Was my invasion correct?

[lovelove]

If you don't understand someone's advice, you should ask for a clarification... and don't accept "because I'm 4d" for an answer.

Even pros can't clearly explain "why" about many things in go, because they just know it by experience. Like, having a good feel about certain moves, because it usually worked out well. "because I'm 4d" is enough for a 16 kyu. Studying go is all about memorization and reading practice. The other various parts of the game will be naturally understood by experience.

[jts]

If you don't understand someone's advice, you should ask for a clarification... and don't accept "because I'm 4d" for an answer.

Even pros can't clearly explain "why" about many things in go, because they just know it by experience. Like, having a good feel about certain moves, because it usually worked out well. "because I'm 4d" is enough for a 16 kyu. Studying go is all about memorization and reading practice. The other various parts of the game will be naturally understood by experience.

Lovelove, if you say "Do tsumego - because I'm 5d," I'll obey you. If you say "Memorize joseki - because I'm 5d," I'll obey you. If you say "Don't invade here - because I'm 5d", I'll have no idea what you mean. Don't invade here, why? Because no invasion can live? Because there's a better invasion point nearby? Because there's a bigger invasion on the opposite side of the board? Because reduction is bigger? Because I'm leading and need to simplify the game? Because he has too much power in the center already, and I can't give him more? How will I know whether to invade or not next time if I don't know what was wrong with my invasion this time?

[lovelove]

If you don't understand someone's advice, you should ask for a clarification... and don't accept "because I'm 4d" for an answer.

Even pros can't clearly explain "why" about many things in go, because they just know it by experience. Like, having a good feel about certain moves, because it usually worked out well. "because I'm 4d" is enough for a 16 kyu. Studying go is all about memorization and reading practice. The other various parts of the game will be naturally understood by experience.

Lovelove, if you say "Do tsumego - because I'm 5d," I'll obey you. If you say "Memorize joseki - because I'm 5d," I'll obey you. If you say "Don't invade here - because I'm 5d", I'll have no idea what you mean. Don't invade here, why? Because no invasion can live? Because there's a better invasion point nearby? Because there's a bigger invasion on the opposite side of the board? Because reduction is bigger? Because I'm leading and need to simplify the game? Because he has too much power in the center already, and I can't give him more? How will I know whether to invade or not next time if I don't know what was wrong with my invasion this time?

('you' is not you)You will not know what is right until you get stronger from tsumegos and joseki memorization and lots of game experience. I just can say, that invasion is nonsense, because I have experience of killing that kind of invasions, my reading tells that will bring a horrible result, and I haven't seen an invasion like that in my memorized pro games or diagrams from various books. How could I explain this? Or is this already an explanation?

[tj86430]

('you' is not you)You will not know what is right until you get stronger from tsumegos and joseki memorization and lots of game experience. I just can say, that invasion is nonsense, because I have experience of killing that kind of invasions, my reading tells that will bring a horrible result, and I haven't seen an invasion like that in my memorized pro games or diagrams from various books. How could I explain this? Or is this already an explanation?

Well, if I asked whether an invasion is good or bad, I'd expect to see some possible sequences and where they lead, not just "because I'm 5d and I say so".

Let's imagine for a moment, that the invasion in OP's question was in fact good, but the opponent killed it anyway. Wouldn't it be nice to show where his continuation went wrong?

If my memory serves me correctly you did this to some extent in your first reply, although only showing one move.

edit: and for OP: practically everyone who writes here is currently stronger than you, and their advice is potentially useful to you (and the ones that are weaker than you most likely don't offer advice). Naturally advice from a 5d is more likely to be correct than advice from 5k, but still 5k can very well be in a position to give you valuable advice. Most people don't give advice unless they know what they are talking about, and if they do and err, the other members will soon correct them, as jts pointed out (I once gave advice that my teacher had given me, and I was soon "shown my place", and I have stopped giving advice altogether).

[lovelove]

('you' is not you)You will not know what is right until you get stronger from tsumegos and joseki memorization and lots of game experience. I just can say, that invasion is nonsense, because I have experience of killing that kind of invasions, my reading tells that will bring a horrible result, and I haven't seen an invasion like that in my memorized pro games or diagrams from various books. How could I explain this? Or is this already an explanation?

