topazg wrote:
CXUD wrote:
The guys at my go club are always telling me I need to keep my stones more connected and try to divide my opponents forces but I never find occasion to do this because I'm always more concerned with placing stones in a way that gets the most influence. I can't see the benefits when I'm playing of cutting apart opponents groups over gaining influence in ANY situation, for some reason my mind doesn't see the effects, I just think to myself the player with the most influence/territory wins so why waste possible influence cutting and connecting, but I know they're right about dividing and connecting groups over gaining influence in certain situations because they're better players and they wipe the floor with me. Is there any visual examples that you guys can think of where I can see the real gains of splitting apart opponent's groups over gaining influence?
Post a game or situation where this sort of situation has cropped up, and I'll try to offer a few suggestions
Cool. I'll try to do that next time it happens.
iazzi wrote:
generally speaking, the games you lost should be good examples of why you should care about cuts.
It comes down to life and death, in a pinch. If your groups are separated they have to make life separately, which means losing territory to make eyes, and building a new border. Being cut or invaded makes little difference: what you consider your territory is not really yours if the opponent can come in.
This is the general guideline: as topazg said, having a real game to comment would make explanations simpler.
To me it seemed like my main problem was preventing infiltration but after the games were done I could see that my defeat had something to do with not keeping my groups connected.
EdLee wrote:
CXUD wrote:
I'm always more concerned with placing stones in a way that gets the most influence.
At this stage, you can pretty much forget everything about influence. Your biggest problems are likely in your basic shapes.
As topazg and iazzi have suggested, post a
serious game here and let's take a look.
Influence is the only thing I have going for me. I can open pretty well and tanuki for influence pretty well.
hyperpape wrote:
CXUD wrote:
...influence/territory...
I'm wondering what you think of as influence.
Pretty much when a piece has a field of influence it can use to put pressure on future developments in the area.
Dusk Eagle wrote:
The simple answer is that if your groups are cut apart and weak, you'll be struggling throughout the game to make them stronger while your opponent attacks you. While your opponent is attacking you, he will find it quite easy to make territory and take away yours. You meanwhile will not be able to make a whole lot of territory because you'll be too busy trying to live with all the weak groups your opponent is attacking. Also, the more weak groups you have on the board, the more likely it is for some of them to die. Of course, if you have strong groups and your opponent is the one with the cut apart weak groups, it is suddenly you who is on the attack.
On a related note, you seem to talk about influence versus strong groups. I would say you can't have influence without strong groups. The point of gaining influence (as opposed to territory) is that if your opponent gets near to it, you will be able to attack them strongly for profit. But if your groups are weak, it's hard to effectively attack your opponent for profit, as your opponent will be attacking you at the same time. But if your groups are strong, you can attack your opponent at will.
I realize this answer seems rather high-level, and I think, like Ed Lee said, that at 20k your problems likely come from basic mistakes rather than an inability to grasp what I'm saying. Still, hopefully this answer is of at least some help to you.
As for good examples demonstrating the difference between staying connected and not staying connected, there is a very good one in the book "Lessons in the Fundamentals of Go," but I'll have to see if I can find any freely available ones.
I see what you're saying but in the games I've played it usually ends up that my territory gets taken away or invaded due to a chink in the individual groups armor rather than the group not being a bigger stronger group. My groups seem to die less from coming into contact with bigger groups than they do from well placed small invasions.
Bill Spight wrote:
CXUD wrote:
The guys at my go club are always telling me I need to keep my stones more connected and try to divide my opponents forces
Divide and conquer is not a go proverb, but it still applies.
Quote:
but I never find occasion to do this because I'm always more concerned with placing stones in a way that gets the most influence.
How do you get influence without keeping your stones connected?
Quote:
I can't see the benefits when I'm playing of cutting apart opponents groups over gaining influence in ANY situation, for some reason my mind doesn't see the effects, I just think to myself the player with the most influence/territory wins so why waste possible influence cutting and connecting, but I know they're right about dividing and connecting groups over gaining influence in certain situations because they're better players and they wipe the floor with me.
Well, their advice is well meaning, but they have obviously not gotten through. I think that you are right to listen to advice but to keep your own counsel. At the same time, let's be frank. You know next to nothing about go. Why not experiment? Try a few games where you just concentrate on connecting and cutting and see what happens.
Quote:
Is there any visual examples that you guys can think of where I can see the real gains of splitting apart opponent's groups over gaining influence?
Oh, sure.
But in your next teaching games with players at your club, why not ask them to show you? If they think that you are making mistakes in that regard, there must be plenty of examples.
Or perhaps they have shown you, but not convinced you. In that case, keep your own counsel, but question yourself.
I don't get influence if my stones aren't connected, but I still get it when my groups aren't connected.
There's one guy there who I'm going to ask next time to show me, he's really good at explaining things. I'm definitely going to mess around with a couple games just doing dividing and connecting.