Today I wanted to do another Life&Death post. Since I've covered the basic small-L group, the logical next step is to examine the impact of small changes to that group, adding "tails" to the group. There are two different ways to do so:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Possible Tails
$$ ------------------------------
$$ . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . |
$$ . . X O . . . | . X W O . . . |
$$ . . X O O O . | . X X O O O . |
$$ . . X X X W . | . . X X X X . |
$$ . . . . X X . | . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . |[/go]

Both of these shapes are unsettled. With one more move, White can live. If it is Black's turn, he can kill. In both instances, the best way to do this is by reducing the current shape to the previously studied small-L group, which we showed was dead.
(I've tried to minimize the number of sgfs I need to embed in this post by combining a few.)
Black to Kill
First, let's look at the different ways that Black can kill these shapes (or fail to do so).


White to Live
The next step is to look at the different ways that White can turn this group into a living shape.


Descents to the Edge
In looking at the basic shape, we saw that adding a descent stone change the shape from dead to unsettled. Here, adding descent stones mean that Black's best result is now less than a clean kill.


A Note about Hanes
Finally, it is worth noting the status of these shapes can change even if White has hanes in place, rather than solidly descending to the edge. (To understand why this is so, recall that the way to kill these shapes originally was by playing a hane that turned them back into the basic Small-L group.)


As always, let me know if I made any errors or missed any important variations.

After reading through some of the other study journals here, and thinking more about my goals, I've come to the conclusion that I should create a bit more of a study plan here for 2015. Here goes:

• Tsuemego - 20-30 minutes per day. I can probably get this done on my commute.
• Detailed study of common positions - I feel like I've gained a lot from the posts I've already made here. My goal will be to post one of these per week.
• Memorize professional games - Also one per week. I'm hoping this will help both with my fuseki (which I think is a bit weak) and, if I'm lucky, I can try to find a game that features the position I'm studying for the week. My plan will be to study the game over the weekend, and then replay it at least once each day, while also replaying a previously memorized game once per day to try to keep those games fresh too. I'll probably focus on Iyama Yutta's games, as I tend to enjoy his play.

I thought about adding an additional item of working through one book per month, but I didn't want to be overly ambitious in allocating my time. I've already got close to an hour's worth of go study per day on this list. Hopefully that will be enough to push me to the next level.

I wanted to spend a bit of time looking at a joseki that I've started seeing more frequently in my games. I don't plan to offer anything revolutionary here, but writing it out hopefully helps for my memory and understanding. The joseki begins like this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ ------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . d . . |
$$ . 2 . . 1 , X b . |
$$ . . . . a 5 7 c . |
$$ . . . . 4 6 8 9 . |
$$ . . . . . 3 . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |[/go]

The first three moves are very common, especially, I've found, on KGS. However, , instead of A is what begins the joseki I'm looking at today. After that, 5-8 are pretty much forced, with White beginning to surround the corner and Black building a wall. Then, tries to avoid being completely surrounded while cutting off the Black 3-4 stone.

Note: Waltheri's database does have 3 instances of professionals playing at B instead of . Black then descends to C and White plays D to capture the corner conclusively. My suspicion is that modern professionals regard Black's sente wall as too good in these variations.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ ------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . b . . . . |
$$ . . . 6 7 a 4 . . |
$$ . X . 5 O , X 1 . |
$$ . . . c . O O 2 . |
$$ . . . . X X X O . |
$$ . . . . . O 3 . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |[/go]

The sequence then continues with White trying to continue to keep the corner. At is where a bit more variation begins. White has to try to kill the aji remaining in the two black stones, and usually the attachment is played, but moves at A and B have also been tried. If White plays A, Black takes the shape point at .

With , Black begins sealing White in. Then and are forced. Now, White must choose how to handle this cross-cut. In general, A is simpler, but I've been told professionals now regard it as a bit too good for Black, so B is gaining in popularity. Waltheri's also shows a few examples of C, but they seem strange to me, so I'm not really focused on them. First A:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc Variation A
$$ ------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . b . 5 . . . . |
$$ . . 4 O X 1 O a . |
$$ . X . X O 3 X X . |
$$ . . . . 2 O O O . |
$$ . . . . X X X O . |
$$ . . . . . O X 6 . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |[/go]

With this sequence, Black can seal White in on both sides, which is why I'm told that Black is slightly better. In a few instances, White plays at :w5, but this is mostly just a change in move order. Black plays 4 at , then White fills, and is sente. After White responds at A, Black can come back to take B and succeed in surrounding White again.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc Variation B
$$ ------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . b 1 5 7 c . |
$$ . . a O X 4 O 6 . |
$$ . X . X O 2 X X . |
$$ . . . 8 3 O O O . |
$$ . . . . X X X O . |
$$ . . . . . O X 9 . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |[/go]

Here is where things get complicated, as you can see. But first, a few things to note:

• If Black plays at , it almost looks the another move order switch, but with a critical difference. White responds at and Black then exchanges A for B. But now, White has openings into both sides, and Black can only seal off one of them.
• If White plays at , then it really is just a move order change. Black plays at , White fills, and Black can play at in sente before coming back to close off the top.

Now, back to the main line. With and , White is trying to kill the entire Black corner, but Black can put up serious resistance by playing threatening to capture the entire White group. After , Black must choose between B and C to try to save his group, with B being more common. Here is how that looks, as both sides search for liberties:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bc Variation B (cont'd)
$$ ------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . 5 3 1 O O O 7 . |
$$ 6 4 2 O X X O X . |
$$ . X . X O X X X . |
$$ . . . X O O O O . |
$$ . . . a X X X O . |
$$ . . . . . O X O . |
$$ . . . . . . b . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |[/go]

Now the situation has reversed. Black has ended up in the corner, while his outside stones have a serious weak point at A (or White can simply come around to A and hope Black creates a heavy group. The game will now focus on how well Black can handle these stones.

In sum, the final variation is the way that White has found to reject Black's plan of taking outside influence, but it comes at the expense significant blood from both sides.

Although it was a short week and it's not that hard to keep to a study plan initially, I'm still happy to report that Week 1 was a success. I'm also feeling optimistic that I'm starting to come out of a recent playing slump.

For tsumego, I've been working through Cho Chikun's Elementary Life & Death problems. With the exception of maybe 1-in-40 problems, I can usually spot the answers pretty quickly, but I've deliberately picked a copy without answers in order to enforce the discipline of proving to myself that I've gotten the problems correct.

For my weekly post, you'll see above some analysis of a joseki that I'm seeing more often. I haven't tried playing it intentionally (rather than responding when it does arise), but maybe soon.

Finally, for professional games, I spent the last few days memorizing this 2011 game between Iyama Yuuta and Lee Sedol. I think the game really reflects the depth of professional life&death reading, particularly with Iyama's - , - and 117. It's good inspiration for me to keep doing the daily tsumego problems myself.

Hi AmatterOf, it's great you examine these basics like this.

I have a question (for anyone who knows the answer.)
When people talk about the "basic L-shape,"
are they only referring to the inside stones, or, do they also
include the outside stones ? I notice at Sensei's Library,
they also filled in 5 of the outside liberties, like in your post #2.

It seems to me changing the inside shape a bit
(say, by adding an extra "tail") is one logical next step in this study.

Another next logical step would be to keep the inside stones identitcal,
but study what happens with different outside liberties.
(As opposed to filling in 5 outside libs,
which is one particular status of the inside-L.)

For example:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Diagram A
$$ -------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . X . X . O . . . |
$$ . . . X . O O O . |
$$ . . . X . . . . . |
$$ . . . . X X X X . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . X . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |[/go]

My understanding is locally, White is still dead,
even if White goes first. (That is, we ignore global considerations such as
ko fights elsewhere.) I think this adds a few more variations to the study,
without adding stones to the inside-L.

( In other words, when people say "the basic small-L," do they imply
"the basic small-L with 5 outside libs filled,"
or do they actually mean Diagram A, which is a more generalized case ? )

How do you feel about this direction of study ?

Thanks for making this excellent point. I agree it is worth studying too. I also agree that even having all of its outside liberties free as in your diagram, the White shape remains locally dead. However, the key seems to be that Black retains the marked stones, as these provide a way to turn certain potential eyes false:



As far as the terminology, I'm not actually sure which one I meant. (Since the no-liberties-filled situation feels rather artificial, I didn't even think of it, but it's worth studying.) I'll leave it to others to hash out that question.

From my experience on SL which does not have sgf integration but as a wiki is better suited to write articles, I warn you that such activity won't help you improve. I understand the need for exposure and feedback more than anyone, but articulating your understanding will not consolidate it, perhaps even reduce it. Your thinking about go is many times faster than your writing about it. Be careful for your writing not to dictate the pace of your thinking.

