, have you mixed up my games? I won easily against Fugate but lost to Silver Star (computer). Any more specific suggestions on my game versus Silver Star? Is it mostly I leave too many cutting points? Or I am so outplayed that comments would be pointless?

Aidoneus · #6

quantumf wrote:

Tempting though it may be, I would not focus on broad strategic aspects such as how influence oriented you are. You're losing these games for the sake of some important and reasonably straightforward tactical errors. I find that progress at Go is largely made by acquiring new tactical skills. For instance, in the silver star game, when you played M17, that was the wrong timing. You *must* finish the local sequence by playing E17. Then, a few moves later, you played O16 - at least you are aware of the need to protect the cut, but you chose a complicated way - the simple, correct and only way to play is P17.

For strategy, just remember to keep your stones connected. Always consider whether your stones are in danger of being isolated and disconnected. Had you played D9 instead of C12, the game would have been won. The corollary is to try and keep your opponents stones disconnected.

Thank you for your comments. So, if I needed to play E17 (and the dreaded empty triangle) instead of tenuki with M17, maybe something earlier was wrong? Same for P17 versus my O16.

Yes, I see now that D9 would have been much better than my C12, though I have already flitted away my handicap, and MFG shows the game as equal before D9.

Cassandra · #7

In the Silver Star game, you usually followed your opponent across the board.
This means that you answered almost every move very, very locally.

Try to have a look on the whole board, whether there might be remaining large points for you, in the case that none of your groups is in imminent danger.

Also, you tried to save every single of your own stones (e.g. with 100), or to really taking some opponent's stones of the board (instead of surrounding some more points of territory in the respective area).

Connecting two already connected (or already living) groups does not serve much purpose. You did this with 102, 118, 122, and 146, for example.

On the contrary, with 146, you missed to connect your non-living group in the lower left that could be (and really was) seperated (and killed) by White. This mistake decided the game !

Aidoneus · #8

Cassandra wrote:

In the Silver Star game, you usually followed your opponent across the board.
This means that you answered almost every move very, very locally.

Try to have a look on the whole board, whether there might be remaining large points for you, in the case that none of your groups is in imminent danger.

Also, you tried to save every single of your own stones (e.g. with 100), or to really taking some opponent's stones of the board (instead of surrounding some more points of territory in the respective area).

Thank you for your comments. Yes, this was my self-assessment. I have trouble seeing what is big and too often chase wildly around the board. I have won a few games against other weak players by hunting down their invasions, but it usually turns out bad against stronger players--stronger than me, that is. I'm not sure how I can break the habit of following my opponent; maybe lose enough times...

Cassandra wrote:

On the contrary, with 146, you missed to connect your non-living group in the lower right that could be (and really was) seperated (and killed) by White. This mistake decided the game !

I'm sorry, I don't understand. What alternative do you suggest?

Aidoneus · #9

Cassandra wrote:

On the contrary, with 146, you missed to connect your non-living group in the lower right that could be (and really was) seperated (and killed) by White. This mistake decided the game !

Ahh, you mean the lower left, not right, yes? C12 was a bad mistake. I saw my mistake in not protecting the lower group too late, and I would have resigned right away if my opponent had been human.

Aidoneus · **#10**

Besides chasing after my opponents, I am afraid that the way that I consistently give up the corners will keep me from ever getting down to SDK. I think that I got lucky in the next game, in part, because it was my fourth (edit: sorry, eighth) game ever played, on my second day of playing, and I kept asking my opponent questions about the KGS interface. He was very nice, and I would love to play him again, maybe with less handicap...or not, if he plays more seriously.

Should I try harder to defend the corners? My play just doesn't feel right compared to any other games I have looked at. I think I may already have yet another bad habit. :-?

Cassandra · **#11**

Aidoneus wrote:

Cassandra wrote:

On the contrary, with 146, you missed to connect your non-living group in the lower right that could be (and really was) seperated (and killed) by White. This mistake decided the game !

Ahh, you mean the lower left, not right, yes? C12 was a bad mistake. I saw my mistake in not protecting the lower group too late, and I would have resigned right away if my opponent had been human.

