For now I'm sticking to my study plan

Solving problems:
- (nearly) every day about 30mn. (That's easy, I just do it in the bus)

Playing:
- I go to my go group every Thursday evening (about 2-4 slow games + review and discussions with stronger players)
- I play games online whenever I have time, with little to no handicap and 25mn time (about 2 a week)
- I review my online games and depending on how much insight I have on my own play, post in the game analysis section
I can't play much more than that without putting too much of a toll on work and family life, so I'm trying to make the most of it.

I feel I'm improving. People I used to lose to at the go group have to give me less handicap now. From my reviewed games, I also have a definite feeling about my next area of improvement (I need to look at the whole board more, play more calmly, generally not get distracted from the rest of the board by a local fight). If I focus on this in my games and keep myself together, soon I will be playing some of them evenly

I'll be on vacation the next two weeks and won't be able to play in that time. I'll try and keep my go problems routine at least, and pack Tesuji and Attack and Defence for casual reading when I get the chance.

Right back from vacation. I did manage a little study time here and there (But not much because you can't afford to be sleep deprived when touring with a lively 2 years old).
I hit a wall at the third level of the GGPB 3 problems. I droped down at barely one third of the problems solved correctly. It seemed pointless and a bit depressing to keep trying, so I went back at the beginning of the book.

I marked each problem I solved:
- Right
- Wrong
- Puzzling (Even after looking at the solution it was not obvious that the solution worked or that other sequences didn't).

I tried solving again the wrong ones and I studied thoroughly the puzzling ones. It seems I did make some progress since I first started the book, and I think my occasional reading of Tesuji helped a great deal in looking for the right moves.
I also discovered that ko problems are nearly always in the "puzzling" category. I simply don't get it... I don't see the potential for a ko nor the sequences leading to it, not even when the book hints "Black to play and make a ko (3 moves)". I had a look at the ko chapter in Tesuji, but I feel my problem is more at ground level than what the book talks about. My brain doesn't categorize ko as a potential solution for living/killing. I have a bit the same problem with seki.

This week I will be preparing for the Kido Cup next weekend. I'm dropping vol 3 of GGPB and going back to vol 2 and 1. I want to solve lots of easy problems quickly.
I'll try to record the tournament games on my tablet. I'm a bit afraid that it might be distracting, but it would be great if I could review the games afterwards, so I'll take the risk.

The only problem now is to decide with which rank I should sign in. I still have no really stable rank.

I have the same problem with ko. Just recently I barely started thinking about ko as a last chance for my dying groups.
I suppose it requires a bit of a practice.

This is fairly normal from my own experience and those of people I've talked to. Ko and seki can be far harder to spot than a killing or living sequence for ddk/weak sdk players. Being able to spot kos quickly is a good sign from what I hear (hasn't happened to me yet ).

My impression is that as you get stronger, the target moves from spot kos to spot and evaluate kos and all threats, as well as the weight of the ko for each side (from a picnic ko to game-breakingly painful to lose). I'm not there yet.

I still have problems at recognizing ko's too (a few moves in advance that is), unless the general shape is familiar to me. It feels like there has been some tangible progress lately though - since about 2k.

From personal experience I feel like about 3dan opponents and better tend to be able to generate ko from atypical corner/side situations confidently (meaning playing multiple moves which would lose points if no ko in the end). 1k-1d and lower than that: ko situations arise from familiar situations, accidentally, out of desperation or do not require that many potentially points-losing plays.

Yes (that's actually what the ko chapter in Tesuji talks about, but as I said, a number of steps too far for me). And that's even worse than that. In the first chapter of Tesuji, when Davies explains about reading, he ends up with one sequence among 20 different ones that entails the strongest moves for both sides, only to say "but black shouldn't play it out because that's a potential ko threat". So you don't just evaluate ko threats, you actually lay them down on the board for later.

Now that is frankly too much careful planning for me. Ah, well, I guess it's not top priority. I have more important things to work on for now ^^°

Indeed, those 20 moves down the line scenarios are a bit impractical, but it's a fairly important step to recognize that some one and two point sente moves, those that your opponent will automatically answer, can be much more valuable when left unplayed and saved as ko threats. Often not playing such moves has a further advantage of not having robbed your own stones of a liberty.

That said, it's great to hear that so many other players have difficulty spotting potential kos. I wonder why that is. Is it because people tend not to look for ko as a solution, or is it because they are like transformers, always changing their shape and their powers?

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

So I came across a problem a few days ago and I thought it was interesting and some of the people on this thread may enjoy it. I'll hide the answers as solving the problem might be interesting for people:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W White to Play
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . X O . . . . .
$$ | . . X O . . . . .
$$ | . X X O . . . . .
$$ | . . X O . . . . .
$$ | X X O . . . . . .
$$ | O O O . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Well...

Amelia,

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

This is one of the oldest problems there is. Comments may be copyrighted, but certainly not the answer.



@Amelia

White cannot kill, but can White live?

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Huh. I found the seki now.

This is why I love go. I'll come back to this problem tomorrow.

Here's another one, it's a bit harder but it uses a different technique to make the seki that you may or may not have come across before:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Black to Play
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . O X . . . .
$$ | . O O O X . . . .
$$ | W O X X X . . . .
$$ | . X . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

The circled stone was marked as a mistake in a book I'm reading. It results in a seki with this group. Find the seki!

My attempt (no answer in book, so this might be wrong):



Edit:

There is also this unanswered problem shown, this also results in a seki. I haven't solved it yet but it might interest people.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Black to Play
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . 1 . . . .
$$ | . 2 . O O X . . .
$$ | . O O O X . X . .
$$ | . O X X X . . . .
$$ | . X . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Again, is a mistake.

You are close to the right solution, but this shape is not seki.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W W is dead (bent four)
$$ ------------------
$$ | . X . O X . . . .
$$ | X O O O X . . . .
$$ | . O O O X . . . .
$$ | O O X X X . . . .
$$ | . X . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

That's twice now I've mistaken bent four in the corner for a regular seki. Good to find blind spots I suppose.

Another go:

Edit: Also

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Ah silly me. Thank you Bill.

Amelia, I apologise for cluttering your thread, I really should have done this somewhere else.

If black fills at c, white can just atari the shape and it's still ko.