Hi all,



I've come across this kind of pattern, up to 10, after a shoulder hit a few times now. It seems like a fairly standard sequence.
The question I have is, if Black pushed like in my diagram, and then if W blocks, and Black cuts at 012, and the ladder does not work for white, was this not the right way to make shape after the shoulder hit? Is there something white should do other than block the push at P12?

Thanks in advance,

Zac

In the kind of situation where this play comes up, White usually wants to play lightly. That means playing flexibly, so White may not care that the ladder does not work.

A few variations.

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Thanks Bill,

It gives me a few different ideas, will see how it plays out in my games. One weakness that I've been focusing on is my lack of ideas about invasions and reductions. I shed a little tear in every game where my opponent gets an edge in the opening. When I try invade, I die, and when I try and reduce I end up with big heavy lumps to look after.

I should have mentioned that the position was artificial. Although at the club last week my opponent playing white used his third move to shoulder hit my small knights enclosure.

Thanks again,

Zac

zac, that kind of push through and cut is usually considered rather crude so I think whilst it is usually bad and white can manage the situation lightly with further sacrifices like Bill showed, strong humans trained to avoid crude play might overlook it when it is good. I do recall seeing bots like Zen play the push and cut occasionally and thinking "Hey, cheeky crude bot, is it actually good?", but then it beats pros so can't be too bad!

P.S. A more stylish way to cut or annoy white's shape is this: it can revert to push and cut, but maybe if you start with push white won't block but extend at 1 or tenuki or some light jump so this can give white fewer options to dodge.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ . . . . . , . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . X X X . .
$$ . . . O . O X . .
$$ . . . 1 . O . . .
$$ . . O . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . , . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . W . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

As a side note, nothing wrong with the marked move. Not played by pros, but still a very reasonable move. (Probably not played only because black does not play the large knight enclosure this early )

OC. improving your life and death skills can help, but what you say suggests heavy play. Learning to sacrifice is important. When you invade, the threat to sacrifice some stones and live with the rest, or run out with the rest, or build outside strength may be part of flexible play. That may also be true when you reduce, but sacrifice is less likely to be necessary.



That's not necessarily bad, against a small knight's enclosure.

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Three options for black:

[+0 black stones locally] Do not answer locally at all (Tenuki). = GOOD (<-Edited: former "bad" not true)

[+1 black stone locally] Do answer exactly once and then Tenuki = GOOD

[+2 black stones locally] Do answer two times locally. = BAD (And I am not talkin about playing two times in a row here instantly loosing the game )

Black plays at a or b and then elsewhere:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ ------------+
$$ . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . |
$$ . . X . . . |
$$ . . , . . . |
$$ . . b X . . |
$$ . . O a . . |
$$ . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . |[/go]

For white usually early in the game tenuki after black answers at a or b is the best option.

An early shoulder hit is a tradeoff. You gain influence and loose some aji. After the exchange of the shoulderhit with the answer a or b the temperature loss in this region of the go board does not allow a further local move (Aka tenuki is the better play now.)

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Joseki
$$ ------------+
$$ . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . |
$$ . . 1 . . . |
$$ . . , . . . |
$$ . . . 3 . . |
$$ . . 2 . . . |
$$ . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . |[/go]

Since this is joseki, we cannot say that tenuki by Black after the shoulder blow is bad.

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

In fact, in browsing AlphaGo Teach I noticed it often recommends tenuki as the best option to the early should hits it likes, for example 3rd diagram of Master vs human game I analysed here: forum/viewtopic.php?p=226119#p226119.

Why would you want to make shape after a shoulder hit? Go is not ikebana flower arrangement.

What you want to do (make) is something like erase, create thickness, settle yourself, or some other strategic goal. The result may well be good shape, but it's the goal that determines the shape and that may well be guzumi (e.g. an empty triangle).

"Make shape" is another anglicism that causes problems for westerners. The Japanese have the noun katachi (shape, usually but not necessarily good-looking - efficiency is the criterion, not prettiness) and for the verb they mostly use sabaku, which means to cope (which may or may not be playing lightly or flexibly - that is not the goal: the goal is coping).

There is no verb + object construction like katachi wo sabaku in Japanese.

The shoulder hit worked out quite well for him. I hadn't played against it so early in a game before and was a bit lost as to how to respond.

I think my L&D is OK for my level, I'm disciplined in doing my problems, but like everything else it can improve. Certainly my groups quote often end up heavy as they try and escape. I've been playing through a lot of Lee Changho games lately, mostly for enjoyment, but I'm amazed at his ability to attach, sacrifice, create options and escape or live when in his opponents sphere of influence. In contrast I feel slow and very linear. Being able to play in a light and flexible way is certainly one of my goals. Maybe not such an easy thing to learn, compared to something like L&D which has a more definite goal, and more immediate feedback on whether I'm getting it right or wrong.

This is really interesting. All the time I hear references to shape, and it's contextual as to what it really means. To the point where by itself I guess it becomes close to meaningless. Here I suppose I'm trying to play in a way that gives my stones options, and so that they cannot be easily attacked in a way that gives my opponent compensation for my having played a shoulder hit in the first place. I can see that it very much depends on a broader situation as to what I'm really trying to achieve- reduction, outside influence to help some other part of the board etc., and this will dictate the "shape" or placement of my stones, and it might not necessarily be a "nice" looking arrangement. I'm not sure if I'm on the right track in understanding what you mean?

Yes. Every move must be about the entire, global context.^(*)

Human pros thought ( incorrectly ) they understood this and had been saying this to amateurs for years, but it wasn't until AlphaGo came along and showed that most top humans were still very much locally ( cash ) focused ( GoSeigen might have been an exception ), missing the big picture in many cases.Correct. Prettiness has nothing to do with anything; it's always about the efficiency ^(*).