Life In 19x19 http://www.lifein19x19.com/ |
|
108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) http://www.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=3511 |
Page 1 of 6 |
Author: | mw42 [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 9:18 am ] |
Post subject: | 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
Challenge accepted, Puppycakes. Black: Puppycakes 3k White: mw42 2k Rules: Japanese Komi: 0.5 Open comments? No. Consultation of joseki dictionaries allowed? No. Let me know if you agree. ![]()
|
Author: | Puppycakes [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 9:36 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
Have a fun game.
I figured, "eh, why not." |
Author: | mw42 [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 10:23 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
The two moves I considered were (a) and (b). Komoku is better than (c) because it's a more difficult to use the influence of the 4-4 with tengen in place. The attachment at (b) aims at starting a fight for control of the center. After the corners are played, (b) is still available for white, so I'd prefer not to play there directly. I seem to recall a famous game that started with ![]() |
Author: | Puppycakes [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 10:39 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
I've played the 5-5 a bit lately. I think it's actually a fairly simple and easy to understand. It's obviously influence oriented which I like. To me, the real question is what happens if white just ignores it for a long time.
But you know, I've never studied at all how to kill if white tries to invade, so it should be an interesting problem if this happens. |
Author: | mw42 [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 11:00 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
If I play at (a) directly then his high approach at (b) looks ideal. If I play (c) then B(a), W(d) becomes a nice move to counter his influence. The invasion at (e) is clearly too early, but it is a move to watch for the proper timing. |
Author: | Puppycakes [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 11:27 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
I like white's last move. Meaning that I think it's a good move. It doesn't allow an approach on the bottom right which is nice for him. It also helps counter the influence that I am going for with the 5-5 point. If he finishes a shimari, I think I'm in good shape making my own shimari. This game is weird. I really hope that we get some interesting comments from strong players. |
Author: | mw42 [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 12:05 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
If I play (a) then he'll play somewhere on the left probably around (b). Then I'll feel obligated to move in, but it will be easier for him to attack me after (b) since he'll have more stones in the area. So, I'll just come in now while it's my choice. The two-space approach at (c) just aims at settling quickly in the area. |
Author: | Puppycakes [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 1:36 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
I must say that I respect my opponent's move again. If he had played closer, I'd very comfortably pincer. I still feel like I'd rather pincer than to let him settle easily on the left side. Truth be told, I've never played this pincer in a game, so I suppose that I'll just to hope that I can read well enough to make some joseki or that my opponent misses any chances to take advantage of any of my blunders. |
Author: | mw42 [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 2:12 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
This is the expected sequence. If black omits ![]() ![]() ![]() EDIT: I planned to tenuki after B(b) which is bad as B(f) becomes very difficult to answer. |
Author: | Puppycakes [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 3:16 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
Well, I don't really know this joseki, but I do know that it involves black letting white take the corner and separating the one stone.
|
Author: | mw42 [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 3:31 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
Trigger Suggestion:
|
Author: | Puppycakes [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 4:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
I'm guessing that he's studied this joseki if he expects me to know it. I've seen it played, so I guess that it makes sense to me, but I've never played it myself before in a game. 16 is a move that looks kind of small to me, but I trust that I'm just wrong. It is reverse sente and it does have a pretty big endgame follow-up. Now, I know that my stone has some aji. With a shape like this, I tend to consider playing on the nose of the white stones, but ![]()
This looks similar, but my stone isn't butting against his thickness.
Also, white can't move this stone yet, so I think I'm safe doing this.
|
Author: | mw42 [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 6:51 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
Black's move is a good. I'll lose sente now which is unfortunate. After B(a) I have to play (b) to cover the weakness at (c). I'm not too unhappy with this, though. Because if he played (a) directly then W(d) B(e), I'd have played at (f) which would give him sente moves at ![]() |
Author: | Puppycakes [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 9:12 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
That is better than what I had in my diagrams, I think. It has more of an effect on my stone on the top side and it still threatens to activate his stone.
|
Author: | Redundant [ Sun Mar 27, 2011 12:30 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
This move seems wrong to me. The aji at a is horrendous. |
Author: | EdLee [ Sun Mar 27, 2011 1:35 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Redundant, Redundant wrote: This move seems wrong to me. The aji at a is horrendous.
![]() (at least 11 pro games between 2001 and 2009). SmartGo returns zero pro games with ![]() |
Author: | mw42 [ Sun Mar 27, 2011 8:04 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
As I mentioned before, ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Now the pincer looks possible because I think ![]() |
Author: | Redundant [ Sun Mar 27, 2011 9:51 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
EdLee wrote: Redundant, Redundant wrote: This move seems wrong to me. The aji at a is horrendous.
![]() (at least 11 pro games between 2001 and 2009). SmartGo returns zero pro games with ![]() Thanks for the info. I still don't like it ... but I guess that white can take the time to fix that aji before tenuki. |
Author: | Puppycakes [ Sun Mar 27, 2011 10:02 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
My first inclination is to jump out lightly with this stone and to worry about this area later. I want sente to play here.
I'm not sure that move is sente though because I can't capture ![]()
A play that protects that cut comes to mind. For example, the heavy move of just pulling out.
Unfortunately, I must play something like 3. I don't care much for how heavy this is. The other play that protects the cut that looks good to me is this one. But I don't like allowing ![]()
I suppose that I could tenuki, but then I probably shouldn't have played that stone in the first place and just let white protect the weakness. I like the first option that I considered. I don't see a good way to absolutely guarantee that I get sente. And I think that having a good light group here is valuable to me. |
Author: | mw42 [ Sun Mar 27, 2011 10:12 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 108: Puppycakes (3k) vs. mw42 (2k) |
As expected so he must be familiar with this joseki. The urge to tenuki is strong, but as I outlined above I don't really like the position it leaves white in on the upper-left so I will just finish the joseki. |
Page 1 of 6 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |