I'm reviving this thread to consider the paradigm for study that Kirby recently posted in his study thread: inputs, outputs, and review. It raises a good question for me: what are my inputs for go study?
Lately, I haven't really had any. As I said elsewhere, life has been busy so go has mostly been a fun escape. There's nothing wrong with that, but I'm not content with the quality of my go. A lot of my losses (and wins) are characterized by crude play or one or two major blunders. I'd like to play a more beautiful game.
So what should my inputs be? It's hard to find testable inputs for the game of go. I don't have a teacher, and I'm not sure a formal relationship would be the best use of my money right now (maybe one day!). Collections of professional games are fun to read over, but it's hard to find lessons in them that I can directly apply in my games. Problem books are certainly helpful to train my reading, but how can I assess that? I suppose I could look for life or death problems in my games and assess my reading skill. Theory books are a bit easier to apply, I suppose.
Perhaps I'm thinking about this the wrong way. I've read some books on curriculum design, and one of the principles is to design backwards: think about what you want to test and then design the inputs correctly. What do I want to look for in my game reviews? What type of mistake would I like to eliminate? If I decide on that, I can probably choose an appropriate book or other resource to help me. I'll have to think that over.
The stones go walking, and I with them
-
sparky314
- Lives with ko
- Posts: 189
- Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2015 1:40 pm
- Rank: KGS 3 kyu
- GD Posts: 0
- Location: Chicago, IL
- Has thanked: 159 times
- Been thanked: 36 times
Re: The stones go walking, and I with them
Maybe you could post a game on here twice a week for review? It would make up for not having a teacher by having stronger players review your games.
In addition, do you have an outline of tsumego to progress through? I have a list of books to progress through (most of them are tsumego). I find having a plan of books helps to get through them, and keeps me a bit more balanced.
In addition, do you have an outline of tsumego to progress through? I have a list of books to progress through (most of them are tsumego). I find having a plan of books helps to get through them, and keeps me a bit more balanced.
-
jeromie
- Lives in sente
- Posts: 902
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 7:12 pm
- Rank: AGA 3k
- GD Posts: 0
- Universal go server handle: jeromie
- Location: Fort Collins, CO
- Has thanked: 319 times
- Been thanked: 287 times
Re: The stones go walking, and I with them
I'll start by reviewing my games again and deciding what I want to work on. Here's my most recent game. While I won, I think it also illustrates some of the weak points in my game well. (Sorry for some of the extra variations. I made the comments with eidogo, and I didn't see an obvious way to delete a branch once I had created it.)
Takeaways: I made way too many weak groups and had to scramble to find a way to profit from them. This is a common thread in my games lately. It increases the likelihood of a single misread causing a disastrous result, and when an opponent can read as well or better than I can in a close fight I am very likely to lose.
I also tend to relax my reading when I think I'm ahead and let opponents back into a game that I should easily be winning. That happened several times in this game: I won a major fight and then made a slack move that let my opponent start another major fight.
These are the kind of trends I want to eliminate in my game. My two goals are: don't create a new group without a plan for how to use it and maintain a consistent mental awareness throughout the entire game. I probably need to start playing slower games again to practice these concepts; fast time controls contribute to both errors.
Takeaways: I made way too many weak groups and had to scramble to find a way to profit from them. This is a common thread in my games lately. It increases the likelihood of a single misread causing a disastrous result, and when an opponent can read as well or better than I can in a close fight I am very likely to lose.
I also tend to relax my reading when I think I'm ahead and let opponents back into a game that I should easily be winning. That happened several times in this game: I won a major fight and then made a slack move that let my opponent start another major fight.
These are the kind of trends I want to eliminate in my game. My two goals are: don't create a new group without a plan for how to use it and maintain a consistent mental awareness throughout the entire game. I probably need to start playing slower games again to practice these concepts; fast time controls contribute to both errors.
