I know what reading is and know what balance is. I also know what I mean when saying something like "reading for the sake creating or evaluating balance". I am just not sure whether this is the thing you mean or whether you have a difference kind of reading related to balance in mind.
Magicwand wrote:your reading has to be global and balanced.
What do you mean by 'balanced reading' and why do you consider it important?
Maintaining the balance. go is not always about playing best move. It is about playing moves that will best help you win. that is why balance is important.
if you dont understand what i am saying: your western culture only allow you to see black and white. my Eastern culture will allow me to see gray. if you humble yourself and admit that your go knowledge is so limited that you have no idea what best move then you will start to see gray.
I have no idea what you mean but it sounds really interesting so can you try and explain it some more? Isn't the best move the one that makes it easiest for you to win?
RobertJasiek wrote:Do you not use any proof play reading? Such as a local boundary's alternative endgame variations? For that alone, a hundred (mostly short) sequences are necessary for the whole board.
No idea what you just said
Do you overlook all endgame / boundary play tesujis because you never read locally to find any?
Usually you dont have to read to find endgame tesuji, they are just obvious?
I think this is a bad example, as it does not demonstrate that even innocuous looking endgame situations have many tesujis that go unnoticed. I would suggest picking up Train Like a Pro Vol. 1 and solving those endgame problems. Even if you are already very good at finding tesujis, you will be forced to memorize a lot of different moves' point values, which is useful.
[go]$$Wm4 type: simultaneous liberty shortage $$ -------------------- $$ . . . . 8 . 7 4 6 . 5 | $$ . . . X O O . X 3 O X | $$ . . O X X O O O 2 O 1 | $$ . , . . X X X X X X X | $$ . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ . . . . . . . , . . . | $$ . . . . . . . . . . . |[/go]
Yes i saw the key points. A little bit of time for the second sequence, didnt really think about the first but i guess if it was a game i might have read more.
logan wrote:Can you instantly spot the key points to give maximum endgame play?
$$W Shape understanding, White to play $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . O O O O . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . O X X . O . . O O O . . | $$ | . . . , . . O X . , X X O O . X X O . | $$ | . . . . . . O X X . . . X O X X O . . | $$ | . . . . . . O O X . . . X O X O . O . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------
Uberdude wrote:One of the specific techniques most 1 dans lack that 6 dans have is playing a type of moyo expansion/solidification move that prevents a reduction. They are often large knight moves towards the centre. Some Korean player said mastering this idea was mainly what took him from 5 dan to 6 dan.
By this, do you mean things like the expansion from a low shimari on P17/R16 to O14 you played in that game on OGS ? If not, could you give an example please?
Uberdude wrote:One of the specific techniques most 1 dans lack that 6 dans have is playing a type of moyo expansion/solidification move that prevents a reduction. They are often large knight moves towards the centre. Some Korean player said mastering this idea was mainly what took him from 5 dan to 6 dan.
By this, do you mean things like the expansion from a low shimari on P17/R16 to O14 you played in that game on OGS ? If not, could you give an example please?
Yes, I suppose that would be an example, the classic one I am thinking of is as below. This prevents white's perfect reduction point at a. You perhaps don't see these moves so often in professional play because they lead to an excellent position, so the opposing professional will often reduce before the other gets the chance to play such a move. But in our amateur games mistakes from our opponents perhaps give more chances to play such moves.
although that move was play by professional i strongly disagree with that move. It is missing spirit. i can understand why he played so timid (to cover the peep move aji at 'a')
.
. At least Liu Yuanbo won the game where he made that shape that I linked to in the comments.
