Pippen vs. whomever danplayer comes first here

leichtloeslich · Post by **leichtloeslich** » Fri Oct 31, 2014 8:53 am

Pippen wrote:no wait-and-see or butterfly's anymore

Aww, and I was hoping for the butterfly effect to tear black to pieces.

And btw Pippen, there's hardly an easier way to piss people off than to take their diagrams from hide-tags and post them as official game moves. (I speak from experience.)
So either you agree to some ground rules (like, for instance, not playing as black), or I'm afraid this thread will very soon die.

Pippen · Post by **Pippen** » Fri Oct 31, 2014 9:59 am

Ok, let's go back to this position where I thought I made quite a mistake in playing at a anyway. From now on I will wait till someone posts a marked black move, not hidden (of course I will also not take back moves again, that's an unique thing to get things rolling again). Is that ok as a basic rule?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$B $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . O . . . . . . O . X . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X X O . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X O X X W . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . a O O . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . O . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X X X . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . O O X O . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X O X X . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . X O O X X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . X X X O . X . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . O X O X . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . X O O O . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

drmwc · Post by **drmwc** » Fri Oct 31, 2014 10:41 am

Doesn't seem to help white much.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$B $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . O . . . . . . O . X . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X X O B X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X O X X W . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . a O O . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . O . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X X X . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . O O X O . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X O X X . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . X O O X X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . X X X O . X . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . O X O X . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . X O O O . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

White's mistake was earlier. Giving up the three stones is quite expensive in terms of territory and influence.

By the way, I think the original splitting move is a fine idea.

Bill Spight · Post by **Bill Spight** » Fri Oct 31, 2014 10:44 am

May I suggest that hide tags not be used to consult about which plays to make? If you are thinking of making a play, don't look at current hidden comments?

Bill Spight · Post by **Bill Spight** » Fri Oct 31, 2014 10:54 am

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wcm14 $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . O . . . . . . O . X . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6 . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4 X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . X . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

Whatever you may say about White's earlier play, :w14:

is joseki, I suppose. But :w20:

seems like an overplay to me. White is just stretched too thin, IMO.

Violence · Post by **Violence** » Fri Oct 31, 2014 11:33 am

I think this game is a good example of how "light" can easily become "thin."

Pippen · Post by **Pippen** » Fri Oct 31, 2014 11:35 am

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$B $$ +---------------------------------------+ $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . O . . . . . . O . X . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O W . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X X O X X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X O X X O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . O . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X X X . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . O O X O . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X O X X . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . X O O X X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . X X X O . X . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . O X O X . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . X O O O . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

W tries to attack the upper right corner to get some benefit from.

Post by **Joaz Banbeck** » Fri Oct 31, 2014 3:53 pm

Violence wrote:I think this game is a good example of how "light" can easily become "thin."

This game is an example of how 'light' can become 'bad'.

You can't play lightly everyplace. Lightness is a strategy for a region of the board, not for the whole game.

EdLee · Post by **EdLee** » Fri Oct 31, 2014 4:51 pm

Joaz Banbeck wrote:You can't play lightly everyplace.

I get the impression Go Seigen did. And not just for one or two games, but quite often,
especially when he took White, before there was komi. Of course, he is a very exceptional case.

Loons · Post by **Loons** » Fri Oct 31, 2014 8:40 pm

I think we're abusing the word light.

'Light' means 'open to sacrifice'.

In the game stones tried to live in black's moyo and then died.

This doesn't impugn light play.

Pippen · Post by **Pippen** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 4:54 am

Joaz Banbeck wrote:You can't play lightly everyplace.

I'd challenge that. Even this game I think is still wide open and god knows how many mistakes I did already compared to a high-dan^^. When you play light, you are less predictable and more flexible. Of course at some point you gotta commit....

shapenaji · Post by **shapenaji** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 5:42 am

Pippen wrote:
Joaz Banbeck wrote:You can't play lightly everyplace.

I'd challenge that. Even this game I think is still wide open and god knows how many mistakes I did already compared to a high-dan^^. When you play light, you are less predictable and more flexible. Of course at some point you gotta commit....

What we took advantage of, though, was not tactical mistakes, but rather that you allowed us to keep building thickness and territory.

You play light so that you can check a region, while still having sente to play somewhere important. If you never play anywhere important with your sente, your opponent will simply get too much profit.

Bill Spight · Post by **Bill Spight** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 8:25 am

We have thick and thin, heavy and light. Thick and light are good, heavy and thin are bad. Nearly everybody gets the metaphors, few players understand the concepts. Most dan players can fairly reliably tell the difference between heavy and thick, between thin and light, but we all get it wrong at times. If it were easy to explain these terms verbally, virtually every SDK could get it right.

Most amateur play, IMO, is heavy. And often it is heavy without trying to be thick, which is a real shame. I think that in part it is a question of attitude. To consistently play lightly requires a flexible attitude. It is possible to make thick plays and to treat those thick stones lightly.

Loons · Post by **Loons** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 11:58 am

Bill I think you're being a trifle nihilistic.

Saying amateurs get the metaphors but don't get the concept is an oxymoron.

I think amateurs are trying to play thick and light but lack the technique, ie reading to do so at a high level.

Further, skillful attack involves making your opponent heavy; it's a two player affair. When Shapenaji struck white's cap it was revealed to be heavy, though it looked like a common light technique.

gowan · Post by **gowan** » Sat Nov 01, 2014 12:28 pm

Bill Spight wrote:We have thick and thin, heavy and light. Thick and light are good, heavy and thin are bad. Nearly everybody gets the metaphors, few players understand the concepts. Most dan players can fairly reliably tell the difference between heavy and thick, between thin and light, but we all get it wrong at times. If it were easy to explain these terms verbally, virtually every SDK could get it right.

Most amateur play, IMO, is heavy. And often it is heavy without trying to be thick, which is a real shame. I think that in part it is a question of attitude. To consistently play lightly requires a flexible attitude. It is possible to make thick plays and to treat those thick stones lightly.

I've noticed on KGS that players make heavy groups and call them thick. All of this stuff is high level for sure. One relatively test for thick vs. heavy is that thick stones are strong whereas heavy stones are usually vulnerable and difficult to sacrifice. Of course a group that is thick at one time in the game could become heavy later. Another dichotomy that has some relevance here is fast vs. slow. Kobayashi Koichi used to be criticised occasionally for making slow moves which he said he considered thick. Fast development is often thin. Takemiya Masaki is well-known for his moyo-oriented play. Less well-known is that he loves thickness and considers the success of his moyos as based on thickness.

Life In 19x19

Pippen vs. whomever danplayer comes first here

Re: Pippen vs. whomever danplayer comes first here

Re: Pippen vs. whomever danplayer comes first here

Re: Pippen vs. whomever danplayer comes first here

Re: Pippen vs. whomever danplayer comes first here

Re: Pippen vs. whomever danplayer comes first here

Re: Pippen vs. whomever danplayer comes first here

Re: Pippen vs. whomever danplayer comes first here

Re: Pippen vs. whomever danplayer comes first here

Re: Pippen vs. whomever danplayer comes first here

Re: Pippen vs. whomever danplayer comes first here

Re: Pippen vs. whomever danplayer comes first here

Re: Pippen vs. whomever danplayer comes first here

Re: Pippen vs. whomever danplayer comes first here

Re: Pippen vs. whomever danplayer comes first here