Uberdude wrote:
@obs
| Life In 19x19 http://www.lifein19x19.com/ |
|
| #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck http://www.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=9917 |
Page 11 of 16 |
| Author: | Bill Spight [ Wed Dec 03, 2014 10:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
Uberdude wrote: @obs This kind of endgame hassling is the fun that comes from splitting groups, not playing the topological game as drmwc calls it. I thought that splitting groups was topological.  |
|
| Author: | drmwc [ Thu Dec 04, 2014 3:35 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
I needed to change to 10 posts per page to read the previous page. Ubderdude: I fully expect resistance. However, a lot of moves are conceivable and giving diagrams for them all was impracticable. Furthermore, it's not completely clear my move is 100% sente. Specifically, any of the moves marked at a maybe possible:
The position is complex, and certainly beyond my reading abilities! I think I avoid collapse in the lines I've looked at, but I may have overlooked something somewhere. |
|
| Author: | Joaz Banbeck [ Thu Dec 04, 2014 3:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
My initial reaction is to set up the miai cuts.
So far, I can't see any reason why I can't do this:
But it is complicated. I must read more. |
|
| Author: | Joaz Banbeck [ Fri Dec 05, 2014 12:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
It comes down to a simple choice: get busy living or get busy dying.
One of the more amusing lines that I have found, even if he does maintain a connection on the F file:
And his upper middle group is on the verge of getting trapped. Sure, there are lots of unexplored branches in these last 2 diagrams, so I can't claim that it works. But it is one more way to solve the living in the middle issue. |
|
| Author: | tj86430 [ Fri Dec 05, 2014 1:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
Joaz, you may want to proofread and correct the hidden part of your post (second diagram doesn't display correctly, because ']' is missing from the end of '[/go]'-tag) |
|
| Author: | Uberdude [ Fri Dec 05, 2014 4:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
I very much doubt white will make the h16 j17 exchange as it damages the top, but just connect. If black then cuts at a then b should be sente and fixes the c weakness for now, or maybe just d atari. Then white could run out his middle group (which also pressures black's middle) or try to kill the left somehow.
|
|
| Author: | drmwc [ Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
Joaz's move is pretty good. However, the continuation is unclear - I don't think white can cut. I atari, which bodges my shape, and ask questions of the centre group:
Next the two moves marked a are miai. Black may have issues if this happens. His best bet may be trying for a big trade e.g.
My group is in trouble, but so is black's. So this line requires careful counting. SO maybe I should do this instead:
This line seems reasonable for me - black is in more trouble than white. Finally, if black doesn't cut:
It's not clear to me where is best for me here. If I play 4 above, black still can't cut since it transposes. Black's next move is unclear - protecting on the right may be prudent. Then I can pretend to be alive everywhere and start the endgame. I could also contemplate all out war against the centre group. If black doesn't play 5, he needs to worry about this:
If a move at a is black's sente, he can bodge against this aji by playing there first. |
|
| Author: | Uberdude [ Fri Dec 05, 2014 11:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
Seems drmwc isn't looking as hard for good black moves as he is for good white moves. Isn't this a connection:
Of course these threats are still nice as white can try to prevent that connection beforehand in sente, or if black ignores say m18 to live in the centre white gets compensation on the side. |
|
| Author: | Joaz Banbeck [ Sun Dec 07, 2014 12:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
It is Xmas time: business is real busy and will be until the 24th. I will be back in a week or two. |
|
| Author: | Joaz Banbeck [ Mon Dec 08, 2014 7:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
The position is complicated, and I don't claim to have analyzed all of the lines, but after playing with it a bit, I have come to the conclusion that a play in the upper left is double sente. Altough I have two iffy groups, ( one in the upper left, one center ) I don't have to make a choice between them. This protects both of them. It protects the upper left directly by getting more room, and the center can live because of the aji of the cut at G16. So I am going to play this before he plays B17. Then I am going to take the previously announced break to read in depth. |
|
| Author: | Joaz Banbeck [ Wed Dec 10, 2014 10:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
Trigger:
|
|
| Author: | drmwc [ Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
I think this is slightly better than the hanging connection. For example,
I cannot play the sequence above if the 5-a exchange has been played. Black 5 is not really sente at the moment. |
|
| Author: | Joaz Banbeck [ Mon Dec 15, 2014 7:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
For observers Hmmm...he plays the fighting move at C18 instead of the more teritorial B18.  And since he is already behind in territory, this move suggests that he has given up on competing directly for territory. It consequently implies that he is assuming that his best winning strategy is to kill something. Now this may be old news for you observers, but it is the first solid evidence that I have of his intentions. It is not an unreasonable plan. I have two groups that are right on the edge of getting killed. My current assement is that my left side group can be reduced to zero points as it struggles to live, barely succeeding with seki. I'm still about 10 or 15 points ahead then. If it does live, I can tenuki with H8.
That makes miai of the two shaded areas. If he has to defend at G16, I can play the other spot ( probably N10 ) which then makes miai of the two circled spots, threatening to kill two of his groups. Then, even if he is succesful at living with both, I'm alive everywhere, and I go into yose with sente. It looks good for me...IF my left side group can live. I must take some time to read this carefully. |
|
| Author: | Joaz Banbeck [ Sat Dec 20, 2014 5:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
I still can't see how he can kill my left side group. In another thread, Bill Spight wrote: ... If you want to stick with what you can read out, try tic-tac-toe.  If you want to get the initiative, seize it...If I lose, it's Bill's fault.
|
|
| Author: | Joaz Banbeck [ Sun Dec 21, 2014 7:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
For observers: The more I look at this position, the more I tend toward the conclusion that this game will be over within ten moves. My middle group can connect or make a second eye. If he kills my left side group, I lose. If not, I'm ahead by 10 to 20 points, or more. He can reduce my left side group substantially. But to do so, he ends in gote, and then I still go into yose with sente and at least 10 point lead. |
|
| Author: | EdLee [ Mon Dec 22, 2014 8:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Joaz Banbeck wrote: My middle group can connect or make a second eye. Can it ? |
|
| Author: | drmwc [ Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
Happy New Year, and sorry for the delay.
I was tempted just to connect my bits. However, that seems to leave me behind. So then I looked at attacks against the top left black groups. These don't work yet (See diagram below). The move played seems to activate these attacks. It also indirectly strengthens me and makes separating white in the centre more severe. However, it may well be an overplay. But it feels like an aggressive move is best.
|
|
| Author: | Joaz Banbeck [ Thu Jan 08, 2015 12:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
To observers: Ouch! IIRC, part of my defense was a timely play at C11, which threatened to get another eye. It has been a month or so since I read this out, so I don't remember the details. But I do remember that I die if I don't have that threat. So I think that I have to let him invade. |
|
| Author: | Joaz Banbeck [ Thu Jan 08, 2015 3:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
He invades what should have been my territory while attacking... I'll invade what should have been his while defending.
He can invade some of my territory on the left. But he has to keep sente, and/or come back and patch up on the right in gote. If 96 goes unanswered, P7 starts to look interesting. And while he defends against that, making sure that N5 has two eyes, I'm building strength to go after L15. All the while, the end of the game gets closer, and my two big right side corners loom large on that horizon. |
|
| Author: | Joaz Banbeck [ Mon Jan 19, 2015 8:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck |
BUMP |
|
| Page 11 of 16 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|