Ian Butler wrote:
Bill Spight wrote:
Ian Butler wrote:
Here I was proud of my tenuki on the top side, but it turns out it was too big a gamble?
Well, your pincer was really an invasion. And the jlt raised the stakes!
That's true. My reasoning at the time, however, was this:
I can live back here. But doing so might give white a lot of influence in exchange. so I'd better postpone it if I can, and do something else first, before giving white such amount of influence.
If white would decide to block off the stone, I could still reduce the area later and have a free move elsewhere.
Well, it seems to me that you are doing two things. First, you are second guessing yourself. If you are right about the influence, then your invasion was premature. I don't think it was, but you do not have my experience. And I could be wrong. Maybe it was premature.
Not just in go, but in general, IMO it is a good idea to be a bit dogged about your original plan or idea. In theory, I suppose, you should reevaluate on every turn, look with fresh eyes, and not hang on to potentially mistaken perceptions or assumptions. But that takes time and energy. Better to have some faith in yourself while admitting that you could be wrong. Besides, if you were wrong then, you could be wrong now. In chess, Znosko-Borovsky said this about second guessing yourself: "Order. Counter-order. Disorder." (I read Znosko-Borovsky when I was 13. He made a big impression.
) Edit2: Znosko-Borovsky points out that a worthy opponent is going to resist your plans and come up with plays that put the outcome in question. It is a contest, after all.
Edit 4: Something I forgot to mention. Sticking by your guns encourages you to make better decisions beforehand, and, by finding out how your original plan works out, you gain information to use in making good decisions.
Anyway, you saw the flaws in White's wall, which are what makes the invasion OK at this time. So maybe do a little reading and evaluate the picture of White's outside influence that emerges. You don't have to do an exhaustive search, just get the picture. Another chess writer, Krogius, points out that each move gives you a better picture of the future than your previous mental picture. Improving your vision of the future is not the same as second guessing yourself.
The second thing you did was assume that your approach was sente, and you could come back to the invasion. In fact, the approach to the 4-4 is not in general sente and White could have attacked your invading stone. He could also have tried a leaning attack against your top left corner, to strengthen the attack against that stone. It was a close enough question that I did not comment on it, but thinking about it now, attacking your invasion would probably have been good psychology, inviting you to question yourself again.
Edit: Correction. Looking again, I see that you did take the possibility of an attack into account. But you assumed that you could reduce if he did. But if he attacks from above, you won't be able to do that. And you might not be able to do that if he starts with a leaning attack against your corner.
Edit3: You did assume that if White did attack your invasion, your gain elsewhere would be good enough compensation. That is a dubious assumption after White has raised the stakes.
----
Oh! Note to jlt. As White you followed Black around the board too much. That is part of the reason why he played so well. Black is supposed to follow White, remember?
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Ian Butler
which should have been at N6 (we noticed it this morning)
. Leelazero says that C5 would have been a better local play. This move separates the white C8 group from the corner group. White can also disconnect Black but C8 is not alive, so that's a fight...
and 
, followed by the no suji, 
is considered as a mistake, I should have attacked your D8 group instead.
, why didn't you try to capture/attack the 4 white stones? They are quite weak, and if you capture them, you're alive
below, Black answers with the knight's move at 
. This is the new style. Next LZ thinks White should enclose the bottom left, leaving the single stone on the right as a forcing play. Instead White extends with the 2-space jump to 
. LZ does not consider this a bad move but slightly worse than the enclosure.
and White answers with 
. This seems natural, everyone who learned go more than three years ago probably feels that Black has made White over-concentrated and that this is a good exchange. LZ disagrees. This exchange strengthens White while creating a weakness at P3 for Black. Immediately, LZ thinks Black needs to protect the bottom left instead of 
, White should play P3 instead of 
, and Black should again protect instead of playing elsewhere with 
. This weakness dominated the analysis of the next thirty moves or so in the game, LZ continually wanting to go back and either protect (as Black) or attach at P3 (as White).