Cheers

Thanks for weighing in. In general, I'm hoping to get more benefit out of studying the materials in advance of writing, rather than the actual writing process. That's more of a public accountability idea. All that being said, what would you recommend instead?

Fully get the public accountability idea.

I was 2D when I started writing on SL. 14 years later I still am.
Before that I had a major breakthrough by playing a rival for 6 months, no time limits, 3 consecutive wins change the handicap and most of all I reviewed the games by myself thoroughly.

Now it could be I was Born to become 2D at best and this is just An anecdote.
How about the uberdudes: what brought them to 4-5d?

I see the similarity in the urge to write. Through my experience I believe more in evanescence than complete accounting. Unless you want to become a good writer of course.

Extraverts like us will always need a channel to keep up motivation. My advice is to keep an eye on the motivational return on the literary investment.

Cheers

I think of it like this: on one end of the spectrum, all 5 libs are filled (a la Sensei's Library, and your post 2).
On the other end, all 5 libs are empty.
In between are different combinations of filled libs and empty libs,
which is what happens in real games.
Now, regardless of the combinations of liberties, the inside-L is dead.
I figure if we understand the case with the most empty libs,
then it should be even easier with fewer libs for the inside-L.

So I was looking for the most generalized case,
given the small inside-L shape.

Another var where W lives:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W Diagram B
$$ -------------------
$$ . . . . . . . 1 9 |
$$ . X X . . O . 3 2 |
$$ . . . X . O O O 4 |
$$ . . . X . . . 5 6 |
$$ . . . . X X X 8 7 |
$$ . . . . . . . X . |
$$ . . . . . . . X . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W Diagram B cont'd
$$ -------------------
$$ . . . . . . . O O |
$$ . X X . . O . O . |
$$ . . . X . O O O . |
$$ . . . X . . . O . |
$$ . . . . X X X X O |
$$ . . . . . . . X . |
$$ . . . . . . . X . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . |[/go]

I had planned to do a different topic for this week, but after working through my selection for a professional game for this week a few times, I've been struck by this shape that almost never occurs to me to play:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Elephant Jump
$$ . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . X . .
$$ . . . a . . .
$$ . . X . . . .
$$ . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . .[/go]

Since I almost never play it (because of the obvious weakness at A), my understanding of it is pretty minimal, but after looking at how it arises in professional play, here are some basic things (I think) I've learned about it.

First, even though it has the obvious weakness at A, the Elephant Jump is often very useful for creating thickness, even when the opponent hits that weak spot. For example, you can imagine a sequence like this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W Black creates thickness
$$ . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . 6 . . . . . .
$$ . . . . 4 2 X . .
$$ . . . 5 3 1 . . .
$$ . . . . B . O . .
$$ . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . .[/go]

If Black can continue to make use of the marked stone, then this thickness is especially good. This is the core idea behind the joseki I examined in my previous study-post. Perhaps an even better example of this is in this Iyama Yuta game. Iyama makes the elephant jump with and then from - sacrifices the one stone in order to build thickness. The aji from the stone continues to linger, however, as seen with .


Relatedly, this Elephant Jump is often played as a cap in a jumping fight. Something like this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ ----------------
$$ . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . .
$$ . X . O . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . .
$$ . X . O . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . B . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . .[/go]

A good example of this is in last week's game, when White played the cap of .

To avoid this result, an opponent will often not want to play at this weak point. This especially seems to happen in certain joseki sequences like these:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ --------------------------------
$$ . . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . |
$$ . 6 . . . . . . | . . . . . . . |
$$ . 3 . . . 4 . . | . . . 1 . . . |
$$ . . . 2 , 1 . . | . . . , . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . | . . . . 2 . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . 5 . . | . . 4 . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . | . . . 3 . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . |[/go]

In these joseki sequences, it's notable that playing at the midpoint weakness in the elephant jump is wrong. In fact, in most examples of this that I found in (my limited review of) professional play, the opponent's response was to play somewhere other than this weakness. (Iyama's in last week's game seems to be the exception, and prompted a bit of an exchange.) You can see this happen several times in the game I'm memorizing this week (notably at and ):


Now that I'm looking for it, I'm seeing this shape everywhere, but still wish I understood more. Can anyone add anything further?

I play it if I want to look cool.