-
jeromie
- Lives in sente
- Posts: 902
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 7:12 pm
- Rank: AGA 3k
- GD Posts: 0
- Universal go server handle: jeromie
- Location: Fort Collins, CO
- Has thanked: 319 times
- Been thanked: 287 times
Re: The stones go walking, and I with them
sparky314 wrote:Maybe you could post a game on here twice a week for review? It would make up for not having a teacher by having stronger players review your games.
In addition, do you have an outline of tsumego to progress through? I have a list of books to progress through (most of them are tsumego). I find having a plan of books helps to get through them, and keeps me a bit more balanced.
Both suggestions are good ideas, thanks!
I've been working through a couple sets of tsumego, but I put them aside for a while. I plan to pick them back up and go through them again.
-
jeromie
- Lives in sente
- Posts: 902
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 7:12 pm
- Rank: AGA 3k
- GD Posts: 0
- Universal go server handle: jeromie
- Location: Fort Collins, CO
- Has thanked: 319 times
- Been thanked: 287 times
Re: The stones go walking, and I with them
I played a game with fellow forum member sparky314 last night (he won handily). I was playing as black.
A couple of moves stood out in our review:
I didn't know how to best handle this reducing move. My initial thought was to push it towards the wall on the right, so I played this:
We ended up with this position, which was not good for me.
I missed two fundamental principles here: keep my stones connected, and keep my opponent's stones separated.
In our review, we looked at M15 as a better initial move, and it's also important that black doesn't let the P12 stone become separated.
While there are lots of possibilities, a position like this looks much more playable for black!
The second move we looked at was much later.
We agreed that this was the losing move. I was already behind because of my handling of the top right reduction, but this move removed all chance of a comeback. It induced white to connect his stones and left me with two weak groups that I barely managed to make live. In the meantime, white solidified his territory and eliminated any prospects of an endgame comeback. This is the sort of thoughtless cut I am trying to eliminate in my games.
Here's the whole game. White played really well throughout and provided lots of opportunities for me to learn!
A couple of moves stood out in our review:
I didn't know how to best handle this reducing move. My initial thought was to push it towards the wall on the right, so I played this:
We ended up with this position, which was not good for me.
I missed two fundamental principles here: keep my stones connected, and keep my opponent's stones separated.
In our review, we looked at M15 as a better initial move, and it's also important that black doesn't let the P12 stone become separated.
While there are lots of possibilities, a position like this looks much more playable for black!
The second move we looked at was much later.
We agreed that this was the losing move. I was already behind because of my handling of the top right reduction, but this move removed all chance of a comeback. It induced white to connect his stones and left me with two weak groups that I barely managed to make live. In the meantime, white solidified his territory and eliminated any prospects of an endgame comeback. This is the sort of thoughtless cut I am trying to eliminate in my games.
Here's the whole game. White played really well throughout and provided lots of opportunities for me to learn!
-
mitsun
- Lives in gote
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 10:10 pm
- Rank: AGA 5 dan
- GD Posts: 0
- Has thanked: 61 times
- Been thanked: 250 times
Re: The stones go walking, and I with them
Some notes on the early middle game fighting in your game with sparky:
is a superb move, with a positive attitude, but you did not follow through with consistent play. The plan as you note is to attack the W stone, by pushing it towards the B strength to the right. But your subsequent defensive moves were inconsistent with this plan.
(An alternative plan would be to defend around L16. You would have to count the score to see if this passive defence gives you enough territory to win. But that strategy would be a little inconsistent with P12 and J15, so I prefer your attacking stragegy.)
A large part of the B strength to the right is the implied presence of a B stone at P11, since pushing there is surely sente. Yet you never played this forcing move, and instead let W capture your cutting stones with no resistance.
For
, take a look at what happens if you push once, then enclose W with M12. It does not look like W can break through this enclosure, and it looks difficult to live inside. Maybe W will find a way to live while devestating your territory, and you will have to resign, but at least that would be a good fight.