Well, if I asked whether an invasion is good or bad, I'd expect to see some possible sequences and where they lead, not just "because I'm 5d and I say so".

Let's imagine for a moment, that the invasion in OP's question was in fact good, but the opponent killed it anyway. Wouldn't it be nice to show where his continuation went wrong?

If my memory serves me correctly you did this to some extent in your first reply, although only showing one move.

If someone asks "How's this move?" I'll say good/bad/I don't know.
- "Why?" "Because it looks so."
- "Suggestions?" I can point out several considerable moves.
- "Sequence?" Very many many kinds, I'm not good at pointing out some main sequences, unless it is joseki.
If "Why?" again, "I don't know, do more tsumegos"

[Amelia]

('you' is not you)You will not know what is right until you get stronger from tsumegos and joseki memorization and lots of game experience. I just can say, that invasion is nonsense, because I have experience of killing that kind of invasions, my reading tells that will bring a horrible result, and I haven't seen an invasion like that in my memorized pro games or diagrams from various books. How could I explain this? Or is this already an explanation?

I think he has accepted that this one move is failing but now would like to know what I asked myself, and can be summed up by "alright but where should I play instead"? xed_over says that not only is this one invading move a mistake, but trying to invade at all is a mistake.

You should display your rank. I'm not sure I should listen to you since I don't know what your rank is.

Regardless of his rank he said something interesting. He told you to count. You invaded because you thought you were behind and it also looks this way to me at first glance, but if you are in fact ahead, it completely changes the perpective, doesn't it?
So I counted. I'm only a low level DDK, I didn't do anything fancy, I just counted the points inside the roughly defined black and white frameworks, assuming a very modest reduction of white's upper framework (I assumed safe territory up to line 13, which I think is pretty generous) and ignoring the empty territory in the center.
The result was roughly 70 points for each side.

So assuming you're not behind, there's no urgent need to invade. Then you can ask yourself: what would be your next move? If I was black my first impulse would be extend the framework towards the center, I think that would be quite enough to get in white's way. And then there is this small white group on the lower left side. Took me quite a while to notice it... In your game, those stones connected with the bigger white group at the top, but it looks quite easy to prevent that. The move at B10 looks like a headache for white... I mean, maybe a 4d can make those stones live but I would be at a loss. At the very least, you can strengthen your black wall on the outside while white tries to make eye shape and then does this white framework still look that menacing? It's very opened on all sides. And you can also try and connect with your corner stones while your opponent is busy not dying. If you do kill those stones, suddenly you're very much ahead.

Just food for thought. I'm only a 15k.

[lovelove]

캡처.PNG (277.64 KiB) Viewed 4353 times

Have a look inside "hide".

White's peep at X is quite painful. Black should find a way to efficiently fix that weakness.
'A' looks good to me. It also helps black breaking though white framework, and makes a black framework around lower right.
'B' could be a little loose, and 'C' is maybe TOO solid, but both still fine.

[xed_over]

"alright but where should I play instead"? xed_over says that not only is this one invading move a mistake, but trying to invade at all is a mistake.

well, I didn't really intend to say it was a mistake per se, but I did want to try to offer a perhaps better alternative -- and a possible reason for that alternative.

as always, "your mileage may vary"

edit: I like lovelove's suggested alternatives. That's the kind of suggestion that I was looking for but couldn't quite find on my own.

[tj86430]

My instinct would have said B or the point above A (for some reason A looked unappealing to me), so perhaps I'm not a totally hopeless case after all .

[EdLee]

I'm not sure I should listen to you since I don't know what your rank is.

kylefoley76, you raised a very good question faced by not only amateurs, but even pros:
how do we know someone's (Go) level and whether they know what they're talking about.

The short (but unfortunate) answer: we have to be smart (have a good eye).
This is true not only in Go but basically in any other field.

You think about this; maybe with more experience (in Go as well as in life), you'll understand better what this means.

As usual, Bill is very polite and shows the positive aspects.

I'll be the bad cop:

We cannot (necessarily) tell someone's Level from their Rank (rating).
This is one of the fundamentals we need to understand: the difference between level and rating -- many people mis-understand this.

Also, Go playing skill level does not (automatically) imply Go teaching level -- another fundamental missed by many.

Specific bad news: there are 4-dans (amateur) who give bad advice (in Go).
There are 6-dans (amateur) who give bad advice (in Go).
There are even pros ( ) who give bad advice (in Go).

( Just 2 nights ago there was a game on IGS between two amateur 7-dans (7d+ on IGS) --
it was not a blitz game; it was "regular" IGS time control: 10 minutes for 25 moves --
pro opinion was White (7d+) had very good basics, much better than Black (also 7d+);
pro opinion: could not believe Black was 7-dan -- some of Black's moves were 4-dan Level ...
Of course, we don't know if Black was tired, drunk, or letting a friend use his account. )

Good-level pros who also happen to be good teachers are very rare (they do exist, just very rare).
(Good news: there are amateurs who are good teachers.)
(Bad news: Looking at someone's rating is OK, but not sufficient -- and in many cases, even misleading.)

Bottom line: You must have a good eye (to spot a good advice or teacher).

[kylefoley76]

I remember some years ago a number of us, including some dan players, were trying to solve a problem on Sensei's Library. The key play was found by a beginner.

Listen.

Yea, but if the beginner is just asserting a that x is good strategy and he can't prove that x is good strategy I have no way of knowing x is good strategy. If on the other hand, the beginner proves that x leads to the kill of two units like the dan player did above then it doesn't matter what their rank is, they're still right.

[Uberdude]

kylefoley76, xed_over said he didn't think you needed to invade as you had enough elsewhere. The way to show he is wrong is to count and show that you are behind if he gets that top side territory. I'm guessing you didn't count before invading.

P.S. How would you count the lower left corner?

[sayuu]

The invasion is too deep and if not careful, black might lose a few points instead if the outcome solidify white's territory.

M13 looks okay for reduction. If white N13, black can just jump out.

Personally, I prefer N12 as black to reduce white and build up black's own moyo.
Or A2 kills if you are confident in your reading,

[billywoods]

Yea, but if the beginner is just asserting a that x is good strategy and he can't prove that x is good strategy I have no way of knowing x is good strategy. If on the other hand, the beginner proves that x leads to the kill of two units like the dan player did above then it doesn't matter what their rank is, they're still right.

The correct way to work out whether someone's suggestion is right is to try it for yourself. If it works, and you can see why it works, then great. If it doesn't, come back and ask for clarification. In this case, xed_over told you to go and estimate the score. Have you done that? Does white obviously have lots more points than black? If not, your invasion - whether or not it was reasonable - was paranoid. If so, see how far ahead white is, and whether you can win just by building up your own territory, or lightly reducing white, or something far less dangerous.

As a simple point of courtesy: remember that, while you are asking for help, you are asking a favour, and other people are giving up their free time to help you. It is completely inappropriate to respond with "I'm not sure I should listen to you". That is impatient, aggressive and ungrateful.

[mitsun]

Let me give a dissenting opinion: I think the B invasion was fine. At the professional level, it might be bad, since a pro may be able to read that it can be killed with no compensation. But at the amateur level, there is a good chance B can break into this W area successfully, without counting on a W mistake. Since B felt that W would win if he consolidated this area, an invasion seems reasonable, and the chosen invasion point was a good try.

As just one possible continuation, suppose W responds at F17 as was suggested. B can then attach at K17. The fight after that is very complicated, and as W I would not be certain of a clean kill.

Some other miscellaneous notes:

A move around O11 would be a very good alternative, as was already suggested. This would expand the B area while reducing the W area. You would have to count the game to see whether this is enough to win, but it certainly looks possible. However, it still seems like a matter of style whether you prefer to win (or think a win is more likely) by consolidating your own territory or breaking your opponents territory.

There are a lot of unsettled groups floating around, making it difficult to count territory. For example, if W pokes at D10, does B have to give up the C11 stone? If B plays B10 or invades at B8 or B7, can the W group live? Does the answer to these questions change if B manages to play some forcing moves around G11? If B plays A2, can the W corner live? If W plays B14, can the B corner live?