i dont know what next picture looks like but i will have to overplay sometime.

Let's fight! I think that doing a hane is too aggressive right now:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm1
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . X . a . O . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . O . . b 1 . X . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . O . . O , . X . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

because of moves like "a" and "b". I think it's better for me to simply extend right now. I haven't read everything out, but I think I can get an advantage. I will read more after his next move.

Let's fight!

You may have noticed that, in my last game, Magicwand said that my play on the bottom lacked "flow".

I played like this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wcm1 Diagram B
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . X . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . X . . X . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

But Magicwand said that he would have extended along the left side. I thought this could lead to something like this (for example):

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wcm1 Diagram A
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . X . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . O . X . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

This was, and still is, somewhat counterintuitive to me. With the way that I played, I have a base on the bottom and feel safe. However, in the suggestion that Magicwand gave, all of his stones seem safe, and my single stone on the bottom seem lonely.

So I have been thinking a lot about this type of a situation. Why is Magicwand's suggestion better than my move? I posed this question, but never actually got a response from Magicwand, so I'm not sure that I totally understand it, still.

However, I thought about it myself a little bit. What is different? He said I was missing the "flow"? Well, as someone brought up, in the diagram for MW's suggestion, I have sente if he attacks my stone. That gives me initiative. So perhaps the initiative has something to do with flow.

But what else is there?

I think Aphelion brought up that in the one diagram, I seemed only concerned about my safety and not winning. This is kind of odd to me... Don't I need to be safe to win?

But if I think about it more - if I think about the "flow", then perhaps it has something to do with not letting your opponent push you around and get the initiative. I do NOT want this to happen.

Therefore, in the current game, Magicwand almost surely played the cap to grab control of this "flow". It's not about points - it's not about a direct strategy of winning - but it's about control of the game. If I let him push me around, he can attack me as he pleases, and control the flow of the game. I do not want that!

So, if I played something feeble (but safe) like this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wcm11
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . X . 4 . O . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . O . . O , . X . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

I will probably be safe with my group. But Magicwand can then choose moves that he wants and control what he wants. I think that this is controlling the flow!

I do not get the concept well, yet... But I do NOT want to give him control!

So that's why I decided to shoulder hit his stone.

MW attacks me... No! I won't have it! I will attack him back. He can't have control! I want it!

That's my current feeling of flow.

kirby is wrong for not hanneing. i would've hanned.

Hmm...

So as I understand it then, "flow" involves:

1. Sacrificing stones aggressively (eg: sacrificing stones that you could save and would even provide counterattacking possibilities)
2. "Fighting spirit"
3. Retaining sente even for a local loss.

Does that sound about right? It does sound less like a direction of play type thing and more like a meta game "show you aren't going to be pushed around" type thing.

I don't know what's going to happen, exactly, but I think I have to play this move. I considered the following, but it is too passive:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wcm11
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . X . . 8 O . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . O . . X O . X . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . O . . O , . X . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

In the diagram above, I am over-concentrated, and white can pull ahead of me without any problems. I have two stones along the side, so I really want to take advantage of them:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wcm11
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . X . . . O . B . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . O . . X O . B . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . O . . O , . X . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

I think that the move I played is the only way to do this well.

Here are some possible continuations:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm1
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . X . 6 . O . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . 7 . X O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . O . . X O 3 X . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . 4 1 2 . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . O . . O , . X . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm1
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . X . . 6 O . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . 7 . X O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . O . . X O 3 X . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . 4 1 2 . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . O . . O , . X . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm1
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . X . . . O . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . O . . X O 3 X . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . 4 1 2 . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . O . . O , . X . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

I think the last diagram that I just gave might be the most severe for white, but I think it's fightable for black. I also get local profit on the right side, if I play it right:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm1
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . X . . . O . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . O . . X O 3 X . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . 4 1 2 x x . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . x x x x |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x x x x |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . x x x x |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . O . . O , . X . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

The marked points may not become my points, but it turns into a favorable area for black. So if I can deal with the fight after in a way that comes out even for white and black, I'll feel I've profited overall.

I've got to fight like this, though. If I play passively I become over-concentrated, and let white off way too easy.

That might be right... Like I said, I don't know the idea that well, myself. I think that I am particularly trying to focus on the fighting spirit part of what you said.

And you're right - I think it's important not to get pushed around.