After W jumped out to N12, you still had an opportunity make a fight of it by pushing at P11 and again at P10, then capping at N10. That would maintain a good attack and keep all of your stones in the game operating efficiently. If W fails to answer your pushes, you get compensation by breaking up the W side territory.
is a superb move, with a positive attitude, but you did not follow through with consistent play. The plan as you note is to attack the W stone, by pushing it towards the B strength to the right. But your subsequent defensive moves were inconsistent with this plan.(An alternative plan would be to defend around L16. You would have to count the score to see if this passive defence gives you enough territory to win. But that strategy would be a little inconsistent with P12 and J15, so I prefer your attacking stragegy.)
A large part of the B strength to the right is the implied presence of a B stone at P11, since pushing there is surely sente. Yet you never played this forcing move, and instead let W capture your cutting stones with no resistance.
For
, take a look at what happens if you push once, then enclose W with M12. It does not look like W can break through this enclosure, and it looks difficult to live inside. Maybe W will find a way to live while devestating your territory, and you will have to resign, but at least that would be a good fight.After W jumped out to N12, you still had an opportunity make a fight of it by pushing at P11 and again at P10, then capping at N10. That would maintain a good attack and keep all of your stones in the game operating efficiently. If W fails to answer your pushes, you get compensation by breaking up the W side territory.
-
jeromie
- Lives in sente
- Posts: 902
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 7:12 pm
- Rank: AGA 3k
- GD Posts: 0
- Universal go server handle: jeromie
- Location: Fort Collins, CO
- Has thanked: 319 times
- Been thanked: 287 times
Re: The stones go walking, and I with them
Thanks, mitsun. Truthfully, I didn't see P11 as sente at the time (though that makes sense when you mention it), and I was afraid that trying to save the cutting stones would lead to a bad fight that allowed white to build strength on both sides. Your comments put things in a new light!
-
jeromie
- Lives in sente
- Posts: 902
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 7:12 pm
- Rank: AGA 3k
- GD Posts: 0
- Universal go server handle: jeromie
- Location: Fort Collins, CO
- Has thanked: 319 times
- Been thanked: 287 times
Re: The stones go walking, and I with them
I played a game last night that I won after my opponent messed up a life and death problem, but I should have lost it. Two big mistakes stood out:
First, I messed up the follow up to this approach in the corner:
We played this:
But I didn't read the clamp that followed:
The position ended up like this, which is makes my corner approach bad.
Surprisingly, when I used Leela to help me analyze the game it told me I was still ahead until this position:
I played this, but I didn't really read out what would happen. Leela suggested a play at a instead.:
My stone got cut off, and my chance of winning went way down after this point:
It strikes me that both of these mistakes are similar: they are errors in yose that are not backed up by reading. The errors in my previous game could (broadly) fall under a similar category; I often make mistakes when the game shifts to making boundary plays. I'm going to take another stab at reading The Endgame from the Elementary Go Series. It's not really the small endgame where I make most of my mistakes, but I think many of the principles will translate to the oyose stage of the game.
The whole game is here:
As a side note, I recently discovered the quarry makes it very easy to export diagrams. I like using diagrams rather than sgf files to highlight specific positions. Do you think it is more readable?
First, I messed up the follow up to this approach in the corner:
We played this:
But I didn't read the clamp that followed:
The position ended up like this, which is makes my corner approach bad.
Surprisingly, when I used Leela to help me analyze the game it told me I was still ahead until this position:
I played this, but I didn't really read out what would happen. Leela suggested a play at a instead.:
My stone got cut off, and my chance of winning went way down after this point:
It strikes me that both of these mistakes are similar: they are errors in yose that are not backed up by reading. The errors in my previous game could (broadly) fall under a similar category; I often make mistakes when the game shifts to making boundary plays. I'm going to take another stab at reading The Endgame from the Elementary Go Series. It's not really the small endgame where I make most of my mistakes, but I think many of the principles will translate to the oyose stage of the game.
The whole game is here:
As a side note, I recently discovered the quarry makes it very easy to export diagrams. I like using diagrams rather than sgf files to highlight specific positions. Do you think it is more readable?
