White to play.

Talk about improving your game, resources you like, games you played, etc.
DJLLAP
Lives in gote
Posts: 602
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 3:32 pm
Rank: 1 kyu KGS
GD Posts: 0
Universal go server handle: djllap
Location: Denver, CO
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 47 times

Re: White to play.

Post by DJLLAP »

Joelnelsonb wrote:So in posting this question, I wasn't looking so much for a particular sequence of moves but rather a general strategy for breaking up the black infrastructure. It appears, based on all the answers given, that white's best plan would be to approach the star point stone while putting pressure on the weak group in the bottom left. I think I missed this because I underestimated the potential of the 2-3 stone played by white. I've been reading "The Direction of Play" (which is an amazing book, btw. not sure how I've gotten so far without it. He starts off by telling you to forget everything you think you know about Go and he reteaches you the fundamentals of the game from scratch). In the book, he heavily encourages using the full potential of every stone played (especially in the opening) and this puzzle demonstrates my weakness in this regard.

Edit: Probably the biggest point that he makes in the book is to stop playing joseki moves simply because they're joseki. Instead, he teaches you to continually assess the whole board on every move and to search for the "direction of play" instead. He demonstrates how insanely important the very first moves of the game are.

I have never read Direction of Play, but I have heard that it has a somewhat dubious reputation. Not because the information contained in it is wrong or bad, but because it is very hard to access and confusing at times. I have heard many say that it is a book for high level dan players only, so it is cool that you are reading and enjoying it.

As for the first moves of the game being insanely important, tell that to Gu Li when he lost the Jubango with Lee Sedol. The pro commentaries say that Gu was ahead after the opening of every game, but usually, one small middle-game blunder threw the whole game in favor of Lee Sedol. The opening is important, but it only makes a significant difference when both players are already proficient at reading and fighting.
User avatar
Joelnelsonb
Lives in gote
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 6:45 pm
GD Posts: 0
OGS: Saint Ravitt
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Re: White to play.

Post by Joelnelsonb »

It is a very difficult book to understand as he takes what you might call an artistic approach to the game rather than analytical. He (Takeo Kajiwara) emphasizes that the complicated details aren't important for what he's trying to teach. He just wants you to grasp the underlying concept to be employed on every move. I feel like it's a book that I can continue to read and reread regardless of how much I improve at the game. It's just good,fundamental food for thought.

As for the first moves, what I mean is that he explains the significant advantages and disadvantages of the opening moves even as they relate to every other move. According to Kajiwara, The fewer stones there are on the board, the stronger the relationship between each stone. So the first move played by white is heavily influenced by black's first move and so on. This brings a little bit of understanding to those statements made by pro's like "the game was lost on the second move." It reminds me of studying Chess in that the first moves say so much about the direction that the game will go (if followed-up properly).
Last edited by Joelnelsonb on Tue May 26, 2015 1:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Thinking like a go player during a game of chess is like bringing a knife to a gun-fight. Thinking like a chess player during a game of go feels like getting knifed while you're holding a gun...
User avatar
topazg
Tengen
Posts: 4511
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 3:08 am
Rank: Nebulous
GD Posts: 918
KGS: topazg
Location: Chatteris, UK
Has thanked: 1579 times
Been thanked: 650 times
Contact:

Re: White to play.

Post by topazg »

FWIW, that and Kageyama's fundamentals books are probably my two favourite Go books. I have lots of others with good resources in (Yilun Yang's fundamental principles etc) but those two ... I just like. It's not the moves that they leave you with, it's the underlying attitude's and overarching ideas that make them re-readable again and again IMO
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: White to play.

Post by mitsun »

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wc White to play.
$$ -----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . X . . |
$$ | . . . O . O . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . a c . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , b d . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . O . . X . . X . . . . . . . 1 . . |
$$ | . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]
Since the two B wings are nearly equal, the symmetrical invasion at :w1: would be my first choice. B will probably block the left side, where the extension is slightly wider. W should be able to live in sente, then set about reducing the resulting B thickness. W can strive for more efficiency by trying to make exchanges a-b-c-d before invading, but there is no guarantee B will play along.
Bill Spight
Honinbo
Posts: 10905
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 1:24 pm
Has thanked: 3651 times
Been thanked: 3373 times

Re: White to play.

