Receiving handicap against stronger players and giving it against weaker players is part of one's set of go skills, so I'm not entirely convinced (and practically due to how automatch works not giving handicap means not playing against stronger players too). The reason I (should have) lost here wasn't because I overplayed like crazy, but because I misread the cut and let it happen.

Also it's not like I only play handi games, it's just that those have been the games I have judged the most worthy of being posted here among those I played lately.

Small handicaps make for an interesting game between players of different strength. White should profit from Black's relative mistakes.
High handicaps are for teaching.

Nothing wrong with it

However, if someone systematically plays handi (which you aren't) that might be a sign of "fear of playing serious games" because the ego can always say "oh, it was just a handicap game"

A non-handicap game this time. There were many inaccuracies in my play (for example was probably wrong, I think should have pushed before connecting, 105 was unnecessarily stubborn about not connecting, 119 could have killed the corner, 153 should have either extended to C7 for a completely safe group or been somewhere on the lower side, black 174 at C7 maybe, 213 should have connected at c12 since I then have miai between living connecting to the top without needing to throw away 12 or so points), but my opponent failed to do anything significant so I won by a lot.

I actually disagree. I think giving handi becomes harder the stronger you get, and receiving handi becomes easier the stronger you get, just because you know how to make the most of the additional stones provided to you. Playing against 5-7kyus with 3 stones will likely lead to you making victories through their mistakes. The chance of you playing moves that play down to their level, poor shape, etc. rises with the reckless play that will be required from you having to overcome the handicap. If you really want to play with a handi, i strongly believe playing with a negative komi would be better.

_________________
My Baduk Journey

This is quite an embarrassing game (alright, it's fine, except for one move, but that move is... well), but I thought I shouldn't shy away from posting games I'm ashamed of.



White 106. It's just, why did I even play that move? I die in gote, but it's worse than that, I knowingly died in gote and somewhat didn't even really consider playing something else. I could have been one move ahead in killing his left side group. The power of wishful thinking is a terrible one.



How is negative komi any better? You're still behind by a lot of points, so you also have to play "recklessly" to compensate. Mind you, I'm not of the school of thought that you should consciously overplay a lot in a handicap game. Play fast and tenuki a lot in the opening? Yes. Seek complications when you can? Certainly. But I'm never a fan of the "I know it's bad but I bet he doesn't know how to respond" gamble.

Anyway, since handicap stones force you to adopt a different strategy, I think they're a good way to have a game that will be interesting for both the stronger and weaker player. At least I think it do that better than reverse komi can.

Do you really die in gote? What happens if White is allowed to play C19 afterwards?

Yeah I guess I was technically mistaken and it's actually "I threaten to live but if black answer I'm unconditionally dead" rather than dying in gote. Still pretty facepalm worthy.

Then it's just a wasted ko threat.

If Black answers it, you wasted a ko threat, which is too bad but not the end of the world.

If Black doesn't answer it, you can play another move to live. That's about a 30 point swing, so 15 points (deiri) per move (in gote). There are probably hotter areas on the board right now (I didn't look closely), but that's not peanuts.

So I think the much bigger error was not seeing that you can now live.

Killing the right was bigger than living in the corner, and I felt confident that I would either be able to kill (as happened) or at least get sente to live in the corner.

At the beginning of this game it turned out that I got solid territory and my opponent started to make a rather impressive center. So I started to reduce while it was still wide open (though there was a mishap in the lower right). The next thing I know I have 40-60 points in the center.

It seems I've stopped oscillating between 4k and 4k+ every few days. If I haven't jinxed myself rank up to 3k should follow soonish.

Stupid lesson of the day : Why you shouldn't count :

I miscounted in a close game that I was losing, thus stupidly started a ko that I couldn't win (because finishing the ko was a big sente move and I didn't have enough big enough ko threat to compensate), of course, since I thought I was losing, I glossed over the "that ko doesn't looks good" and instead focused on the "I'm losing I need to do this part".

I lost the ko, which led to a stupid life of death game ending blunder.

