Life In 19x19

Joaz Banbeck wrote:

$$Wcm31
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . , . . . . . , .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . X X X X . 6 . . . .
$$| . O O O O X . . . . .
$$| O . . . O X . . . . .
$$| . O O . O X . . . , .
$$| . O . O X 1 2 . . . .
$$| . O . O X 3 4 . . . .
$$| . . O . 5 . . . . . .
$$|-------------------------

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wcm31
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . , . . . . . , .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . X X X X . 6 . . . .
$$| . O O O O X . . . . .
$$| O . . . O X . . . . .
$$| . O O . O X . . . , .
$$| . O . O X 1 2 . . . .
$$| . O . O X 3 4 . . . .
$$| . . O . 5 . . . . . .
$$|-------------------------[/go]

He got 22 points plus sente. I got a wall.
Who is better here? I think I am. He, of course, disagreed.

Looks like B is much better here, even considering the extra move. But the last three W moves were bad, giving up sente to capture two stones, and B promptly used that sente to perfect his outside thickness. If W omits the moves in this diagram, the result is not so clearly better for B.

SoDesuNe wrote:

Dusk Eagle wrote:What about this?

$$Wc
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . a , . . . . . , .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . 3 . . . . . . . .
$$| . X X 1 . . . . . . .
$$| . O O X . . . . . . .
$$| O . O X . . . . . , .
$$| . O X O X . . . . . .
$$| . O X 2 . . . . . . .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$|-------------------------

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . a , . . . . . , .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . 3 . . . . . . . .
$$| . X X 1 . . . . . . .
$$| . O O X . . . . . . .
$$| O . O X . . . . . , .
$$| . O X O X . . . . . .
$$| . O X 2 . . . . . . .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$|-------------------------[/go]

Locally Tenuki? ^^
Later I'd prefer to approach ('a') the position threatening to pull out the stones.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

If cuts, I think . New if , and then looks pretty good.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

If , maybe . White is OK in the center, but White's corner is very small.

Joaz Banbeck wrote:

$$Wcm31
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . , . . . . . , .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . X X X X . 6 . . . .
$$| . O O O O X . . . . .
$$| O . . . O X . . . . .
$$| . O O . O X . . . , .
$$| . O . O X 1 2 . . . .
$$| . O . O X 3 4 . . . .
$$| . . O . 5 . . . . . .
$$|-------------------------

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wcm31
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . , . . . . . , .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . X X X X . 6 . . . .
$$| . O O O O X . . . . .
$$| O . . . O X . . . . .
$$| . O O . O X . . . , .
$$| . O . O X 1 2 . . . .
$$| . O . O X 3 4 . . . .
$$| . . O . 5 . . . . . .
$$|-------------------------[/go]

Should 36 be at F7 instead?

palapiku wrote:

Joaz Banbeck wrote:

$$Wcm31
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . , . . . . . , .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . X X X X . 6 . . . .
$$| . O O O O X . . . . .
$$| O . . . O X . . . . .
$$| . O O . O X . . . , .
$$| . O . O X 1 2 . . . .
$$| . O . O X 3 4 . . . .
$$| . . O . 5 . . . . . .
$$|-------------------------

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wcm31
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . , . . . . . , .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . X X X X . 6 . . . .
$$| . O O O O X . . . . .
$$| O . . . O X . . . . .
$$| . O O . O X . . . , .
$$| . O . O X 1 2 . . . .
$$| . O . O X 3 4 . . . .
$$| . . O . 5 . . . . . .
$$|-------------------------[/go]

Should 36 be at F7 instead?

Several people stronger than I think so.

I don't understand why. In the game, he peeped. In effect, he traded 1 for 2 as below:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . , . . . . . , .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . . . 1 . . . . .
$$| . X X X X X 2 . . . .
$$| . O O O O X . . . . .
$$| O . . . O X . . . . .
$$| . O O . O X a . . , .
$$| . O . O . O X . . . .
$$| . O . O . O X . . . .
$$| . . O . O . . . . . .
$$|-------------------------[/go]

To me, that is a net loss for him. With , I have even more influence, and 'a' is easier to protect. His does almost nothing. It is so close to my overwhelmingly stronger wall that anything that it can do is neutralized. ( And, yes, in the game he did try to save it. It became part of a crane's nest while I built further influence. )

Joaz Banbeck wrote:I don't understand why. In the game, he peeped. In effect, he traded 1 for 2 as below:

$$Wc
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . , . . . . . , .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . . . 1 . . . . .
$$| . X X X X X 2 . . . .
$$| . O O O O X . . . . .
$$| O . . . O X . . . . .
$$| . O O . O X a . . , .
$$| . O . O . O X . . . .
$$| . O . O . O X . . . .
$$| . . O . O . . . . . .
$$|-------------------------