Post by Bill Spight »

DJLLAP wrote:
Joelnelsonb wrote:So in posting this question, I wasn't looking so much for a particular sequence of moves but rather a general strategy for breaking up the black infrastructure. It appears, based on all the answers given, that white's best plan would be to approach the star point stone while putting pressure on the weak group in the bottom left. I think I missed this because I underestimated the potential of the 2-3 stone played by white. I've been reading "The Direction of Play" (which is an amazing book, btw. not sure how I've gotten so far without it. He starts off by telling you to forget everything you think you know about Go and he reteaches you the fundamentals of the game from scratch). In the book, he heavily encourages using the full potential of every stone played (especially in the opening) and this puzzle demonstrates my weakness in this regard.

Edit: Probably the biggest point that he makes in the book is to stop playing joseki moves simply because they're joseki. Instead, he teaches you to continually assess the whole board on every move and to search for the "direction of play" instead. He demonstrates how insanely important the very first moves of the game are.

I have never read Direction of Play, but I have heard that it has a somewhat dubious reputation. Not because the information contained in it is wrong or bad, but because it is very hard to access and confusing at times. I have heard many say that it is a book for high level dan players only, so it is cool that you are reading and enjoying it.
Kajiwara was a creative and colorful character. He was prone to exaggeration, which is evident in the book. Not to disparage it at all, but Kajiwara should be read as a stimulus to your own thinking rather than taking him as gospel. I don't think he would want it any other way. :) The book was aimed at kyu players. As are most go books.
As for the first moves of the game being insanely important, tell that to Gu Li when he lost the Jubango with Lee Sedol. The pro commentaries say that Gu was ahead after the opening of every game, but usually, one small middle-game blunder threw the whole game in favor of Lee Sedol. The opening is important, but it only makes a significant difference when both players are already proficient at reading and fighting.
Sorry, but that's a crock. I don't know why it is popular these days to disparage the opening. Where do the pros spend their time thinking?

Sure, if you are a 5 kyu and come out of the opening 15 points down, you still have a chance to win the game. But if your opponent is as capable as you are in the middle game, those chances are slim. OTOH, if your opponent is also 5 kyu and is better than you in the opening, while you are better in the middle game, then the odds are pretty even. Otherwise you would not both be 5 kyus.

It is true that if you are a 5 dan and come out of the opening 15 points down against an opponent who is as good as you are in the middle game, you can almost resign. But that is nothing against the opening. It is that the variability of 5 dan games is much less than the variability of 5 kyu games.
Last edited by Bill Spight on Tue May 26, 2015 1:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.
Bill Spight
Honinbo
Posts: 10905
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 1:24 pm
Has thanked: 3651 times
Been thanked: 3373 times

Re: White to play.

Post by Bill Spight »

mitsun wrote:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wc White to play.
$$ -----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . X . . |
$$ | . . . O . O . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . a c . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , b d . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . O . . X . . X . . . . . . . 1 . . |
$$ | . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]
Since the two B wings are nearly equal, the symmetrical invasion at :w1: would be my first choice. B will probably block the left side, where the extension is slightly wider. W should be able to live in sente, then set about reducing the resulting B thickness. W can strive for more efficiency by trying to make exchanges a-b-c-d before invading, but there is no guarantee B will play along.
Certainly a viable plan. I did not mention it because, IMO, it is difficult for kyu players to handle.
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.
illluck
Lives in sente
Posts: 1223
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 5:07 am
Rank: OGS 2d
GD Posts: 0
KGS: illluck
Tygem: Trickprey
OGS: illluck
Has thanked: 736 times
Been thanked: 239 times

Re: White to play.

Post by illluck »

mitsun wrote:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wc White to play.
$$ -----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . X . . |
$$ | . . . O . O . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . a c . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , b d . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . O . . X . . X . . . . . . . 1 . . |
$$ | . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]
Since the two B wings are nearly equal, the symmetrical invasion at :w1: would be my first choice. B will probably block the left side, where the extension is slightly wider. W should be able to live in sente, then set about reducing the resulting B thickness. W can strive for more efficiency by trying to make exchanges a-b-c-d before invading, but there is no guarantee B will play along.
I sort of feel like that black will block from top due to the nice reductions bot (which is why I wanted to attach one point above 1 or the submarine from the top). One thing I was also wondering is whether stablising the black group below makes the second line block on the lower right corner even worse, but I guess that's not really as important as getting an invasion in.
Post Reply