I won but felt like my opponent outplayed me.

[kaimat]

I won by a few points because I managed to cut off some of his stones and kill them, but I felt through the whole game like I was being outplayed. I lack a solid understanding of the fundamentals, and as such, am hoping for some concrete examples from my game that show the flaws in my thinking. Thank you.

http://files.gokgs.com/games/2015/7/5/kaimat-Bern915.sgf

[EdLee]

Hi Kaimat,

may be a bad habit: take directly.
When you look at the result in the real game up to ,
if you had just taken directly at B6 on ,
and B still dropped to , it's as if you now play at the empty triangle B7,
which you wouldn't have played -- so you see the move at B7 is inefficient.

( I ninja'd mitsun, who would give a much better review; so I stop here. )

[mitsun]

I think your analysis is right -- your opponent outplayed you in the opening. The basic problem was making a series of overly conservative moves, letting your opponent push you around submissively. Have you seen the endgame lesson, in a perfectly symmetric position, where one player wins by 20 points by taking all the sente moves, which his opponent dutifully answers? That is what this opening felt like.

In your next game, after your opponent plays a move which reduces your territory, instead of thinking "how should I answer that move to minimize damage", try thinking "where can I play to make new and greater profit", or "where can I play to inflict equal or greater damage".

is a simple mistake. The way to see this is tewari analysis: imagine W just captures, then B descends to B8, then W answers at B7. This last exchange would be very submissive for W and a huge gain for B. Yet that is exactly what happened in the game, through a different sequence.

thorugh is weak and submissive, letting B push W around. is a good move, breaking up the lower W area. However, it threatens no weak W groups and has no large followup, so there is no need for W to answer locally. Just play an equally good move of your own somewhere else on the board. You cannot always prevent your opponent from making good moves like this, but you must not let him keep sente.

through is exactly the same problem. The B capture is quite big, but there are other equally large points on the board. Letting B make this profit in sente is unacceptable.

is overly submissive, defending the strongest group on the board. Again you let B make a profitable exchange in sente.

is good! (I was truly afraid you would answer at H13).

is too conservative -- why not go all the way to R11? That move makes more territory and has a stronger followup if B does not answer. Please check that B cannot cause trouble by invading at R13.

is hopeless, losing points if B simply extends to O16. You have to do something more dramatic than this to give yourself winning chances.

One fighting idea would be to invade at M17. That move threatens to connect under at K18 or to escape with M15, so it is not easy to answer. It also exposes some weaknesses in the B position, so the fight would not be entirely one-sided.

Another fighting idea might be to break up the left side at C11, possibly after a peep at D9. Note that B has another potential weakness with the E5 cut, so his group is not as strong as it appears. Could you even cut directly at D8 and fight? You say the cut fails because B has a ladder? Then attach at K14 first, and come out of that fight with a ladder-breaker in place.

[kaimat]

Thank you to both of you. Those comments were well laid out and will definitely give me some things to focus on in my coming games.