I wouldn't say I've a good grasp of shape because while I can sometimes see good shape I can't necessarily understand the shape I see and know it it's the right one for this local situation. I've often made the wrong shape move for a given context etc. I also still completely miss certain shapes, especially when fighting. Just look at any of the reviews in this thread by Ed pointing out my shape errors.

Yes pro games are quite fun to replay. I especially like Go Seigen, well that is the only book on pro games I have. How about you what pros are you reading?

_________________
我が道を行く。
I'll do it my way....

P.S. @Boidhre: Modesty modesty modesty!

_________________
我が道を行く。
I'll do it my way....

I was looking at Invincible, I've Lee Sedol's commented games arriving on Monday so I'll get to replay some amazing fights.

Realism, realism, realism!

Even if your not being modest, it still sounds like you have a better sense of shape than me. XD

It is really fun going over pro games. I didn't realise before. I just bought the first in John Fairbairn's series detailing Honinbo Shuhei's games. I think it's going to be really interesting to not only analyse his style of play, but also watch his development as a player. There are so many other players that I also want to read about though.

The go club went very well today as per usual and really put me in a mood to study afterwards. I used the Chinese fuseki in two games for the first time in over 3 months and had forgotten the theory behind it. So I spent my evening fixing that, or at least beginning to fix that. It's put me in quite a good mood. I do enjoy study with an immediate use. I look forward to my next even games with black with eagerness and equally look forward to playing against the Chinese as white.

Is it efficient for me to be studying fuseki? Perhaps not. But the Chinese, when played properly (or as properly as someone my level can do anyway), forces the kind of fighting that I desperately need to improve at so I think the Chinese might be a good platform for me to grow from for the moment. I flirted with the mini-Chinese and Orthodox fusekis (I fell into the Orthodox by people refusing to play 4,4 and allow the mini/micro Chinese :p) but found the first too tricky variation wise for me yet and the second too, well, slow feeling? It's not slow but it doesn't feel "fast" to me and one thing I really favour for black is fast, fast openings for no good reason other than taste (well I could argue komi but eh I'm not strong enough to make those kinds of arguments in my opinion). Orthodox is obviously played by pros today so it's obviously perfectly viable as a fuseki, I just didn't find it a good fit for me taste wise.

Health wise: Can't sleep tonight despite taking sedatives.


So the question I have for anyone reading this: What has been your experience with the Chinese fuseki? I'd be interested in hearing if people found a lot of counter play from opponents opening with two 3,4 points and similar.

Also I'm intrigued by: http://senseis.xmp.net/?HighConceptOpeningMyth
I find 1934 games with a nirensei vs Chinese opening in GoGoD running up to 2011. So if the pros are playing it and still playing it, surely it can't be that bad? All points about the popularity of micro and mini Chinese variants accepted. The mini/micro Chinese *really* appeals to me shape-wise. Moreso than the Chinese which already appeals to me shape wise. I fell in love with them the first time I saw them on a board. The Chinese is a *lot* more straightforward variations wise if you ignore the option of pincering the N4 approach by black from ym admittedly limited understanding of these things. Am I correct in avoiding fuseki whose shape/feel I prefer simply because of the mountain of variations involved? Or would I be getting into fuseki territory with them that is far above my head at the moment? Or should I be challenging myself and pushing the envelope out by a good bit taking myself out of my comfort zone and tackling a fuseki that interests me for no reason other than I think the shape is nice and some of the ideas behind it interesting?

Anyway, sorry, very much in a study/thinking about go mood after today's club and my lack of ability to sleep is just compounding things greatly.

The mini-Chinese was used by White in handicap games by the early 19th century.



Given that you have a good feel for the game, I would generally say go with your feel.

As for getting in over your head, pushing the envelope, and your comfort zone:

1) At your stage of learning you should not have an envelope. Does a baby learning to walk worry about envelopes?

2) Your comfort zone is not a very good guide for learning. Experimentation is good.

3) How far you are over your head is a good guide for learning. Go has an element of jumping in the water to learn how to swim. If the level of difficulty is too low, you do not learn much. As Goethe said, if you can think something through you are not really thinking. If the level of difficulty is too high, you do not learn much, either. There is a Goldilocks level that is just right. For winning games, traditional handicaps provide a good level of difficulty. But, especially at your level, learning occurs within games, so somewhat inadequate handicaps may be best for learning.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

For Chinese at our level, look at my EGC games. I will use it at Bochum tournament next month too. I will keep you posted. Unfortunately, since I went back from holidays, it is tough to take time to play more.

_________________
“I am easily satisfied with the very best.” Winston Churchill

KGS | EGF | GMT+1

Thanks virgo.

How about flirting with some UN-orthodox fusekis? http://senseis.xmp.net/?GreatWall

In fact I find the Chinese quite hard to handle. It looks very nice for black when he plays it. Also this video is quite nice, he talks about the chinese in it I believe. http://eurogotv.com/index.php?menu=Vide ... k6ixgZmpH4

_________________
我が道を行く。
I'll do it my way....

You and your Great Wall fuseki.

Had a long game with Anthony/grooviest. Some of the moves were recorded incorrectly, 99 and 100 for instance, so I stopped recording in the middle of the yose. The final result was W + 9.5. I messed up in the transition from fuseki to middlegame and the game was only as tight as it was because of a mistake by Anthony in the bottom left.



I felt completely outplayed in the early middlegame. My cap on the left side was ill-judged, or just mis-played by me, I'm not sure which.

So topazg answered my question and the cap was fine if I'd know the midgame joseki.

A few questions for you.

Question 1: Oh, that's fascinating. I agree the tiger's mouth is a far better move than the one I chose.

Question 2: I think it's because it requires another move to reinforce the group after committing another stone there. If white had responded my idea was to play F5. Though, if I wanted to slide into the corner in the first place then K4 is misplaced so my play is inconsistent here?

Question 3: This move bothers me, but I've been told it's solid in this kind of position. I considered something like N16 to pressure the invading stone and give white a choice of saving it or pushing in at S17.

Question 4: I was torn between the hane and the nobi. My first instinct was the nobi, I went into analysis paralysis and decided on the hane for no good reason despite knowing that it gave white good shape. I had a lot of problems in the midgame with analysis paralysis and picking poor moves after overthinking things.

Question 5: From behind.

Point 6: Point taken this result was terrible for black.

Question 7: Topazg already said to me that White should have keima'd to the other side to push me against his strength on top and to make the ladder not work for the joseki associated with the cap.


Thank you for the questions Ed.

It depends. In some cases, the descend is better; in some other cases, the tiger's mouth is better.
See Malkovich Game 180, Splatted vs konfuzed: Intrepid's Post #17 in that thread.

I read it and say the logic immediately, it was very well explained. I lack a stone in the top to protect my group so the descend lacks any real threat.

It's solid, but it's a move to live. This is only necessary if the white groups on both sides are strong. Here, pushing out to the center doubles as an attack on the lone white stone, so if white ignores it to take the corner, black may just take the whole top side.

If you play the keima on the third line instead (make it an one point jump) you can take the corner and keep sente. That being said, which is better depends on the situation, but pros don't like the tiger's mouth variation because it is slower