P.S. Another common situation it is a good haengma is when you have one/both of the one point jumps to aim at as attaches which bulk up the shape, but you might want to keep that in reserve as it's good style not to play moves you don't need to in case you want other options later.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$ ----------------------+
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . 1 . X . . X . . |
$$ . , . . . . . X . O . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . 2 . a O . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ . , . . . . . , . . . |[/go]

Another common shape (maybe some black pincers like marked, they vary):

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$ ----------------------+
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . B . . . O X . . . |
$$ . , . . . . O , X . . |
$$ . . B . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . 1 . a X . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . , . . . . . , . . . |[/go]

Thanks for pointing out Haylee's youtube channel (although my pony has been a little slow). Haylee's channel is the first youtube channel I have subscribed too.

Thanks! These are excellent examples.

Week 2 Update
I consider this to have been a successful week. It had the bonus of the AGA Professional Qualifying tournament going on, which was quite fun to watch. I was also happy with my own play this week, and I managed to go 3-0 in slow games. On the other hand, in reviewing those games, I still found tons of embarrassing mistakes, so it's clear that I have a long way to go.

I was able to continue my daily tsumego, and am now more than halfway through Cho Chikun's Elementary Life & Death. I was particularly happy to notice how quickly I could go through the small-L shape problems that popped up this week, which I credit to my previous study-posts (here and here) on the shape.

For professional games, I was feeling optimistic this week and went ahead and did two games. First was a fighting game between Iyama Yuta and Park Junghwan that I mentioned above. After spending a few days looking at it, I found Go Game Guru's commentary on the game, which proved very helpful to my deeper understanding of it. That said, a lot of what I hoped to get out of professional games is improving my fuseki and direction of play, and crazy fighting games like this are not as useful in that respect. If this game ends up being one of the first ones I start to forget, I won't be heartbroken.

The second game I thought was a good example of how modern professionals treat the orthodox fuseki.

For this week's post, I want to look at a shape that has always given me headaches.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W The Carpenter's Square
$$ ----------------
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . O . O X . a . |
$$ . . . O X . . . |
$$ . . . O X X X . |
$$ . . . O O O O . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . O . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |[/go]

There is an obvious vital point in the shape at A, and by playing there, Black can easily live. However, if White plays first, the best result she can achieve is a ko, and the far more challenging aspect of this shape for me has been figuring out the various paths to this result. So many of the moves that seem obvious to me turn out to be wrong, and the correct moves strike me as unintuitive initially. To help with this, I found it useful to first look at the common results of many patterns. First, the ko result:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W Ko for life
$$ ----------------
$$ . . . . . X X S |
$$ . O . O X W O X |
$$ . . . O X . X O |
$$ . . . O X X X O |
$$ . . . O O O O . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . O . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |[/go]

The ko occurs around the 1-1 point, and generally follows from a shape like this. In some instances, the marked White stone may not be in place.

When White fails, it's usually because Black has managed to create a seki with a shape like this.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W Seki
$$ ----------------
$$ . . . . O . X . |
$$ . O . O X X O O |
$$ . . . O X . O X |
$$ . . . O X X X X |
$$ . . . O O O O . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . O . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |[/go]

Of course, in some circumstances where White knows she has a lack of ko threats, seki may be better, but following the common practice of tsumego, I'll consider this a White failure.

When Black fails, it's usually because White has managed to create a dead shape inside, something like these:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W Black dies
$$ --------------------------------
$$ . . . . X b a . | . . . . X X O . |
$$ . O . O X O O O | . O . O X O O X |
$$ . . . O X . . X | . . . O X . O X |
$$ . . . O X X X . | . . . O X X X . |
$$ . . . O O O O . | . . . O O O O . |
$$ . . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . O . | . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . . |[/go]

Because Black has no outside liberties, the throw-in tesuji at A does not work. When Black plays there, White merely responds at B, and Black will not be able to capture the White stones before running out of liberties himself. And, if Black does not play at A, White can play there, creating both a dead shape and an eye to win any capturing race.

Keeping these in mind, it's a bit easier to see why Black's response at the 2-1 point is the right answer.


Another proper way for White to create a ko is with this initial move:


Things get even trickier with less conventional moves from White initially. In particular, White can also create a ko with the simple hane, and Black's proper response is not easy to see at all.


