Page 3 of 3

Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:54 pm
by EdLee
Hi Fedya, please see PM. :)

Re: Re:

Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2015 12:10 am
by quantumf
Fedya wrote:Why shouldn't you mention when somebody's opponent made a mistake and that the person who requested the review has the chance to take advantage, even if that advantage is "only" taking a neglected big part of the board?
I think that its OK to point out opponent mistakes, at least if both players are at roughly the same level, as they're likely to be making similar kinds of mistakes.
Fedya wrote:I still don't see the difference. :scratch:
There are quite a few differences, but I'm not sure which one(s) Ed is referring to, so I'll leave it to him to explain. Unfortunately (if you want quick answers) it seems Ed prefers you figure out these things on your own :)

Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2015 12:13 am
by EdLee
Hi quantum, Thanks.

I started a PM with Fedya. We'll see how it goes from there.
Actually, there is another thread where I tried to discuss some of these issues,
with some interesting results. :)

You're correct that, in general, if someone wants some quick and easy answers,
they may not always be available. :) ( Sometimes, they are. )

Re: Not enough room to post what went wrong

Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2015 3:54 am
by Uberdude
quantumf wrote:
Uberdude wrote:I wouldn't worry about move 40, it's fine for a 7k and fine for a 1k.
Am I to conclude from this, by induction, that it's OK at 5d? If a move is bad, and it can be articulated why, then at any level it's potentially worth knowing, even if you lack the tactical expertise or whole board judgement (or whatever) to punish it appropriately. I appreciate that there is a concern that we should help Fedya focus on the biggest flaws, and I agree, 40 is far from the biggest flaw, but the whole forum can benefit from the discussion. So if in fact 40 is not an error, then I'd be grateful in some assistance in understanding why my impression (and explanation) is flawed.
No I think it is probably a mistake, but I am not sure. Also playing somewhat over-ambitious moves (which is what this jump is if a move on the corner is indeed better which I'm not sure, should white help his right side group instead, or k15, or something in top right corner?) could well be a good idea in an attempt to catch up. I would not be incredulous if a player stronger than myself said it was a good move. As a 4d I can find probably 50+ mistakes in a 7k game by spending just a few seconds to come to the conclusion a move is a mistake, whereas this one requires quite a few minutes of thought and even then I could be wrong. I thought your previous comment:
quantumf wrote: Move 40 - I would say you are playing too close to black's thickness, and stones here are at best passes, but more likely to become problems for you later.
was overly critical: it is certainly a lot better than a pass. s8 was more like a pass (but even that has a small yose value).

Re: Not enough room to post what went wrong

Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2015 4:57 am
by quantumf
Uberdude wrote:was overly critical: it is certainly a lot better than a pass. s8 was more like a pass (but even that has a small yose value).
Fair enough. The board is still pretty wide open, so questionable to criticize it so harshly. And I agree that overplays are perhaps justified given how far behind already was by move 40.

In my defence, in my games, a move like that (a one space jump to the middle, very close to thickness, far away from any support) tends to result in a weak group. So in fact, 10 points worse than a pass :)

Re: Not enough room to post what went wrong

Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2015 5:00 am
by Fedya
Ed Lee:

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to have time to deal with your PM right now. See here.

Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2015 12:38 pm
by EdLee
Hi Fedya, Life happens.

Re: Not enough room to post what went wrong

Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2015 1:13 pm
by Bill Spight
Uberdude wrote:I wouldn't worry about move 40, it's fine for a 7k and fine for a 1k.
quantumf wrote:Am I to conclude from this, by induction, that it's OK at 5d?
Uberdude wrote:No I think it is probably a mistake, but I am not sure. Also playing somewhat over-ambitious moves . . . could well be a good idea in an attempt to catch up.
Ah! It seems like we agree more than I originally thought. :)

I still think that :w40: was a small error, an SDK move, for two reasons. First, because of the Black wall, it has little potential for development. Second, it is too far from the White stone on D-04. When Black approaches at D-06, the White pincer in the game makes an overconcentrated group, but if White does not pincer, Black has room to make a two space extension for a base. IMO, :w40: at D-08 to make a base and stake out the left side is better.

A practical problem is that :w40: in the game is hard to handle for a kyu player. And indeed, White lost further ground in the game.