The goal seems to be to settle
quickly.
| Life In 19x19 http://www.lifein19x19.com/ |
|
| Opening theory - shows what we know! http://www.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=6750 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | topazg [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 5:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | Opening theory - shows what we know! |
I saw an interesting game today played between high level players. Everyone knows contact plays are mostly wrong in the opening right? This one would have never dawned on me - is this something anyone else here would play, and what would be your long-term goals with it? |
|
| Author: | p2501 [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 5:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opening theory - shows what we know! |
The goal seems to be to settle quickly.
|
|
| Author: | topazg [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 5:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opening theory - shows what we know! |
Doesn't the idea of White sealing Black into the corner with a facing 6-4 in the lower left just seem .. I dunno, unwise or something ? 
|
|
| Author: | Magicwand [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 7:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opening theory - shows what we know! |
variation variation my assessment on the position..black attaching doesnt look good because of above white move.. i hope robert apply his theory to evaluate this joseky and prove to everyone if he has guts. |
|
| Author: | Splatted [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 8:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opening theory - shows what we know! |
My only guess is that it forces white to commit to using  for influence. It's hard to see how white can not end up with lots of influence after playing the 6-4, but if black plays to counter that white can just take a large corner whenever she wants, so maybe it's better to remove that option early on? I guess the same reasoning could apply to a 3-3 invasion of a 4-4 stone, but I think the territory to influence balance is quite different there.Of course, it might just have been a bad move... |
|
| Author: | snorri [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 9:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | " |
topazg wrote: I saw an interesting game today played between high level players. Everyone knows contact plays are mostly wrong in the opening right? This one would have never dawned on me - is this something anyone else here would play, and what would be your long-term goals with it? Some common ideas for black instead of are at the points 'x'. I think the attachment is a psychological strategy. White is trying to take black out of the book by playing two 6-4 points, so maybe black thinks this will take the game out of white's book.In any case, I don't think early contact plays are as bad as people think they are. I remember there used to be a series in Go World titled something like "bad moves, how bad are they?" and the pros would discuss how many points compensation would they take for playing a specific bad move. The results are usually surprisingly small. Players often at the pro level throw away more points in the endgame than a lot of the classic opening bad moves lose. I think in one commentary there was a quip that if people learn about that, it will be very hard to sell go books.  If you think is bad, how many points would you want to take black in this game? For me, I think 2 points compensation and we're good to go 
|
|
| Author: | topazg [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opening theory - shows what we know! |
For those interested, here's the game: (Taken from gogameworld.com but with their excellent commentary removed - subtle plug here for their excellent site too  )
|
|
| Author: | lemmata [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opening theory - shows what we know! |
 Well done, topazg. Very refreshing. Who could have guessed that "high level player" meant Lee Sedol? This ought to teach us not to speak in absolutes when talking about go. I am curious how Gu Li would play against this. The Korean pros on Baduk TV frequently say that Gu Li is better at playing the opening than anyone else. Do you have any Gu Li vs Gan Siyang games? |
|
| Author: | topazg [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opening theory - shows what we know! |
I'm afraid not, it's the only game of his that they have, but Gan Siyang seems to have a reputation for interesting openings: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFImtHxZ ... re=related |
|
| Author: | EdLee [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
lemmata wrote: Who could have guessed that "high level player" meant Lee Sedol? Yes, but there's also a flip side to the coin.This ought to teach us not to speak in absolutes when talking about go. Lee Sedol is famous (notorious?) for playing unconventional moves (Luo Xihe 9p is another one). At their level, they can do a lot of things that we mere mortals cannot do, because they have their own ways of thinking, and, more importantly, they have completely mastered the fundamentals and their minds are free, so they can handle the situation. This is one reason it's not uncommon to see amateurs, especially kyus and low dans, blindly (or fashionably) copy pro moves without having a clue as to what they're doing. |
|
| Author: | ez4u [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opening theory - shows what we know! |
topazg wrote: For those interested, here's the game: ... (Taken from gogameworld.com but with their excellent commentary removed - subtle plug here for their excellent site too )That's nice but where is the link to the commentary for us lazy old guys? Searching on Gan Siyang returned no hits and Lee Sedol returned too many! 
|
|
| Author: | topazg [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opening theory - shows what we know! |
ez4u wrote: topazg wrote: For those interested, here's the game: ... (Taken from gogameworld.com but with their excellent commentary removed - subtle plug here for their excellent site too )That's nice but where is the link to the commentary for us lazy old guys? Searching on Gan Siyang returned no hits and Lee Sedol returned too many! It's a paid for service so I don't feel I can post it here - all their games have professional commentaries attached (in this case by Wang Lei), and most of which are really enjoyable to read They're all at http://www.gogameworld.com/ |
|
| Author: | ez4u [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opening theory - shows what we know! |
Compare the result in the upper left in the game to the lower left in the diagram below. Black is one line higher in the corner. |
|
| Author: | ez4u [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opening theory - shows what we know! |
topazg wrote: ez4u wrote: topazg wrote: For those interested, here's the game: ... (Taken from gogameworld.com but with their excellent commentary removed - subtle plug here for their excellent site too )That's nice but where is the link to the commentary for us lazy old guys? Searching on Gan Siyang returned no hits and Lee Sedol returned too many! It's a paid for service so I don't feel I can post it here - all their games have professional commentaries attached (in this case by Wang Lei), and most of which are really enjoyable to read They're all at http://www.gogameworld.com/ Ah, understood. I thought it was just my general incompetence! 
|
|
| Author: | Magicwand [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 2:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opening theory - shows what we know! |
Magicwand wrote: variation variation my assessment on the position..black attaching doesnt look good because of above white move.. i hope robert apply his theory to evaluate this joseky and prove to everyone if he has guts. i dont like actual game hanne. that is why i thought above is the only variation for white. i will be bold and say that hanne was not good for white.(i did not read any comments about this game) let me know if the comment mentioned anything about my move. what other answer does black have if white play as above??? |
|
| Author: | lemmata [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 2:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
EdLee wrote: At their level, they can do a lot of things that we mere mortals cannot do This is so true But don't forget that our opponents are amateurs. What ever it is that we can do might be enough to win.That said, I do agree that blindly copying pro moves is not very productive. For me, the pro moves are almost always too difficult to understand anyways. |
|
| Author: | topazg [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 2:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opening theory - shows what we know! |
@MW: My first feeling is that C17 is ok: Also, it's a bit weird, but maybe this? Unless my reading fails again, the cut at "a" no longer seems to work for white, so Black can descend. If White plays to the corner, maybe @  is ok? Still, some complicated stuff for poor me.Regarding the game commentary, no nobis were addressed. The only comment was that if White hane'd the other side, Black would counter-hane: |
|
| Author: | Magicwand [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 4:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Opening theory - shows what we know! |
this appears to be joseki because white can miai a or b unless professionals think black is better... white stones in the middle will be attacked ..i dont like white |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|