But anyway, the point is, looking at the position when the ko happened, it seems that I would end up winning by around 1-3 points... Oops?

Ah well, a loss was expected anyway since I was one game from ranking up.



That's the game. Not much to say about the early opening. I think the left ended up well, but he probably misplayed, but I probably misplayed the lower right. 105 at M9 was something else that I considered, and it might have been better. 163 was stupid, not only because I had missed 164, but also because it didn't strengthen the lower group well (which was its purpose). Either a descent, or playing outright S3 would have been better. And I think I can get at worst seki even if I don't play anything there, but during the game I was very worried about this group. Snaking into his territory up to 199 was very good for me.

Some very quick comments:

_________________
My "guide" to become stronger in Go

It's not clear what you think your "stupid life of death game ending blunder" was, but hopefully you meant answering at 253 when Black played in at 252. What did you think this move threatened to do to your corner? I don't see anything there. Your group is too big and Black has to connect at R18.

Also should you consider 163 a worse move than 161? Can you see that you should have played 161 at M7 instead of O7? You can then finish with O6 instead of O7 if Black connects. That would leave you 3 points better off than if you had saved your stones in the game.

_________________
Dave Sigaty
"Short-lived are both the praiser and the praised, and rememberer and the remembered..."
- Marcus Aurelius; Meditations, VIII 21

...It seems surprising, but you're right, I can't find a way for black to kill if I ignore 252. That said the blunder I was thinking was 264. After that, white is definitely dead

I'm not sure why you think 161 as played is so bad though. Yes, not following up with 163 either capturing or connecting at O6 was moronic, but it's a one point loss compared to M7 (black then extend at O7, white capture, black M10, white connect, and will eventually have to capture at K6. Yeah I can theoretically go to ko, but in reality no).

The game itself isn't necessarily notable (we played some move, he was a bit unreasonable, and I killed something), but with this game I'm now 3k on IGS (well, temporarily, I will probably rank down and rank up a few time in the next week).



After white 108 he probably chose one of the worst possible answers (among those that I've seen). Still, looking over this position I haven't found a way for black to kill my N11 group. Black can save his 4 stones (113 at Q14 is a possibility, though I like the hane of T14 instead of 109 since the corner looks questionably alive after that), but then I can get an eye at O12 and a second on the side.

Of course if my reading is wrong, I will be happy to be corrected.

For the opening, I'm confident I played well (though of course definitely not optimally) at least until -:b25:. I'm unsure about , it might have been too early. After that... Honestly it's not my best game, I don't like how I let him close the top with (so should probably have extended there), so I think that from there up until I might be losing. After I'm good, even if by some miracle his center group manage to live I should be able to live with sente with my own center group and strengthen the lower side, which mean I can look toward reducing the lower right and the top.

Isn't it frustrating when you end up reviewing a game and you realize that there was almost no way to lose the fight, but somehow you did?



After the cut at black 139 by all means I should win this game. 149 should probably have pushed and cut at M16 but even then it would be fine. 183 and 185 were crude (185 at 183 immediately is better, or even 185 at R13). But even after then I'm fine. It's b189 which is completely moronic. I should cut white's two groups and then I win the semeai. White will live with his dragon because he can get T8 and T6 in sente, but I get a large top right, and get sente to play something like G13 and in the end white doesn't have much territory.

I agree with all of that but it isn't obvious to count the liberties appropriately, see the implications of all that fighting, let alone during the game. So, to call 189 "completely moronic" is too harsh, but it shows the signs of a high dan in the making.

Well, the semeai after I cut with 189 is unclear, yes, but the one when I play as in the game is obviously lost, which is why I'm so critical of that one play there.

Of course, as you say, realizing that in the after game review is different than doing so while playing.

When you cut at 149, White should have thrown in at G11, capturing your G12 stone. You are short of liberties there.

_________________
Dave Sigaty
"Short-lived are both the praiser and the praised, and rememberer and the remembered..."
- Marcus Aurelius; Meditations, VIII 21