Nothing major died but somehow I got behind a lot

shoryuu · #1

Obviously my attacks failed so this must b an accumulation of many mistakes. Allowing W to make points too easily and getting mine broken. It's more difficult I think because nothing big died to cause the gap. Appreciate the help.

Javaness2 · #2

Go Teaching Ladder used to have a rule that if you wanted to have a game review, that you should first ask some questions about your play in the sgf file itself - i.e. that you kind of reviewed it a little yourself first. I think that's quite helpful, because a reviewer can then have some sense of what you might be thinking about during the game. If nothing, it adds some degree of interpersonal interaction.

I'd be interested to know what was in your head when you played move 33.

Knotwilg · #3

As javaness points out, 33 is the suspicious move. It shows that you care more about "destroying" than building. In fact, while your destruction of his potential 50 point territory superficially succeeded, it was a success for White, who converted the moyo into 25 points of territory and major strength on the outside, plus sente.

When White executed that fine cutting sequence, the game became already hard by move 74.

I must say White played it out quite well - this is an experienced player who knows how to convert thickness into territory.

You did well in winning the battles, making life for every group that was under attack, but lost the war because you decided to fight on too many fronts. Actually it was a fine game of go, showing how beautiful the game can be, unfortunately at your loss.

Kirby · #4

I feel like you should have gotten more in the bottom right.

moha · #5

Kirby wrote:

I feel like you should have gotten more in the bottom right.

I agree. Around 106 the lower right was your sphere of influence, yet in the end you didn't have any advantage there. I think this is an example that reasonable results do NOT come automatically. Even where you know the strategic expectation (such as B getting more than W in/around lower right), this is only with near optimal play. A few poor moves (not outright blunders) can lead to completely unreasonable results. BTW, in lower right I think your play lacked commitment. Trying to play both sides simultaneously, while the other side was still weak, creating thin shapes made W easier to settle even in sente.

Also note that you ended up with five groups each about five points. This may be better than dying, but not healthy living either.

shoryuu · #6

moha wrote:

Kirby wrote:

I feel like you should have gotten more in the bottom right.

I agree. Around 106 the lower right was your sphere of influence, yet in the end you didn't have any advantage there. I think this is an example that reasonable results do NOT come automatically. Even where you know the strategic expectation (such as B getting more than W in/around lower right), this is only with near optimal play. A few poor moves (not outright blunders) can lead to completely unreasonable results. BTW, in lower right I think your play lacked commitment. Trying to play both sides simultaneously, while the other side was still weak, creating thin shapes made W easier to settle even in sente.

@Knotwilg Thanks for the review though brief it may be. Probably not your intention buy boy, do you sure know how to rub salt into my wounds indirectly by praising his play that much. :sad:

To all:
Anyway for the suspect move 33 a few of you brought up, I felt he was overplaying, playing it all on the 4th line and if I gave him 1 more move he would have secured the whole thing. :evil:

Where else could I have invaded even if not that early?
Well which side in the bottom right should I have pressed more on? Any actual moves you think I could have played instead? I have put up some variations I think are better but I might have made oversights. I thought I should have gotten more out of it too which is why it's so frustrating. Assuming you are stronger, even a short sequence you think I could have played would be helpful.
I think my top right corner handling was sub-optimal too. What do you think?

Knotwilg · #7

A brief review??? All right, seems like expectations are pretty high ...

To answer two of your questions:

1) your invasion at 33 seems to be at the best possible invasion point (it succeeded after all) so it's all about the timing. It was too soon. Top groups were still competing for power. Right side was still open and big. If you had played elsewhere and White would have secured the left side with 1 more move, you get another move centre or right.

2) One place where you could play better in the lower right: Black 127 is targeting a stone, not a structure. See my alternative.

BTW, my assessment of White's play shouldn't "rub it in". We both know there are players who outplay both of us. It shouldn't be a surprise if a 10k rank difference does that. In fact, I found White to play more like a dan player than a 6k. I'm not sure I could beat this guy, surely won't have an easy game;

shoryuu · #8

Knotwilg wrote:

A brief review??? All right, seems like expectations are pretty high ...

To answer two of your questions:

1) your invasion at 33 seems to be at the best possible invasion point (it succeeded after all) so it's all about the timing. It was too soon. Top groups were still competing for power. Right side was still open and big. If you had played elsewhere and White would have secured the left side with 1 more move, you get another move centre or right.

2) One place where you could play better in the lower right: Black 127 is targeting a stone, not a structure. See my alternative.

Sorry if I offended. You did look through the game to the end and gave comments at some points. Guess I was hoping for more variations to better understand the general idea you were conveying at each point.

The only reason why my invasion worked was because he descended at A10 at move 40 that gave me the sente to live.
Thank you for your comments. I'm grateful for any input from everyone no matter the amount.

Knotwilg · #9

shoryuu wrote:

Knotwilg wrote:

A brief review??? All right, seems like expectations are pretty high ...

To answer two of your questions:

1) your invasion at 33 seems to be at the best possible invasion point (it succeeded after all) so it's all about the timing. It was too soon. Top groups were still competing for power. Right side was still open and big. If you had played elsewhere and White would have secured the left side with 1 more move, you get another move centre or right.

2) One place where you could play better in the lower right: Black 127 is targeting a stone, not a structure. See my alternative.

Sorry if I offended. You did look through the game to the end and gave comments at some points. Guess I was hoping for more variations to better understand the general idea you were conveying at each point.

The only reason why my invasion worked was because he descended at A10 at move 40 that gave me the sente to live.
Thank you for your comments. I'm grateful for any input from everyone no matter the amount.

No worries.

Sometimes I do have a lot to say. This time the theme for this game was pretty clear for me and was centered around one particular move: 33. At 74 the game was already very difficult and there was no point for me to make any more comments. Next time it might be different. Always welcome.

Nothing major died but somehow I got behind a lot

Who is online