Life In 19x19

Life in 19x19. Go, Weiqi, Baduk... Thats the life.
https://www.lifein19x19.com/

#246 moyoaji vs. schawipp

https://www.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?t=11181

Page 12 of 12

Re: #246 moyoaji vs. schawipp

Posted: Mon May 04, 2015 12:39 am
by moyoaji
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wcm110 Captured: :w4: :b5:
$$ -----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O O . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . O . X O X . |
$$ | . . . , . . O . O O . O O X X X X . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . X . . . X O . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . X . . X X X X O . X . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . X . X O O O . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . X O . . O X . . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . . O . O X X X . . . |
$$ | . X . O . . . . . , O O . O . , . . . |
$$ | . X O . X . . . . O . O O O O X X . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . O O X X X O O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . X . . X X O . . . |
$$ | . . X X . . . . . . X X X . O X X . . |
$$ | . . O X . . . . . . X O O . O . X . . |
$$ | . . O , . X . . . X . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . 1 . . O X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . 2 5 . . . 3 4 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ -----------------------------------------[/go]
Again, miai as I said. At this rate, I could have a binary switch making my moves for me! :lol:

If I can get the move at P4, I believe this is enough eyespace for my group to live. At least, that's what I read.

Re: #246 moyoaji vs. schawipp

Posted: Sun May 10, 2015 2:26 pm
by schawipp
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wcm110 Captured: :w4: :b5:
$$ -----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O O . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . O . X O X . |
$$ | . . . , . . O . O O . O O X X X X . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . X . . . X O . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . X . . X X X X O . X . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . X . X O O O . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . X O . . O X . . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . . O . O X X X . . . |
$$ | . X . O . . . . . , O O . O . , . . . |
$$ | . X O . X . . . . O . O O O O X X . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . O O X X X O O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . X . . X X O . . . |
$$ | . . X X . . . . . . X X X . O X X . . |
$$ | . . O X . . . . . . X O O . O . X . . |
$$ | . . O , . X . . . X . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . 6 . 1 . . O X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . 2 5 . . . 3 4 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ -----------------------------------------[/go]
I cannot find a variation to kill the lower white group. With K3 a connection to the left corner is more difficult for w, also I can hope to get a few more points in lower left center area, while white needs to get alive at bottom. After the lower side is clarified I will try to count in detail and then decide, whether to resign or to go on...

Re: #246 moyoaji vs. schawipp

Posted: Sun May 10, 2015 11:43 pm
by moyoaji
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wcm110 Captured: :w4: :b5:
$$ -----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O O . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . O . X O X . |
$$ | . . . , . . O . O O . O O X X X X . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . X . . . X O . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . X . . X X X X O . X . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . X . X O O O . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . X O . . O X . . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . . O . O X X X . . . |
$$ | . X . O . . . . . , O O . O . , . . . |
$$ | . X O . X . . . . O . O O O O X X . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . O O X X X O O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . X . . X X O . . . |
$$ | . . X X . . . . . . X X X . O X X . . |
$$ | . . O X . . . . . . X O O . O . X . . |
$$ | . . O , . X . . . X . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . 6 . 1 . . O X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . 2 5 . 7 . 3 4 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ -----------------------------------------[/go]
Okay, I'm pretty sure this is alive now. I had to be careful on this move because of a tricky possible play at N1 if I played something like L3 instead, but I'm pretty sure that I'm alive at this point. Now I know I don't need to kill the black group in the center. All I need is reasonable endgame from this point forward.

Re: #246 moyoaji vs. schawipp

Posted: Mon May 11, 2015 1:11 pm
by schawipp
Well, I think there is no reasonable chance for me to catch up, so I resign this game. Congratulations, it was a quite interesting game (at least for me ;-) )!

Once more a hidden comment ;-)
Currently, white has about 50 points in upper-left area, 15 points in lower left corner, 5 points in center, some more points in the now alive lower group plus komi -> roundabout 80 points in total. I have 14 points in lower right corner, 20 points in the area above, maybe ten points at left side invasion and a few potential points with my not-yet-completely alive upper group. That means I would need to get more than 30 points in the unsettled central area while still having to care about the k14 group. It seems not realistic at all.

The problem with white's lower group was that if I tried too hard to kill (e.g. by jumping in in move 113 instead of blocking the corner), it seems that my corner would have died first. I underestimated the aji with this group and was far too optimistic about that.

I think one of my biggest mistakes was move :b69: which I thought to be kikashi but which in fact was not. It allowed white to build a strong wall facing upper center and causing the subsequent problems.

Re: #246 moyoaji vs. schawipp

Posted: Mon May 11, 2015 4:48 pm
by moyoaji
Thank you for the game schawipp, I look forward to seeing your and other's comments.
Considering the game is over, I don't need to hide this, but I will anyway because my opponent hid one last comment.

So far, I have yet to have a Malkovich game on this forum go to counting. I wonder if that is because of the time involved - perhaps my opponent and I each take more time to evaluate the score at each stage of the game and, therefore, will not continue a game when down by a large margin.

Do I think the resignation is needed? I think it's reasonable.

I count 55 points for me on the top, 5 in the center, 15 in the bottom left, and 7 for the bottom center group that just lived, for a total of 82 plus komi and being up one prisoner, so 89.5 for white.
For black, I count 14 in the bottom right, 22 on the right, 10 on the left, at least 2 for his top center group, and a hard to determine central value - probably at least 4 points, so that's 52 points plus whatever else black can muster in the center. An uphill battle for sure.

If I were black, perhaps I could have tried something else first. Looking for a place to resign by playing moves on the top side in hopes of having a group live there. Is that likely at all? No, but I would have understood if black wanted to play something like that out.

