my 4k games to critique

[osepsi]

Hi,

please review my games here and suggest some areas of improvement I needed. I play about one and half year ago and improved quickly, but I am stuck at about 4k for almost half a year. I solved lots of tsumego and also read books on strategy during this time, but it seems to be rather hard to hit this barrier.

So here is a game I played today on KGS.

Thanks in advance. Ors

[Uberdude]

For starters:

I laughed at white's attachment of 6, but wasn't laughing a few moves later when he got a good result. Hane on top should be better.

Also just a quick general comment from whizzing through the next 100 moves, you seem to play rather a lot of small close-together moves, like you are playing snake. Try to play more spread-out and tenuki more.

[skydyr]

Some comments:


I think a few keys would be to study direction of play and joseki or specific openings, as well as practicing on playing the whole board rather than the local situation.

[RBerenguel]

For starters:

I laughed at white's attachment of 6, but wasn't laughing a few moves later when he got a good result. Hane on top should be better.

Also just a quick general comment from whizzing through the next 100 moves, you seem to play rather a lot of small close-together moves, like you are playing snake. Try to play more spread-out and tenuki more.

Don't play snake. Play Battleship.

[tapir]

J6 helped White strengthen herself.

Don't let White get R5. The corner was wide open earlier.

Q3 at R3 and your invasion looks suddenly way more dangerous, if White resists. (Likely not enough to win the game though.)

[osepsi]

Thank you for the suggestions. I indeed have a tendency to play more in local positions rather than going for big points.

Today I have played a very nice game. I have tried to play more on the whole board scale, and I have enjoyed it a lot. I even did not feel the urge to kill my partners groups, one time I have even missed the killing.



Thanks for wieving, osepsi

[Unusedname]

Thank you for the suggestions. I indeed have a tendency to play more in local positions rather than going for big points.

Today I have played a very nice game. I have tried to play more on the whole board scale, and I have enjoyed it a lot. I even did not feel the urge to kill my partners groups, one time I have even missed the killing.



Thanks for wieving, osepsi

My thoughts

Not wanting to get closed in is a good idea. Did you consider Q8 instead? This way white can't take control of the side in sente, and white doesn't really have a move that threatens to cut.

Yes splitting is definitely better

I think your idea here was to split. But why? Both white groups are alive so splitting them does nothing. In the case of One white group would not be alive and it is available to attack. In this case black just weakens his M15 group

b111 again splitting for 0 points whereas taking whites move would be worth a lot more points. or even blocking at b5

I don't know how to respond to W116 x]

[EdLee]

Hi os,

shape problem: W can cut at P5. in the game also works, but W must cut at P6 on .

W cuts at P6.

Q8: local shared vital point.

Q8: hane head of 2. If P8, then double hane P9.

M3: local shared vital point. Basic shape.

W got the vital point. You missed it.

N16: split W -- miai of o16 and L18.

Notice all the problems so far are basic shape issues.

[osepsi]

Ed,
I see your point about shape. Do you have any suggestion how to improve this area? Just study Shape up!, or should I find some other way?

Unusedname,
the idea behind 97 was not to disconnect, but rather to connect my two weakish group in the center to the side, ensuring that they are alive.