-
jeromie
- Lives in sente
- Posts: 902
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 7:12 pm
- Rank: AGA 3k
- GD Posts: 0
- Universal go server handle: jeromie
- Location: Fort Collins, CO
- Has thanked: 319 times
- Been thanked: 287 times
Re: The stones go walking, and I with them
Six principles from chapter one of The Endgame:
- Appreciate the size of individual moves in the endgame.
- Besides thinking about different moves in isolation, you have to think about them in combination.
- You have to search out your opponent's weaknesses and put pressure on them.
- You have to learn to recognize areas that look big but are largely worthless.
- It helps a great deal to know whether you are ahead or behind.
- Especially when the game is close or you are behind, you must not accept the ordinary move too readily, but look for the move that gives you a little bit more.
-
jeromie
- Lives in sente
- Posts: 902
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 7:12 pm
- Rank: AGA 3k
- GD Posts: 0
- Universal go server handle: jeromie
- Location: Fort Collins, CO
- Has thanked: 319 times
- Been thanked: 287 times
Re: The stones go walking, and I with them
I've found The Endgame less difficult to read this time around, probably because I actually took the advice of the authors and skipped some of the lengthy explanations they put into asides. I'm in the midst of the problems at the end of chapter 2, and I'm doing pretty well so far.
I've known for a while that a sente endgame move counts for twice it's value compared to a gote move, but I understand the reasoning behind it this time. I was also struck by a few implications: if I respond unnecessarily to an opponent's move in the endgame, I am giving them twice as many points as they deserve. If I incorrectly judge a move to be sente, I am significantly overvaluing the move. These are obvious points, but I have also noticed how many points these kinds of mistakes can be worth in my own games. I have no doubt that proper endgame play (for my level... I'm not even talking about professional level endgame play) is worth at least two stones in my game.
I caught myself the other night in a pattern I can sometimes fall into. Late at night, I can find myself tired but not willing to go to bed. When I'm in that state, I often find myself doing something just to keep myself awake. When go is that something, my games usually don't end well.
I need to avoid this; not just for the sake of my rating on KGS, but also because it's generally unhealthy and robs my games of some of the joy they could bring.
I've known for a while that a sente endgame move counts for twice it's value compared to a gote move, but I understand the reasoning behind it this time. I was also struck by a few implications: if I respond unnecessarily to an opponent's move in the endgame, I am giving them twice as many points as they deserve. If I incorrectly judge a move to be sente, I am significantly overvaluing the move. These are obvious points, but I have also noticed how many points these kinds of mistakes can be worth in my own games. I have no doubt that proper endgame play (for my level... I'm not even talking about professional level endgame play) is worth at least two stones in my game.
I caught myself the other night in a pattern I can sometimes fall into. Late at night, I can find myself tired but not willing to go to bed. When I'm in that state, I often find myself doing something just to keep myself awake. When go is that something, my games usually don't end well.
I need to avoid this; not just for the sake of my rating on KGS, but also because it's generally unhealthy and robs my games of some of the joy they could bring.-
jeromie
- Lives in sente
- Posts: 902
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 7:12 pm
- Rank: AGA 3k
- GD Posts: 0
- Universal go server handle: jeromie
- Location: Fort Collins, CO
- Has thanked: 319 times
- Been thanked: 287 times
Re: The stones go walking, and I with them
I finished the nine problems at the end of chapter 2 in The Endgame. The problems are set up such that there are three possible endgame moves marked on the board. For each position, you are expected to determine the largest move, the smallest move, how many points each move is worth, and the classification of each move (gote, sente, reverse sente, or double sente). The authors allot a maximum of 20 points for each answer: 10 points for the correct largest move plus 10 points for the correct smallest move minus the difference in your point valuations from the correct totals. I got a total of 118 out of 180 points: I got the largest move correct on all nine problems, but on the last three I mixed up the order of the two smaller moves.
I like the setup for the problems. Very few of the tsumego I have done involve deciding between multiple areas of the board, so this was a different way of thinking. Counting the actual point totals was helpful, too, since it meant you actually have to read out the best sequence of moves from both sides. I'm still too slow at this process to count every endgame move in an actual game, but I think this will certainly make me stronger. (I haven't had a chance to test this hypothesis yet, since all of my games the last couple of nights before they got to the endgame.)
