Life In 19x19

The first week's load seemed easy because I was eager to begin, but I probably spent 2-3 hours on it overall. Realistically, I think that's about right for a weekly study group.

I'm looking forward to the next week! I'd still appreciate if any one else has thoughts about 14, though.

jeromie wrote:The first week's load seemed easy because I was eager to begin, but I probably spent 2-3 hours on it overall. Realistically, I think that's about right for a weekly study group.

I'm looking forward to the next week! I'd still appreciate if any one else has thoughts about 14, though.

Here are mine:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W Moves 14 to 16
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , 4 . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . O , . . . . 2 , X . . |
$$ | . . a . O X . . . 3 . X . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Suppose White attacks at right away. Then Black would logically play . Next if White enlarges the capture at Black can develop nicely to ? Also, Black's two stones have aji, at A or B.

I'm guessing after the facts.

studying wrote: 4. Variation 25 for (page 19)
For a book that has declared its intention to embrace a love of fighting, I'm curious that there isn't even a mention of the bad shape (empty triangle) that makes in this diagram. To me, shape is *almost* as important in fighting as reading, but so far, it's received only passing attention. (The same thing happens in Variation 40.) Maybe the shape discussion will come later?

Since white played with the intention to cut, it seems is the only response to .

And yes, the shape topic will be addressed later, for example see "Don't Obsess Over Shape" on page 40.

jeromie wrote:My biggest question was about move 14. When replaying the game 14 seemed dubious to me, because after 15 black threatens to swallow up white on one side or the other. When I've looked up the micro chinese opening, most of the comments mention that 7 is in an ideal place to attack a high approach to the lower right corner. I understand that 10 changes the strategic considerations, but was this really a good move at this point? There wasn't a lot of commentary on this move in Relentless. Is there history for this attacking combination in the micro chinese?

I was similarly dubious of when I first replayed the game. My first thought upon seeing it was "Why is White creating two weak groups?" and seems a natural splitting attack. Upon looking at it more though, I think it's a fascinating choice. The key for me was realizing that, even though White is creating two weak groups (P4 and J4), he is also forcing Black to have two weak groups (F3 and M3). Moreover, White can say "Both my weak groups are high (fourth-line) and light," but Black's weak groups are alternatively (1) heavy (F3) and (2) low (M3).

This type of move, creating two weak groups for both players but declaring "Your groups are weaker than mine," to me, typifies professional fighting and is something I think we should aspire to. The toughest part about it is that it requires constantly viewing and evaluating the board from *both* players' perspective. In my own play, I usually view one player as the attacker, and one player as the defender (although these roles switch throughout the game). In professional play, both players are playing so efficiently and finding so many dual purpose moves that they are attacking and defending at the same time. Really, almost the entirety of Game 1 seems to be a battle of wills, with each player trying to convince the other that their weaknesses are more urgent.

In the US, we have a phrase, "playing chicken," that I think encompasses this type of play nicely. I believe it comes from a game that reckless drivers would play where they both drive directly at one another at high speed, waiting to see who is the first one to turn away from the oncoming crash. Obviously, it is a high risk endeavor, but so I think is modern professional Go.

One additional thought: After , I think is fairly forced (it is just too good for White to get to play here), so before playing , I expect Gu Li mostly focused on whether he felt he could better settle his first weak group while attacking Black's stones (and of course tried to determine which player would end in sente).

studying wrote:This type of move, creating two weak groups for both players but declaring "Your groups are weaker than mine," to me, typifies professional fighting and is something I think we should aspire to.

This was a helpful way to look at things, thanks. It's funny, but I've been trying to eliminate this type of thinking from my current play. I'm so bad at judging which groups will become weak that it usually end up turning my games into a toss up. Being able to judge how groups will develop is a necessary precedent to this style of play, so it may not be appropriate for kyu players.

studying wrote:Really, almost the entirety of Game 1 seems to be a battle of wills, with each player trying to convince the other that their weaknesses are more urgent.

This is a great assessment of the game, too.

Do we have an assignment for week 2?

Let's aim to cover the following sections by next Monday.

