Life In 19x19 :: 3k vs. 3d(?), with 5 stones

Life In 19x19 http://www.lifein19x19.com/

3k vs. 3d(?), with 5 stones http://www.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=8441	Page 1 of 1

Author:

billywoods [ Sun May 26, 2013 4:42 pm ]

Post subject:

3k vs. 3d(?), with 5 stones

Hello all,

I played this game recently on goshrine with a stronger (presumably around 3 dan) player. It was lots of fun. I took 5 stones and won (barely). My own comments on the game follow. Would anyone mind giving me a quick review? Thanks in advance!

6: perhaps this should have been at K3, just for safety.
14-28: I had to live in gote and form a silly squashed group on the outside, which I had planned for, but I had planned to do so while disconnecting white's two groups, which I didn't manage. Perhaps the four approaches on my corner shape were just too strong.
44: was this move bad? Now I think about it, I don't need an extra move there, but it helped white make shape. Just D18 might have been better.
48: I wonder whether something like D12 would have worked.
52: I thought about cutting here. I decided against it, because it would give me a weak group in a bad place, but I ended up cutting at 58 anyway, which surely must be worse. Through to 72 everything went okay, until 83, when I got split (and one group eventually died), which is more or less as I'd expected.
110: I'm unsure about this. I felt like 113 was hopeful, and I ended up getting the trade I wanted - though I did have to fight a ko for it. Perhaps 116 should be a defensive move in the corner.
155: oops, I didn't realise how dangerous this was.
182-end: I started misreading from here on, so there's no need to check this.

Attachments:

1cc302a2.sgf [2.32 KiB]
Downloaded 522 times

Author:	Joaz Banbeck [ Sun May 26, 2013 5:11 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 3k vs. 3d(?), with 5 stones
2: I hate to take issue with the first move that you put on the board, but this is passive. You have a huge advantage, so you should use it. Extend high, not low. Or pincer. 6: Just a tad inferior to its opposite at K4. The bottom is open because O4 is high. ( O10 is interesting also. ) BTW, If you are thinking 'just for safety' on move 6 of a 5-stone handicap game, you're being paranoid. Think 'POWER' or 'CRUSH' or 'KILL'. 10: Keep him separate, and maintain access to the center: O6. ( Maybe P6? ) 14: Stay connected: Q6. Then cut. 20: If you must fight here, get more liberties: Q8 Wife wants to go out for dinner, so I'm stopping here. Overall, your play is just too conservative. You start out with a big advantage in a 5-stone game. Use it, use it vigorously, and use it early.

Author:	oren [ Sun May 26, 2013 5:20 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 3k vs. 3d(?), with 5 stones
Re: Joaz on move 2... Interestingly I was just reading a book that promoted responding low to all the approaches in a 4 stone game and then how to counterattack after that.

Author:	Joaz Banbeck [ Mon May 27, 2013 8:36 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 3k vs. 3d(?), with 5 stones
oren wrote: Re: Joaz on move 2... Interestingly I was just reading a book that promoted responding low to all the approaches in a 4 stone game and then how to counterattack after that. In an even game? Or with a large handicap?

Author:	oren [ Mon May 27, 2013 9:29 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 3k vs. 3d(?), with 5 stones
Joaz Banbeck wrote: oren wrote: Re: Joaz on move 2... Interestingly I was just reading a book that promoted responding low to all the approaches in a 4 stone game and then how to counterattack after that. In an even game? Or with a large handicap? Specifically 4 and 5 stone games. He proposes a different strategy for 6 and up.

Author:	billywoods [ Mon May 27, 2013 10:06 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 3k vs. 3d(?), with 5 stones
Thanks, Joaz! Joaz Banbeck wrote: Overall, your play is just too conservative. You start out with a big advantage in a 5-stone game. Use it, use it vigorously, and use it early. I'm not quite sure I understand this. Admittedly, I don't really understand the opening at all. But why would I extend high rather than low, or pincer rather than extending, as move 2 here? I don't mind a fight if I can see something useful I'm getting out of it, but fighting for the sake of fighting seems like a surefire way not to win!

Author:	Redundant [ Mon May 27, 2013 10:25 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 3k vs. 3d(?), with 5 stones
billywoods wrote: Thanks, Joaz! Joaz Banbeck wrote: Overall, your play is just too conservative. You start out with a big advantage in a 5-stone game. Use it, use it vigorously, and use it early. I'm not quite sure I understand this. Admittedly, I don't really understand the opening at all. But why would I extend high rather than low, or pincer rather than extending, as move 2 here? I don't mind a fight if I can see something useful I'm getting out of it, but fighting for the sake of fighting seems like a surefire way not to win! Not fighting in a handicap game is a surefire way not to learn. You start with 5 stones, which give you a great advantage in fights. Then you should pick fights with white and make white make weak groups. You can learn a lot from how a skilled player rebuffs your attacks. If you play conservatively, all you'll learn is how white takes advantage of lax play.