Another thing to note is that, while it seems less safe to play this way, you might not end up with a local loss, anyway. I'm reminded of Kageyama's book where he talks about mutual damage in the endgame. If you just answer your opponent, you end up losing points.

If you fight for control, this is less likely to happen, I think. It might seem like you could potentially get a loss in an area, but your opponent might not take advantage of it - and maybe you could turn that same local area into an advantageous area later.

---

Take this example: Magicwand played a capping move on me. I could flounder around for safety. It'd probably work, but MW would probably make big profit in the process. Instead, I'm trying to attack this other group. In the process, I hope to get strength - and maybe I can render his capping stone as useless (I hope).

First of all, I'm not sure how Magicwand uses "flow" and I am not nearly as strong, so my words are purely what I feel about the subject. Heck, I'm not sure Magicwand has a specific meaning in mind other than some intuitions he has about the game. He seems to be a player who goes more by experience and instinct rather than hard theory.

The way I feel flow is simply... a lack of awkwardness in your moves. I think its possible to play calmly and still have your moves flow well. By this I mean having a coherent idea behind the game that you steadily build toward, not lurching from move to move. It might be easier to "grasp the flow" by playing aggressively, since that seems to be the most direct way to control the the game. Besides having a consistent plan its also about a good sense of timing and sente, and know which moves are the urgent ones that can dramatically change the nature of the game.

Kirby is quite a few stones stronger than me, but sometimes when I watch his games against Magicwand I feel like he is digging in trenches and just trying to prevent white from doing something instead of aiming at something himself. Its a little frustrating because I don't quite know what he wants in the game, the biggest feeling is that he wants the game to end. It feels like a matter of just coping from move to move and maintaining an advantage, and as a result his moves don't seem to come as naturally as Magicwand's.

I feel like I haven't expressed myself quite clearly, and the main reason is I'm simply too weak to substantiate my ideas with solid examples or reading. If some one stronger can point out if I am on the right track or where I have erred, I'd be grateful.

I am not sure if Magicwand is using the word 'flow' in this context but I suspect he is. There is a Go term that exists only in Korean, which is 'Haengma'. Haengma is very difficult to translate into other languages, but it basically refers to how the stones move, hence the word 'flow' or 'flow of play'. It tends to refer to not only how efficient or effective a move is, but also how well a move works with other local stones. Good haengma is a move which helps to make good shape and also a move which is easy to continue to play from. Good haengma also makes it difficult for your opponent to come up with a severe counter-measure.

I hope this helps a bit ^^.

This is a very interesting observation. I'd like to discuss it more, but I'm not sure that I have much to add.

I guess I can say that I sometimes do want a game to end, with me ahead. I wonder if this is an unnatural feeling. When you are playing go, do you prefer for the game to keep going for a long time?

I'll make a thread to discuss this...

Interesting, youngjae. Thanks for the insight. There's another conversation that's been going on about haengma, by the way: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1588&start=20

Do you agree with what people are saying there?

I think John Fairbairn is pretty well spot on. It looks like quite an interesting thread though.In the case of this thread though I wished to suggest that haengma is what Magicwand frequently refers to when he says 'flow'. I am studying Go in Korea and haengma is considered to be very important.

I debated for awhile on this move. It seems a little over-concentrated, but I think it leads to the result I like best, though. Here's what I expect:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wcm1
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . X . . X O . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . O . . X O 3 X 6 . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . O X 1 5 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4 7 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . O . . O , . X . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Something like this might play out... And I feel OK with this.

if i atari..then it seems ajikeshi.

Even if white lives, I can't imagine that this is good for him, since black is getting stronger in the process...

i have successfully separated his group. 4 stones are much easier because i dont have middle stone to think about.

What are people's thoughts on N15 as a move? It seemed good in theory, but now Kirby may be having second thoughts. This is the kind of thing that always happens to me in handicap games: white plays an overplay capping move like the one Magicwand did. I think "oh I'm not going to be scared and play passively and let myself get shut in, im going to fight!" but what ends up happening is some kind of questionable sequence which involves a lot of pushing and cutting. By the end of it though, that entire side of the board just ends up being a mass of small groups where no one has any points...success for white. Does anyone else have this kind of problem? In Kirby's example, is there another choice between aggressively pushing and cutting and meekly living?