Page 19 of 21

Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck

Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2016 4:31 pm
by Joaz Banbeck
It has been about 6 months since I moved.

DrMWC, are you still around?

Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck

Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 2:00 am
by drmwc
E2.

I forgot about this forum for a bit! :)

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wc
$$ -----------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X O X . O O X . O . X . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X . O O X X O . O X X . X . X . |
$$ | . . . . . X O . X X O . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . X O . . . O . . . . . O . . |
$$ | . . . . . O O X . X O . X . . O . . . |
$$ | . X . X . . . . . . X O . . . O X . . |
$$ | . O . . X O . . . . X . X . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O . O X X X , X . . . O , O . . |
$$ | . O X O . O O O . O O . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X X O . . . O X . . X O . X . . |
$$ | . . . . O O X . . . . . O O . . . . . |
$$ | . . O X . X . . . . . . . . X . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . X X . X X X X O . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X . . . . O . . O . O . X . . . |
$$ | . X O X X O O . O X X . . O X . . . . |
$$ | . O O O W . . X O . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ --------------------------------[/go]

Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck

Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 2:38 am
by drmwc
Black's big group can almost certainly live. Balck should avoid dropping stragglers if possible.

But I should keep sente, and I think I can live at the top e.g. one line is

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bc
$$ -----------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X O X . O O X . O . X . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X . O O X X O . O X X . X . X . |
$$ | . . . . . X O . X X O . 2 3 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . X O . . . O . 4 5 . . O . . |
$$ | . . . . . O O X . X O 8 X 9 . O . . . |
$$ | . X . X . . . . . . X O 6 7 . O X . . |
$$ | . O . . X O . . . . X . X . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O . O X X X , X . . . O , O . . |
$$ | . O X O . O O O . O O . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X X O . . . O X . . X O . X . . |
$$ | . . . 1 O O X . . . . . O O . . . . . |
$$ | . . O X . X . . . . . . . . X . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . X X . X X X X O . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X . . . . O . . O . O . X . . . |
$$ | . X O X X O O . O X X . . O X . . . . |
$$ | . O O O O . . X O . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ --------------------------------[/go]


If this happens, I have a possible cut against the top middle black group. I can live with my group. I'm very thin, and it's all courting disaster, but it may win.

I need to be aggressive, as if everything lives everywhere, I don't have much territory.

Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck

Posted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 1:31 pm
by Joaz Banbeck
My opponent is back. It must be time for my yearly move.

I may need a few months to think about it.

Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck

Posted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 1:48 pm
by Bill Spight
Joaz Banbeck wrote:My opponent is back. It must be time for my yearly move.

I may need a few months to think about it.


:lol:

Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck

Posted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 2:54 pm
by Joaz Banbeck
I'll play fast. Maybe he won't notice that his clock is running and I can win on time.
Actually, a few minutes thought shows this move to be forced. It connects the loose stones at 8c/d/e, and threatens to make easy life if he tenukis.


Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wc
$$ -----------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X O X . O O X . O . X . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X . O O X X O . O X X . X . X . |
$$ | . . . . . X O . X X O . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . X O . . . O . . . . . O . . |
$$ | . . . . . O O X . X O . X . . O . . . |
$$ | . X . X . . . . . . X O . . . O X . . |
$$ | . O . . X O . . . . X . X . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O . O X X X , X . . . O , O . . |
$$ | . O X O . O O O . O O . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X X O . . . O X . . X O . X . . |
$$ | . . . B O O X . . . . . O O . . . . . |
$$ | . . O X . X . . . . . . . . X . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . X X . X X X X O . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X . . . . O . . O . O . X . . . |
$$ | . X O X X O O . O X X . . O X . . . . |
$$ | . O O O W . . X O . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]

Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck

Posted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
by Joaz Banbeck
@Observers:
Joaz Banbeck wrote:... a few minutes thought shows this move to be forced. It connects the loose stones at 8c/d/e, and threatens to make easy life if he tenukis...


The implied idea here is that I am ahead by a minimum of 10 points. If I round his territory upwards, the best I can see is about 40; if I round mine down, the worst is about 50 ( that includes losing all of the lower left side ). So his only winning strategy is to kill something.
A possible distant second is to try to make a few points in every yose encounter.

My strategy, therefore, is the opposite: to keep everything alive. A secondary strategy might be to not lose too much in yose.

Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck

Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2017 2:04 pm
by drmwc
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wc
$$ -----------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X O X . O O X . O . X . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X . O O X X O . O X X . X . X . |
$$ | . . . . . X O . X X O . W . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . X O . . . O . . . . . O . . |
$$ | . . . . . O O X . X O . X . . O . . . |
$$ | . X . X . . . . . . X O . . . O X . . |
$$ | . O . . X O . . . . X . X . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O . O X X X , X . . . O , O . . |
$$ | . O X O . O O O . O O . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X X O . . . O X . . X O . X . . |
$$ | . . . X O O X . . . . . O O . . . . . |
$$ | . . O X . X . . . . . . . . X . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . X X . X X X X O . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X . . . . O . . O . O . X . . . |
$$ | . X O X X O O . O X X . . O X . . . . |
$$ | . O O O O . . X O . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]

Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck

Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2018 2:09 am
by drmwc
I think I may actually be ahead in time now! (Probably not if anyone is actually counting, though.)

Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck

Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 11:02 am
by jonsa
BUMP


(I've been a lurker for a while but it was the tragic evaporation of this game that compelled me to make an account so it could surface once more. I want to see the conclusion!)

Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck

Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 12:23 pm
by Joaz Banbeck
jonsa wrote:... I want to see the conclusion!)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibonacci_number

Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck

Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 2:06 pm
by paK0
I can already see it, ten years from now this game and mine with Kirby will still be going with about a move per year during the more active periods :lol:

Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck

Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2018 6:39 am
by drmwc
I saw there were new posts, and thought it may be my move...

At least we are using Fibonacci, and not Busy Beaver!

Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 7:06 am
by ez4u
ez4u wrote:BTW, what is the record for slow play in a Malkovich? This game began on Feb. 26 last year. :)

I posted this in February 2015! :blackeye:

Re: #231 drmwc vs Joaz Banbeck

Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2019 6:51 pm
by hyperpape
I wonder, does everyone involved know whose turn it is?