Sorry, corrected my posting respectively in the meantime.

quantumf · **#12**

Yes, I'm afraid the empty triangle that is created at (D16, D17, E17) when you play at E17 is required. You get fantastic compensation, though, which is that the white stone at F17 is now absolutely and 100% isolated from the corner allies. Also, your "wasted" stone created by the empty triangle is compensated by white's now-wasted F17 stone.

Note also that the 4-4 stone almost never turns into territory, as it needs too many moves to turn into secure territory, and white usually has an easy invasion at the 3-3 point. Thus in handicap games like the one you showed, you should expect to give white the small corners, and in return your central influence should get lots of side and/or central territory. It's not a given, of course, and white will do he can to prevent it, but you will outnumber white so it should make the fights a little easier. Note that in the game you showed, you had a won game, until the late error at C12.

oren · **#13**

Mike Novack wrote:

Let's discuss this.
MFOG what version? Set at what playing strength?

You're going to start failing the Turing test if you keep asking the same questions when certain topics are brought up.

Especially when the question isn't really relevant...

Bill Spight · **#14**

A few comments.

You made a lot of small plays, defensive plays, and single purpose plays.

Main focus: What are you afraid of?

Aidoneus · **#15**

Hi Bill, I look forward to reading your comments...just as soon as the server lets me! Thank you in advance.

Edit: I still can't download, but I see that I can view it. So thank you again, I am reading your comments now.

Aidoneus · **#16**

Yes, Bill, your comments reinforce my observation that I ignore the corners when I should be contesting them. (Plus lots of other mistakes you point out, thank you.) I guess because I haven't looked at any, and I do mean any, Joseki, I feel uncomfortable sliding in to the corners to fight. (Edit: I guess I am afraid of falling into traps. A legacy of my chess days and playing Sicilian Dragon and Najdorf games where not knowing in advance usually gets you killed! Maybe I should have called my post Too fear influenced...) Perhaps I should study a few basic patterns with 4-4 corners? Not to memorize but to get more of a feel of some possibilities?

In any case, I really appreciate your help, and everyone else who has made observations/suggestions, which have given me some things to think about.

Now if I could just find some opponents 20 plus/minus 4 (what I ask for on KGS) to get some practice. While I did play a few 9x9 on igowin, I only starting playing MFG on 19x19 because of the difficulty in finding other beginners on KGS. I may try Tygem again. (I did beat an 18k there, but probably only because he disconnected. Really annoying--maybe he left after about 30 moves because of the slow 30-min time control I set? My only other game there was Silver Star, which I may try again as it seems weaker than MFG.)

oren · **#17**

Aidoneus wrote:

Now if I could just find some opponents 20 plus/minus 4 (what I ask for on KGS) to get some practice.

You don't really need to aim so low. Just start assuming you're around 10-15k and try automatches and getting matches around that level. The system will quickly place you into an area for closer games.

EdLee · **#18**

Hi Aidoneus, continue to do your best in your games,
and have them reviewed.

Aidoneus · **#19**

EdLee wrote:

Hi Aidoneus, continue to do your best in your games,
and have them reviewed.

I just noticed this post. Thank you for your encouragement!

For the last week or so I have been studying Bruce Wilcox's Go Dojo discs. After which I plan on playing more partial games with Many Faces of Go. By looking at the built-in scoring of MFG, I can quickly see where I have been going wrong in these handicap games and hopefully improve the speed of my counting territory. I do plan on uploading more games with human opponents eventually, but I just don't want to abuse the community with too many of my games--especially if I keep making the same mistakes. :oops:

emerus · **#20**

Aidoneus wrote:

EdLee wrote:

Hi Aidoneus, continue to do your best in your games,
and have them reviewed.

...... I do plan on uploading more games with human opponents eventually, but I just don't want to abuse the community with too many of my games--especially if I keep making the same mistakes. :oops:

I felt this way and keep hearing it from others as well.... but please post as many games as you want. As long as you also put a bit of effort into review and replying to the feedback, there is no such thing as posting too many games. Most of us love helping new players.

Too influence oriented?

Who is online