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . , . . . . . , .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . . . 1 . . . . .
$$| . X X X X X 2 . . . .
$$| . O O O O X . . . . .
$$| O . . . O X . . . . .
$$| . O O . O X a . . , .
$$| . O . O . O X . . . .
$$| . O . O . O X . . . .
$$| . . O . O . . . . . .
$$|-------------------------[/go]

To me, that is a net loss for him. With , I have even more influence, and 'a' is easier to protect. His does almost nothing. It is so close to my overwhelmingly stronger wall that anything that it can do is neutralized. ( And, yes, in the game he did try to save it. It became part of a crane's nest while I built further influence. )

1 is playable although it is bad... but your 2 is worst move you can play against 1.
you lost the point on the peep.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . , . . . . . , .
$$| . . . . . . . . . . .
$$| . . . . . 1 . . . . .
$$| . X X X X X 2 . . . .
$$| . O O O O X . . . . .
$$| O . . . O X . . . . .
$$| . O O . O X a . . , .
$$| . O . O . O X . . . .
$$| . O . O . O X . . . .
$$| . . O . O . . . . . .
$$|-------------------------[/go]

The only loss he could incur is one point for the captured stone. If we change the order of moves, and you played the solid connection, and I attached to your wall, would you respond? Of course not! But if you responded with this empty triangle, then you gain practically nothing (a is already covered by a net, so the cut is not really worrisome) while I get 1 in sente. Hane would be better. Of course, 1 does nothing to make territory or a framework or anything like that, but perhaps if there is a fight near that area (if I invade or reduce, for example, and this is probably going to happen) then 1 might protect a cut or threaten to make an eye or something. And that was practically free, so 1 has more than paid for itself.

Shaddy wrote:The only loss he could incur is one point for the captured stone. If we change the order of moves, and you played the solid connection, and I attached to your wall, would you respond? Of course not! But if you responded with this empty triangle, then you gain practically nothing (a is already covered by a net, so the cut is not really worrisome) while I get 1 in sente. Hane would be better. Of course, 1 does nothing to make territory or a framework or anything like that, but perhaps if there is a fight near that area (if I invade or reduce, for example, and this is probably going to happen) then 1 might protect a cut or threaten to make an eye or something. And that was practically free, so 1 has more than paid for itself.

You are several stones stronger than me, so I am not trying to challenge your reasoning but I must say that I don't fully understand it. We are comparing two almost useless stones (whites peep and black 1) and try to find which one is more useless.

I understand that if white had attaced to the solid connection (which would probably be a misclick) then black would hane. But does this change the value of stones in the actual position?

Ok, whites peeping stone might be accidentally useful in an eventual fight but black 1 also erases the possibility to use the aji the "a" cut. The "a" cut is for the moment protected by a net but who knows how the position will develop in future? Maybe a peep to that (not yet existing) net would be more useful. Furthermore, is it obvious that black 1's tiny influence is less valuable than whites peeps potential usefullness?

Again, I am not trying to challenge your reasoning. This is really a question. More I would like to see if every dan player would come to the same conclusion?

The point is that the benefit black gets from the empty triangle is miniscule. You might say that black's stone is too close to thickness (indeed, it's as close as you can get to thickness) and white's stone has a good chance of being useful in an accidental fight, because white will probably play to use that stone as a springboard for an invasion or reduction, so white is certainly better off. Anyway, white can still use the aji at the 'a' cut- just play a direct peep to it. Black still has to respond.

The difference is relatively small, so it's hard for me to judge. But my feeling is that the tewari'ed exchange is better for white.

For example, if in the process of some fight white ends up with a stone around F10, then suddenly white's stone helps slightly in supporting the connection for a jump, such as down to C10 or up to H10. The stone remains disposable, but has a great chance to be of some slight benefit in this manner if white later tries to reduce the area. It also activates a particular ladder path from the upper right for white, which has a small chance of randomly proving useful.

By constrast, I don't feel like black's stone is doing that much. Because black is already so thick, it's hard for me to think of a play that black's move would help out with. Almost any sort of extension or move black could play is likely to work almost as well without it. It also helps black a little, but I don't feel it does quite as much as white's stone.

The difference is really quite small though.

On sensei's, it is said that each defect in a wall reduces the value of the wall by half. Here, I think the tiger's mouth reduces the value of the wall by less than that, but not a ton less.

Shaddy wrote:On sensei's, it is said that each defect in a wall reduces the value of the wall by half.

A lot of things are said on Sensei's.

Here, I think the tiger's mouth reduces the value of the wall by less than that, but not a ton less.

Well, it's a huge wall. It's worth like 40 points or so. (With the solid connection.) The hanging connection -- this one, such that you cannot ignore the peek -- takes away maybe 4 - 5 points, I think. Nothing near 20 points.

Well, the other posts gave me the impression that people thought the peep was worth 1-2 points for white. I also think the peep is worth a bit more than 5 points, but I'm not very good at judging things like this.