September 26, 2016

1. Create Something From Nothing
2. Power Promises Territory
3. Know When to Fight... And When Not To
4. Running Is More Fun with a Friend
5. Don't Obsess Over Shape
6. Seize Fleeting Opportunities
7. Deform Your Opponent's Shape
8. Determination Is Power
9. The Beauty of Omission
10. A Rish Man Shouldn't Pick Quarrels

Knotwilg wrote: I think it's ok in terms of pace. I still wonder exactly how we will conduct the collective study but I found the first week's organic results quite promising already and will oppress my thirst for structure.

Indeed. Did you have any particular thoughts in mind (e.g. meeting up on KGS at a particular time to chat, for those interested)?

studying wrote:

jeromie wrote:My biggest question was about move 14. When replaying the game 14 seemed dubious to me, because after 15 black threatens to swallow up white on one side or the other. When I've looked up the micro chinese opening, most of the comments mention that 7 is in an ideal place to attack a high approach to the lower right corner. I understand that 10 changes the strategic considerations, but was this really a good move at this point? There wasn't a lot of commentary on this move in Relentless. Is there history for this attacking combination in the micro chinese?

I was similarly dubious of when I first replayed the game. My first thought upon seeing it was "Why is White creating two weak groups?" and seems a natural splitting attack. Upon looking at it more though, I think it's a fascinating choice. The key for me was realizing that, even though White is creating two weak groups (P4 and J4), he is also forcing Black to have two weak groups (F3 and M3). Moreover, White can say "Both my weak groups are high (fourth-line) and light," but Black's weak groups are alternatively (1) heavy (F3) and (2) low (M3).
...

My thoughts on move 14...

I feel Gu Li and Lee Sedol are fighting for initiative here. Gu Li kicks black's stone to make it heavy, and then pincers to attack. Instead of helping the stones out, black splits the left side. An interesting aspect of this split is that, if white encloses the top left corner as in the variation given in the book, black's extension indirectly helps the stones white is attacking, while taking profit on the side. So white didn't allow that, so black got the initiative in playing in the top left corner.

If white just answers, black seems to have gotten the initiative. So I feel that white felt that he should profit from black's tenuki on the bottom. White threatened to attack the two white stones and black ignored. So white amped up the pressure. The commentary mentions that white can be flexible in settling his stone in the corner. So move 14 doesn't really become a weak group. The result was that white put a lot of pressure on attacking the two black stones after his tenuki.

I didn't post notes earlier, so here are a few thoughts on the first assignment, which was due today...

Interesting Thoughts
* Enclosing a 4-4 stone too early reduces flexibility by "slanting the corner in a particular direction". I'm often not sure about the best timing for enclosing a 4-4 stone. It's interesting to note that the choice should be made once you've decided on a direction. Obvious, maybe. But it hadn't occurred to me.

* I was fascinated by this point:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . b W . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . c . . . . . . . . . X O O . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . # , . . . . . , X O . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . X . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

The commentary noted that if the marked white stone were at "b", the marked black stone would be played at "c". It makes sense in an abstract way to me, I suppose. Because the marked white stone is high, perhaps it's riskier to play a move like "c" to threaten a shape on the bottom - white has an easier time to invade, I suppose - though I don't know an exact sequence. In contrast, if it's at "b", perhaps the invasion isn't as powerful?

* I also found this fascinating:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . X . . . B W . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

After the exchange of the marked stones, black can *tenuki* (!!) from . It's true that the exchange that white makes allows white aji for living in the corner later. And it's true that the exchange gives black some strength in the area. But it seems so painful to me for white to hane:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . W X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . X . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Maybe black has enough here. Or perhaps black can't expect a large shape in this area since white has aji to live in the corner? I'm not really sure. But I'd find it very hard to tenuki in my own game.

* When I skimmed through the game for myself, I was inclined to play at 'a', below:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . O , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . O X . . . . . X . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

I feel that black's marked move, having miai, is a "wider" type of move than "a". Maybe "a" is too limited in strategy.

* I found this variation to be a cool followup to white's invasion:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O 2 . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 6 , 1 3 . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . 7 X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . W . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . O , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . O X . . . . . X . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

It's somewhat obvious, but it gives fewer points than my instinct (another variation):

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . O . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . X . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . O , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . O X . . . . . X . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

The variation above is natural to me, but seems to give more points on top. Both variations have pros and cons, probably, but I wouldn't even consider the first one, since this second one is so ingrained into my head.