Author:	billywoods [ Tue May 28, 2013 12:35 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 3k vs. 3d(?), with 5 stones
Redundant wrote: Not fighting in a handicap game is a surefire way not to learn. You start with 5 stones, which give you a great advantage in fights. Then you should pick fights with white and make white make weak groups. You can learn a lot from how a skilled player rebuffs your attacks. If you play conservatively, all you'll learn is how white takes advantage of lax play. Sure, and I did make white fight - but only when I saw something to be gained from it. I simply disagree that my move 2 was 'conservative' or 'lax' - even in a handicap game it looks like the most normal thing in the world to me. If I'm wrong, I'd be grateful to see why, of course. (If you just mean that I should treat all handicap games as excuses to try out new things, then fair enough - I didn't in this game, though, and I'd quite like comments on the game I played, rather than games that differ from this one at move 2. )

Author:	mitsun [ Tue May 28, 2013 12:42 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 3k vs. 3d(?), with 5 stones
For a different opinion ... I think your first few moves were fine. There is nothing wrong with conservative play, when it maintains your starting advantage. In fact, I have heard professionals state that the biggest failing amateurs have in handicap games is being overly aggressive. The first mistake I see for B is move 10. Extending to O6 to split W and to avoid being enclosed is much better than the passive game move. This move combines attack and defense and is pivotal for both sides.

Author:	Bill Spight [ Tue May 28, 2013 1:03 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 3k vs. 3d(?), with 5 stones
Redundant wrote: Not fighting in a handicap game is a surefire way not to learn. You start with 5 stones, which give you a great advantage in fights. Then you should pick fights with white and make white make weak groups. You can learn a lot from how a skilled player rebuffs your attacks. If you play conservatively, all you'll learn is how white takes advantage of lax play. mitsun wrote: For a different opinion ... I think your first few moves were fine. There is nothing wrong with conservative play, when it maintains your starting advantage. In fact, I have heard professionals state that the biggest failing amateurs have in handicap games is being overly aggressive. The first mistake I see for B is move 10. Extending to O6 to split W and to avoid being enclosed is much better than the passive game move. This move combines attack and defense and is pivotal for both sides. I quoted both of these notes because I agree with both of them, despite the apparent contradiction. I think that the key to the difference between them is why you (as Black) are playing. If you are playing to win, then by being overly aggressive you give White chances. But if you are playing to learn, then those same opportunities for White to win are opportunities for Black to learn. All in all, I like Sakata's advice in Killer of Go: Kill sensei's stones!

Author:	Bill Spight [ Tue May 28, 2013 2:39 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 3k vs. 3d(?), with 5 stones
Some comments. Main focus: Think big. Attack big.

Author:	Uberdude [ Tue May 28, 2013 3:58 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 3k vs. 3d(?), with 5 stones
mitsun wrote: For a different opinion ... I think your first few moves were fine. There is nothing wrong with conservative play, when it maintains your starting advantage. In fact, I have heard professionals state that the biggest failing amateurs have in handicap games is being overly aggressive. The first mistake I see for B is move 10. Extending to O6 to split W and to avoid being enclosed is much better than the passive game move. This move combines attack and defense and is pivotal for both sides. In my opinion, there's nothing much wrong with o17, though I like a pincer more as black has tengen and I want to use it in a fight, whereas with patient moves like o17 leading to territory around the corners and sides there's a danger it becomes dame. But I'd call k16 a mistake. o17 is low, o4 is high, so o17 has finished that area and it is not urgent, whereas o4 is high so that area is unfinished. m3 is a very obvious point to attack black's shape and if you had to predict a black group to die in a handicap game, it would be that corner after m3. Billy, if you were white giving 5 stones to a 8 kyu you'd enjoy playing m3 right? Of course the fight after white m3 is perfectly fine for black, but it gives white something nice to do. So play something to patch that weakness like k3 or k4. Or d10 is bigger than k16 if you want to leave it.

Author:	Bill Spight [ Tue May 28, 2013 4:47 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 3k vs. 3d(?), with 5 stones
Some thoughts about

Author:	billywoods [ Sat Jun 01, 2013 9:36 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 3k vs. 3d(?), with 5 stones
Thank you all. Very useful.

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/