Finally, it's worth noting that White cannot create a ko with these plays:


There are, of course, many other variations of the Carpenter's Square, such as those where Black has extra liberties or hanes/extensions in place. I plan to look at those in a future post. Let me know if you spot any errors/omissions, or anything that is unclear.

Week 3 Update
I've always found weeks 3 and 4 to be the most difficult in creating new routines/habits. That said, I still seem to be on track. And, while my play this week didn't feel as sharp as last week, I still managed to go 4-1 in slow games.

As far as tsumego goes, I've continued my daily streak. Now, however, the problems are getting a bit more difficult, and I can't get through nearly as many in one day. I'm also getting to the point where I wish I had the answers, since, while I'm trying to force myself to read out all of the variations, there are beginning to be so many that it's tough not to miss one. But, I guess that's a good thing to practice too.

I also got a study post in (immediately above) on the Carpenter's Square. I had hoped it would be more comprehensive, but I ran out of time to do some of the related shapes.

My daily work memorizing professional games has also continued. This week I wanted to look at something with a Mini/Micro-Chinese fuseki, and this summer's deciding match between Iyama Yuta and Ida Atsushi in the Honinbo final provided that. (It also had the bonus of good commentary from Go Game Guru, available here.) The endgame in this match still trips me up sometimes, but not too badly. I was amazed at the shape that Iyama created in the bottom, but I guess small life is the price he paid for switching directions with .

Here is the game record:

About the move I showed earlier, i don't think it's any good. First of all, the opponent can just let you live in the corner, which I think is rarely good for you since he breaks the side. Secondly, if he wants the corner he can just play the hane instead of pulling down, and it reverts to one of the 2 normal variations. There is no way for you to live in the corner now so you have to play the normal variation after the hane. Here is what I mean: http://eidogo.com/#xNQTfhpA

_________________
My go YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/DragonfistGaming
My website: http://learnbaduk.com/

Week 4 Update
This was a busy week for me at work, which, combined with feeling a bit under the weather, made it tougher to stay on top of my goals. In particular, I didn't get to do a study post this week. On the other hand, I did watch a number of Level Up to 5 Dan videos on BadukTV English, thanks to the AGA's recent promotional offer (see here). I guess I could have written up some of the interesting things I learned about the Chinese opening from those videos, but I didn't have much to add beyond their helpful lines/explanations. I also spent a bit of time looking at this old joseki, after seeing it come up in a few of my games this month:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ --------------
$$ . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . X . . . |
$$ . . . b . a . |
$$ . . . 2 1 . . |
$$ . . . 3 4 . . |
$$ . . . . . . . |[/go]

I often thought of B as the next obvious response, but after looking it up, there are some really nice lines after the tesuji at A. I'll have to remember this next time it comes up.

On the positive side, I did manage to stay on track with daily tsumego, and have nearly finished Cho's Elementary problems. I'll probably move on to his Intermediate set next, but if anyone has better suggestions, I'd love to hear them,

I also successfully kept up with my review of professional games. I still remember >95% of each of the previous weeks' games, which is nice to see. For this week's game, I wanted to stay with the mini/micro-Chinese idea. It's sad that this game ended with a mistake, but perhaps comforting to see that even in title matches with very long time limits, pros still make these mistakes too. The game record is below, and GoGameGuru's helpful comments are here.

Week 5 Update
This was slightly disappointing week for me. I played fairly poorly, but at least I mostly kept up with the resolutions. The study-posts have largely faded, which seems unfortunate. I've been telling myself that the detailed study of my correspondence games has taken its place, which is somewhat true, but those positions aren't always as generalizable as what I was doing in the study posts. Hopefully I can find time to bring them back.

I did continue with the daily tsumego, and finished Cho's Elementary. I've moved on to his Intermediate set, and I'm finding these quite fun.

I also continued with my goal of memorizing pro games. This week I selected a game that had previously appeared in one of my study posts (on the elephant jump):


A few things I'm hoping to change up for February:

• Chinese Opening - I'd like to be more focused in what I'm studying, instead of just bouncing around from idea to idea. So, this month, I'm going to try to focus on the Chinese opening. Each of the professional games I'll select this month will have this opening, and hopefully I can do a study-post or two regarding it. If I can find time, I'll also re-read Kato's book on the Chinese opening.
• Tygem - In January I mostly played on KGS, but I'm going to switch over to Tygem this month, partly because I'd like to continue developing my fighting strength, and partly just for a change of pace.