Here's an example of one of the problems at the end of the chapter. I'll let you buy the book (or figure it out for yourself) if you want the correct answer.
I like the setup for the problems. Very few of the tsumego I have done involve deciding between multiple areas of the board, so this was a different way of thinking. Counting the actual point totals was helpful, too, since it meant you actually have to read out the best sequence of moves from both sides. I'm still too slow at this process to count every endgame move in an actual game, but I think this will certainly make me stronger. (I haven't had a chance to test this hypothesis yet, since all of my games the last couple of nights before they got to the endgame.)
Here's an example of one of the problems at the end of the chapter. I'll let you buy the book (or figure it out for yourself) if you want the correct answer.
-
jeromie
- Lives in sente
- Posts: 902
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 7:12 pm
- Rank: AGA 3k
- GD Posts: 0
- Universal go server handle: jeromie
- Location: Fort Collins, CO
- Has thanked: 319 times
- Been thanked: 287 times
Re: The stones go walking, and I with them
I'm working through chapter 3 of The Endgame now, which presents various endgame tesuji. I'm pretty familiar with all of the moves that have been presented so far (I'm about a third of the way through the chapter), but it still serves as a good reminder to be on the lookout for these moves in my games.
The section on the monkey jump was particularly enlightening. I'm guilty of automatically playing the monkey jump without looking for a better move at times, and the authors show why that is a mistake. I also didn't realize how often my default response to the monkey jump can actually allow the opponent to push further into my territory. On the flip side, I can now look out for the opportunity to do that in my own games! There are so many clever moves and significant opportunities to change the outcome of the game during the endgame; why do some people find it boring? My guess is the calculable nature of the endgame is a turnoff for some people, but I find it fascinating.
The section on the monkey jump was particularly enlightening. I'm guilty of automatically playing the monkey jump without looking for a better move at times, and the authors show why that is a mistake. I also didn't realize how often my default response to the monkey jump can actually allow the opponent to push further into my territory. On the flip side, I can now look out for the opportunity to do that in my own games! There are so many clever moves and significant opportunities to change the outcome of the game during the endgame; why do some people find it boring? My guess is the calculable nature of the endgame is a turnoff for some people, but I find it fascinating.
-
jeromie
- Lives in sente
- Posts: 902
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 7:12 pm
- Rank: AGA 3k
- GD Posts: 0
- Universal go server handle: jeromie
- Location: Fort Collins, CO
- Has thanked: 319 times
- Been thanked: 287 times
Re: The stones go walking, and I with them
I've won my last 9 rated games on KGS. I can be kind of streaky, so that's not terribly uncommon. Also, a majority of those wins have come against the various incarnations of ayabot, which seems to have become my main rival. I was finishing grading for the summer term this week, and computer opponents can reliably fit in a quick game when I have a little time.
While it could just be a coincidence that I'm doing well, endgame study seems to be particularly helpful against bots. The SDK and up Monte Carlo bots don't often start ill advised middle game fights, so as long as I don't make any big blunders the games often come down to who can make the big plays to consolidate territory. If I get the first few big endgame plays, the bot will usually see that it doesn't have a path to come back and resign.
Not all of my games have been against bots. Here are a few positions from a game I played earlier today against a person.
Here's the first position I found interesting:
Black just played the marked stone. I'm pretty sure that his joseki choice in the upper left was ill advised with the marked white stone in place, but I wasn't sure how to follow up from this position. I decided that finishing the joseki was good for white, so we ended up with this position.
Was this follow up good for white? I've got some proto-territory in the lower left and the upper left, but there are still vulnerabilities in both places. Black's group isn't entirely secure yet, but it will be hard to attack it profitably, I think. I wish I could have left his group a little more insecure, but I can't really find a better line of play.
A few moves latter I played this:
I'm pretty sure this move was a mistake. I tend to make moves like this fairly often, because they seem to enlarge my moyo while keeping my opponent's moyo in check. But that knight's move doesn't add too much territory, and my opponent could safely ignore it and play something like a, b, c or d to stake out a very large area in the bottom and right sides. I've got something like 60 points sketched out in the top and left (and that can still be reduced), and black can get at least that much with one more well placed move. Black has lots of choices here, and all of them are going to leave white struggling to find a point for invasion or reduction that doesn't let black build up a lot of strength somewhere.
Of course, this is a kyu level game and black just passively responded at G4. I played Q10 next, to end up with this position:
It was looking for a move that
I made another reducing move on the bottom and we ended up here:
My next move was to invade the bottom right, since it seemed to be now or never. If I died, I figured I wouldn't make my opponent any stronger on the outside. I lived (though I don't think I should have), and my opponent resigned.
If there are any stronger players reading this, I'd love some comments on my selection of reducing moves. They seemed like they might fall into the category of right idea, wrong implementation, but I got away with it because my opponent was weaker than me.
Here's the whole game if you're interested:
I was finishing grading for the summer term this week, and computer opponents can reliably fit in a quick game when I have a little time.While it could just be a coincidence that I'm doing well, endgame study seems to be particularly helpful against bots. The SDK and up Monte Carlo bots don't often start ill advised middle game fights, so as long as I don't make any big blunders the games often come down to who can make the big plays to consolidate territory. If I get the first few big endgame plays, the bot will usually see that it doesn't have a path to come back and resign.
Not all of my games have been against bots. Here are a few positions from a game I played earlier today against a person.
Here's the first position I found interesting:
Black just played the marked stone. I'm pretty sure that his joseki choice in the upper left was ill advised with the marked white stone in place, but I wasn't sure how to follow up from this position. I decided that finishing the joseki was good for white, so we ended up with this position.
Was this follow up good for white? I've got some proto-territory in the lower left and the upper left, but there are still vulnerabilities in both places. Black's group isn't entirely secure yet, but it will be hard to attack it profitably, I think. I wish I could have left his group a little more insecure, but I can't really find a better line of play.
A few moves latter I played this:
I'm pretty sure this move was a mistake. I tend to make moves like this fairly often, because they seem to enlarge my moyo while keeping my opponent's moyo in check. But that knight's move doesn't add too much territory, and my opponent could safely ignore it and play something like a, b, c or d to stake out a very large area in the bottom and right sides. I've got something like 60 points sketched out in the top and left (and that can still be reduced), and black can get at least that much with one more well placed move. Black has lots of choices here, and all of them are going to leave white struggling to find a point for invasion or reduction that doesn't let black build up a lot of strength somewhere.
Of course, this is a kyu level game and black just passively responded at G4. I played Q10 next, to end up with this position:
It was looking for a move that
- Threatened to leave black with a weak group.
- Wouldn't lead to fighting that would just let black build strength.
- Wouldn't be terribly hard to pull my stone out.
I made another reducing move on the bottom and we ended up here:
My next move was to invade the bottom right, since it seemed to be now or never. If I died, I figured I wouldn't make my opponent any stronger on the outside. I lived (though I don't think I should have), and my opponent resigned.
If there are any stronger players reading this, I'd love some comments on my selection of reducing moves. They seemed like they might fall into the category of right idea, wrong implementation, but I got away with it because my opponent was weaker than me.
Here's the whole game if you're interested:
-
Bill Spight
- Honinbo
- Posts: 10905
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 1:24 pm
- Has thanked: 3651 times
- Been thanked: 3373 times
Re: The stones go walking, and I with them
A few comments. 
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.
-
jeromie
- Lives in sente
- Posts: 902
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 7:12 pm
- Rank: AGA 3k
- GD Posts: 0
- Universal go server handle: jeromie
- Location: Fort Collins, CO
- Has thanked: 319 times
- Been thanked: 287 times
Re: The stones go walking, and I with them
Thanks, Bill! It's interesting to see how many opportunities for better choices I have even in an aborted game. After I finish my book on the endgame, I may have to find some more resources for studying the opening!