C16 looks like an invasion point. L17 and H17 could both be played. E14 is free at any time, so perhaps a move like E16 or F17 would be something to try? But it all looks quite dubious and, worse case for me, I could just let one of those stones live but win on the rest of my points. I understand my opponent's decision to not look for a place to resign and accept my group living as big enough to call an end to the game.

Fuller game analysis still to come - let's see what the commenters had to say. ;-)

Re: #246 moyoaji vs. schawipp

Posted: Mon May 11, 2015 6:12 pm
by moyoaji
So I just got through reading most of the comments. Here are my initial thoughts on this game:

* My goal was to play for territory and to play lightly. I definitely kept a territorial advantage all game. As for playing lightly, I lost my way a bit with my central stick, but generally I was willing to let go of things I did not need. I was willing to let my bottom group die if black took the time to come back against it.

* In general, my assessments seemed to agree with others' assessments. Seems consensus was that C13 was questionable as it likely gave me a wall in sente and B10 was a mistake that I punished with C14 to get ahead. However, for one situations in particular, I was completely at odds with the group:

My move at P5, the reduction of the corner, was generally disliked. However, upon looking back at Kato Masao's book, I haven't found a reason to discount the idea.

Here was his assessment of the move in the following situation: "White 1 is also effective. Black is virtually obligated to play 2, since the attachment at 'a' would be ideal for white. Following this, White plays the cap at 3, which was his aim from the beginning. Jumping in at 'b' instead of 3 is unsatisfactory; white would have been better playing 1 at c to start with. You should note that the knight's move shoulder approach at 1 is unsuitable when Black's marked stone is at d."
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wcm1
$$ -----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . O . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . Y . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 c b . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . X . . . 2 . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . a X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ -----------------------------------------[/go]
Yes, the board state for my game with schawipp was different, but I don't see what is wrong with P5. Black is building a moyo in the center and :w1: reduces this moyo as a flexible move. The only argument I saw against this was that the standard approach is better, but I cannot agree with the idea of simply approaching in a game like this. My goal with this, and every Malkovich game, is to learn from my opponent and others. Playing the standard approach sequence teaches me nothing. Sure, it is an easy path to victory when I'm ahead, but I wasn't playing just to win - as I stated in my post about the move. And had I known that this move would cost me the game somehow, I would not have changed it to the approach. Perhaps I would have played M5, N5, Q6, or even P6, but not Q5. Q5 is a great move, and if you look at my games on the KGS you'll find me playing it there without question, but that's why I didn't play it here. I know Q5. I was unfamiliar with P5. Now I understand it a little better. It is a harder move, but I can see why it could be considered.

And I think this is exactly the situation to consider it in.

P5 aims at a light reduction, granting black points on the bottom and likely more in the corner, in exchange for more of a central reduction. Black was going to get nothing on the bottom after being undercut, so giving black the bottom was fine by me. All of black's points were going to come from the center, so, to me, these moves seem like they directly challenge that. Instead of asking for a share of the corner, I was telling black that I wanted to make something live in the center - thereby making his hopes of the center meaningless. Had black somehow managed to kill both P5 and P9 it would be game over, but I don't think that's possible. And were I more skilled at sabaki, I think I could have done wonders with these stones. Especially if I didn't tenuki to take black's corner - which I questioned myself at the time.

That part of the game was by far the hardest for me, because I was so unfamiliar with the situation. Yet, that was the point. I wanted to make it hard there. I wanted to make mistakes and let the game get messy. That certainly happened, so even if I'm totally wrong for playing P5, it did exactly what I wanted it to do.

Re: #246 moyoaji vs. schawipp

Posted: Tue May 12, 2015 4:22 pm
by Shaddy
A few thoughts:

P5 sucks because its goal is to reduce the bottom, and in your game, the bottom is already destroyed. So it's nice to approach with Q5 to force Black to build up the bottom more.

42 (knight's attachment) was heavy, and 43 was the right punishment. 45 was painful to watch, 48 let Black off. 48 would be the losing move, if you had lost. Don't get into that kind of situation in the future.

Re: #246 moyoaji vs. schawipp

Posted: Wed May 13, 2015 2:01 am
by moyoaji
Shaddy wrote:P5 sucks because its goal is to reduce the bottom, and in your game, the bottom is already destroyed. So it's nice to approach with Q5 to force Black to build up the bottom more.
So would you say that Q5 is the only move in this situation? Could I have considered anything else?
Shaddy wrote:42 (knight's attachment) was heavy, and 43 was the right punishment. 45 was painful to watch, 48 let Black off. 48 would be the losing move, if you had lost. Don't get into that kind of situation in the future.
As I said in the previous post, I lost my way with making that group heavy. If I had stuck to my plan from the start of the game I would not have played 42. I liked Uberdude's suggestion for 48 - that looks like a good result to me - connecting my stones while working to surround black's. Is there another move you suggest, or would his be best?

Also, what is "that kind of situation?" My goal with 48 was to work at surrounding black's two stones. Are you referring to the idea that you shouldn't try to attack from a position of weakness (before my group was settled) or the general principle of not making two weak groups (because my stones could be cut)?

Re: #246 moyoaji vs. schawipp

Posted: Wed May 13, 2015 9:51 am
by Shaddy
I wouldn't say that q5 is the only move, but I don't think p5 makes sense, and I can't think of anything clearly better at the moment. Uberdude's idea was good for 48, and even the diagram you posted as rejected looked better to me than the game.
Also, what is "that kind of situation?" My goal with 48 was to work at surrounding black's two stones. Are you referring to the idea that you shouldn't try to attack from a position of weakness (before my group was settled) or the general principle of not making two weak groups (because my stones could be cut)?
It's rough having two weak groups, but especially when Black has stones all around. Next time, make sure you control the center before you do that :rambo:
All times are UTC-07:00
Page 12 of 12

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited