Life In 19x19

skydyr wrote:In relation to Bill's problem:

I like that this...

$$B
$$ -------------------------------
$$ . . . . O . B B B . W . . . . .
$$ . . . X O O . O O O W . X . . .
$$ . . X . X O O X O X . X . . . .
$$ . . . . X X X X X X . . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ -------------------------------
$$ . . . . O . B B B . W . . . . .
$$ . . . X O O . O O O W . X . . .
$$ . . X . X O O X O X . X . . . .
$$ . . . . X X X X X X . . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

is completely different from this:

$$B
$$ -------------------------------
$$ . . . . O . B B B . W . . . . .
$$ . . . X O O . O O O W . X . . .
$$ . . X . X X O O X X . X . . . .
$$ . . . . . X X X X . . . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ -------------------------------
$$ . . . . O . B B B . W . . . . .
$$ . . . X O O . O O O W . X . . .
$$ . . X . X X O O X X . X . . . .
$$ . . . . . X X X X . . . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Bill Spight wrote:Black made a mistake in the original problem and left behind this seki, right?

With the hint it's rather easy, however I must have a very very good day if I would spot that in an actual game without "hint"

schawipp wrote:

$$Bcm5 Badumtsss
$$ -------------------------------
$$ . . . X O O 1 . . O O . . . . .
$$ . . . X O O . O O O O . X . . .
$$ . . X . X O O X O X . X . . . .
$$ . . . . X X X X X X . . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm5 Badumtsss
$$ -------------------------------
$$ . . . X O O 1 . . O O . . . . .
$$ . . . X O O . O O O O . X . . .
$$ . . X . X O O X O X . X . . . .
$$ . . . . X X X X X X . . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm5 Badumtsss
$$ -------------------------------
$$ . . . X O O . 1 . O O . . . . .
$$ . . . X O O . O O O O . X . . .
$$ . . X . X O O X O X . X . . . .
$$ . . . . X X X X X X . . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

This is better. In both variations, White has exactly one ko threat. In this variation, if White plays a ko threat answered by Black, the white group retains less aji because Black can remove at a to better defend his left stones if necessary:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm5 less aji
$$ -------------------------------
$$ . . . X O O 3 1 2 O O . . . . .
$$ . . . X O O a O O O O . X . . .
$$ . . X . X O O X O X . X . . . .
$$ . . . . X X X X X X . . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Compare: more aji after ko threat:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm5 Badumtsss
$$ -------------------------------
$$ . . . X O O 1 3 . O O . . . . .
$$ . . . X O O 2 O O O O . X . . .
$$ . . X . X O O X O X . X . . . .
$$ . . . . X X X X X X . . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Here, Black does not have the extra option of fast defense for his left stones.

As I said, clarifying a chunk is hard!

An interesting shape

In our exploration of problem #222 we have encountered an interesting shape.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm7
$$ ---------------------
$$ | . . X . O O X X . .
$$ | O O 1 O . O O X . .
$$ | O X O O O X X X . .
$$ | X X X X X . . . . ,
$$ | . X . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

kills in an interesting way. The two Black stones complete a shape known as Golden Cock Stands on One Leg. Its key characteristic is that the Black stones have two dame but that White cannot fill either without putting his own stones in atari. Experienced players are familiar with it from the following seki.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

If the solver was unaware of it, he could have learned it in the course of exploring the problem. In fact, it occurs in another variation.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

With the Golden Cock Stands on One Leg. and descend to the first line and have 2 dame neither of which White may fill without putting White stones in atari. White can still make life, but Black can then capture the stones.

Note that this shape is not about eyes, but about damezumari.

They don't bring result because go is not chess. In Chess if you solve thousands of problems you can be very good because chess is very limited. In go, you can lose large groups of stones and still win the game with the right strategy.

I don't do much go problems, but focus on strategy and theory. Tsumego can't hurt, but only doing that is a mistake.

Stefany93 wrote:They don't bring result because go is not chess. In Chess if you solve thousands of problems you can be very good because chess is very limited. In go, you can lose large groups of stones and still win the game with the right strategy.

I don't do much go problems, but focus on strategy and theory. Tsumego can't hurt, but only doing that is a mistake.

I agree that go is not chess, but I disagree that go problems do not bring results. The OP was not doing a lot of problems and there are go problems that teach strategy and theory as well.

I have had very good results recently with doing go problems, but I did a lot more than 10 per day and they were not tsumego, either, but problems like "choose A, B or C in this opening", "enclose this group or try to kill it?", "respond to this ko threat or not?", "where is the right endgame move against the upper right corner?".

Gotraskhalana wrote:

Stefany93 wrote:They don't bring result because go is not chess. In Chess if you solve thousands of problems you can be very good because chess is very limited. In go, you can lose large groups of stones and still win the game with the right strategy.

I don't do much go problems, but focus on strategy and theory. Tsumego can't hurt, but only doing that is a mistake.

I agree that go is not chess, but I disagree that go problems do not bring results. The OP was not doing a lot of problems and there are go problems that teach strategy and theory as well.

I have had very good results recently with doing go problems, but I did a lot more than 10 per day and they were not tsumego, either, but problems like "choose A, B or C in this opening", "enclose this group or try to kill it?", "respond to this ko threat or not?", "where is the right endgame move against the upper right corner?".

Yes of course.... I think confused tsumego (life and death) with normal go problems.... You are right!