Any comments/advice welcome. I've included my thoughts in the sgf, just to show how confused I probably was.
I'm black.
Took a lead (I think) and lost it
-
Koroviev
- Lives with ko
- Posts: 221
- Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 7:27 am
- Rank: 6k
- GD Posts: 0
- Has thanked: 38 times
- Been thanked: 35 times
Took a lead (I think) and lost it
Hi, here's a game where I felt very comfortable through the middle game, perhaps too comfortable...cuz I lost. My lousy endgame didn't help, but I think I made some poor strategic decisions based on thinking I had a huge lead.
Any comments/advice welcome. I've included my thoughts in the sgf, just to show how confused I probably was.
I'm black.
Any comments/advice welcome. I've included my thoughts in the sgf, just to show how confused I probably was.
I'm black.
- Attachments
-
- vs 7k.sgf
- (5.15 KiB) Downloaded 488 times
-
VincentCB
- Dies with sente
- Posts: 98
- Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 10:49 am
- Rank: OGS 1 kyu
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: KrazyV
- Tygem: kaiou19
- OGS: VincentCB
- Location: Canada
- Has thanked: 14 times
- Been thanked: 9 times
Re: Took a lead (I think) and lost it
Just a few comments on your comments 
: D11 looks like the only move here. In addition, if white has to answer B17, it is not at C18 like you mentioned, but instead towards the outside, around J17.
: This move lets white cut you apart. Playing the natural stretch at E12 instead looks forward to playing either at D9, attacking the left side group, or at H17, attacking the top one.
: This is a big move, but it looks too passive. I like L17 instead, which is both a good extension from your corner enclosure and puts pressure on the white group at the top.
: I don't think approaching here is good. However, I'm not quite sure what would be best here 
Maybe invading at C3 directly, or else at K3?
and 
: These moves are quite passive considering the huge potential that white has. Since white has more potential in the center than you have on the right, going for mutual destruction is fine. Something like at N8 would be better, I think, although I'm not sure it would be enough to win.
Hopefully I didn't say anything too nonsensical
-Vincent
: D11 looks like the only move here. In addition, if white has to answer B17, it is not at C18 like you mentioned, but instead towards the outside, around J17. : This move lets white cut you apart. Playing the natural stretch at E12 instead looks forward to playing either at D9, attacking the left side group, or at H17, attacking the top one. : This is a big move, but it looks too passive. I like L17 instead, which is both a good extension from your corner enclosure and puts pressure on the white group at the top. : I don't think approaching here is good. However, I'm not quite sure what would be best here Maybe invading at C3 directly, or else at K3? and : These moves are quite passive considering the huge potential that white has. Since white has more potential in the center than you have on the right, going for mutual destruction is fine. Something like at N8 would be better, I think, although I'm not sure it would be enough to win.Hopefully I didn't say anything too nonsensical
-Vincent
-
EdLee
- Honinbo
- Posts: 8859
- Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 6:49 pm
- GD Posts: 312
- Location: Santa Barbara, CA
- Has thanked: 349 times
- Been thanked: 2070 times
-
Koroviev
- Lives with ko
- Posts: 221
- Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 7:27 am
- Rank: 6k
- GD Posts: 0
- Has thanked: 38 times
- Been thanked: 35 times
Re: Took a lead (I think) and lost it
Great, thanks for these comments, I will study them this evening.
@EdLee – I missed that one completely! Luckily so did White. More L&D practice for both of us perhaps.
@EdLee – I missed that one completely! Luckily so did White. More L&D practice for both of us perhaps.
-
Bill Spight
- Honinbo
- Posts: 10905
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 1:24 pm
- Has thanked: 3651 times
- Been thanked: 3373 times
Re: Took a lead (I think) and lost it
IMO, you had fallen behind by move 16, and you never caught back up.
is not bad, but I prefer P-03. 
has prevented the White enclosure with sente.
is questionable. The extension to D-11 is consistent with 
. Normally White with crawl again and Black will extend again.
is also questionable. However, it makes look bad. Suppose that White had played before Black played . Then the exchange, - 
would have been bad for Black.
is bad. If you had an attack against that White group, it might be OK. But you don't. It needlessly strengthens White.
is bad. It is what you play when you are forced to live. What you want to do now is to attack the White two stone group by approaching it from the right. Doing so would make use of . It would also start to build a framework on the top side. Instead you allow White to extend with 
.
The game is not hopeless, of course. Black now has the challenge of making useful. The later jump into the bottom left corner pretty well gave up on that.
is not bad, but I prefer P-03. has prevented the White enclosure with sente. is questionable. The extension to D-11 is consistent with . Normally White with crawl again and Black will extend again. is also questionable. However, it makes look bad. Suppose that White had played before Black played . Then the exchange, - would have been bad for Black. is bad. If you had an attack against that White group, it might be OK. But you don't. It needlessly strengthens White. is bad. It is what you play when you are forced to live. What you want to do now is to attack the White two stone group by approaching it from the right. Doing so would make use of . It would also start to build a framework on the top side. Instead you allow White to extend with .The game is not hopeless, of course.
Black now has the challenge of making useful. The later jump into the bottom left corner pretty well gave up on that.The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins
Visualize whirled peas.
Everything with love. Stay safe.
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins
Visualize whirled peas.
Everything with love. Stay safe.
-
Koroviev
- Lives with ko
- Posts: 221
- Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 7:27 am
- Rank: 6k
- GD Posts: 0
- Has thanked: 38 times
- Been thanked: 35 times
Re: Took a lead (I think) and lost it
Bill Spight wrote:IMO, you had fallen behind by move 16, and you never caught back up.
Ha, just goes to show how wrong my thinking is!-
ez4u
- Oza
- Posts: 2414
- Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 10:15 pm
- Rank: Jp 6 dan
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: ez4u
- Location: Tokyo, Japan
- Has thanked: 2351 times
- Been thanked: 1332 times
Re: Took a lead (I think) and lost it
Let's look at the situation at 
. The game file has the comment, "Didn't want to try to run out with the C6 stones as they look dead to me...better to expand what I have."
The problem is that Black does not get enough by trading the left for the right. So we have to back up a step and ask, how dead are the black stones on the left?
The game file also asks the question regarding
below, "Should I try to move this group?" I think the answer is clearly "Yes!". The most interesting question is what if White plays 
, threatening to kill the corner and cutting off any relationship between the side and the corner? What is the situation if Black just ignores this and plays something like 
? White can capture the corner in the sequence to , but if Black descends at "a" next, in order to pressure the marked White stones, doesn't Black look better? Black has three corners to White's one. The only really weak stones on the board are White's and Black seems to have more potential to expand territory than White does.
Basically I think Black misjudged the balance of strength on the left side, badly underestimating Black's own opportunities in this area. It is often the case that we imagine our weaknesses are more pressing than our opponent's and that we fail to give due equal weight to our strengths compared to our opponent's. The ability/willingness to take a chance on our opportunities versus protecting against our threats is a key to improving our results, IMHO. I am still searching for that ability/willingness myself!
. The game file has the comment, "Didn't want to try to run out with the C6 stones as they look dead to me...better to expand what I have."The problem is that Black does not get enough by trading the left for the right. So we have to back up a step and ask, how dead are the black stones on the left?
The game file also asks the question regarding
below, "Should I try to move this group?" I think the answer is clearly "Yes!". The most interesting question is what if White plays , threatening to kill the corner and cutting off any relationship between the side and the corner? What is the situation if Black just ignores this and plays something like ? White can capture the corner in the sequence to , but if Black descends at "a" next, in order to pressure the marked White stones, doesn't Black look better? Black has three corners to White's one. The only really weak stones on the board are White's and Black seems to have more potential to expand territory than White does. Basically I think Black misjudged the balance of strength on the left side, badly underestimating Black's own opportunities in this area. It is often the case that we imagine our weaknesses are more pressing than our opponent's and that we fail to give due equal weight to our strengths compared to our opponent's. The ability/willingness to take a chance on our opportunities versus protecting against our threats is a key to improving our results, IMHO. I am still searching for that ability/willingness myself!
Dave Sigaty
"Short-lived are both the praiser and the praised, and rememberer and the remembered..."
- Marcus Aurelius; Meditations, VIII 21
"Short-lived are both the praiser and the praised, and rememberer and the remembered..."
- Marcus Aurelius; Meditations, VIII 21