* Some quotes I liked:
"When you’re attacking, quiet moves like this are often the strongest way of playing, because they don’t help your opponent to make shape, trade or move out."

"If you make a habit of choosing straightforward, reasonable sequences that are within the horizon of your reading ability whenever possible, your game will become more stable and you’ll win more often." <-- This is really a quote for me, I think. I often make the game needlessly complex. I should stick to simple variations that I can read out clearly. I think it's a really good idea.

And now, here are my questions:

1.) This sequence was given:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

with the comment:

White is a firm way to defend the corner without playing too tightly

I don't understand this way of playing. I would consider two variations:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

I understand there may be pros and cons between these two, but I am really inclined to kick if I don't cover. Is this bad because it makes the pincer stone weaker? While I'm writing this, I guess I am starting to think that the white stone gets lonely this way:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . O X . W . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Since the kick doesn't secure the corner, maybe that's why it is bad here? The pincer stone isn't right for attacking the stones?

How about if the pincer is higher:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . W , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . O X . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Is the kick appropriate here? Any other thoughts?

---

2.) Under "The Micro-Chinese Opening", Diagram 6, it says:

If were at C, could be at D instead

So with as is, this is acceptable:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . O , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . O X . . d . c X . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

But if were at C, it'd be okay to do this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . W . X . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

What's the deal here? Presumably, this means that white can't do this with the original placement. So this would be bad for white:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . W . . X . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

But this is good:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . W . X . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Why? Because black has more potential in the bottom right? I don't get it.

---

3.) In variation 15 of "The Micro-Chinese Opening", the commentary notes that it's difficult to attack the white stones given the flexible horse-head shape:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

I still can see it might not be a great idea to go this route since white profits on the left so easily, but could black attack white's stones more strongly with a peep? I peep too often, though, so maybe this is one of those cases:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . 4 . . . . 7 . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . 1 . 2 . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . 6 5 . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . O , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . O X . . . . . X . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Maybe my thought that white will connect with is naive? Or maybe it makes white too thick? Thoughts?

Another idea that occurred to me was to make an Anki deck with he variations discussed here. A lot of the stuff in the opening includes common shapes, and the lessons could be worth remembering.

Reading a bit of the upcoming week's material and one thing that strikes me as interesting is that the commentary seems to evaluate the game in a different way than I do. He points out that white has more points, but black is more powerful - so the game is balanced.

When evaluating, I always count points, and don't have many techniques in quantitying "power". So in the current game, I'd evaluate white as winning and feel behind as black.

Perhaps this is a reason for my thin play at times.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

This is playable, I believe. It might be considered slightly slow for White.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

5 must be high here, or it's too easy for Black to settle (why?). In any case 1 is a bit too close IMO.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . O X . W . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Since the kick doesn't secure the corner, maybe that's why it is bad here? The pincer stone isn't right for attacking the stones?

How about if the pincer is higher:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . W , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . O X . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Still need one-space jump instead of knight's move. I prefer Black's position.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . X , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . W . X . a . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . X , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . W . . X . a . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Compare the invasions.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . 4 . . . . 7 . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . 1 . 2 . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . 6 5 . 8 . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . O , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . O X . . . . . X . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

What's your plan next for Black? You need to explain a little more.

Kirby wrote: 1.)Is the kick appropriate here? Any other thoughts?

With the low pincer, the kick just looks dangerous for white. While the enclosure isn't quite the right direction, black can still extend from the lower right to rob white from a base while getting almost as many points in the corner. Then, as the game shows, white still has to spend quite a few stones to capture the two black stones. Alternatively, black can sacrifice them and turn the lower left corner into a ko at worst.

The high pincer looks a little better because white isn't counting on making territory on the bottom, but it still seems he might be in danger of creating a floating group.

Kirby wrote: 2.) Under "The Micro-Chinese Opening", Diagram 6, it says:

If were at C, could be at D instead

Why? Because black has more potential in the bottom right? I don't get it.

My justification based on the different placement of the stone in the mini/micro Chinese is that the low stone risks being in the wrong place if it can't become useful in an invasion of the bottom right. I don't think I can come up with a sequence to prove it, though.

Kirby wrote: Maybe my thought that white will connect with is naive? Or maybe it makes white too thick? Thoughts?

Does this cut work after white connects?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . X . O . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . 1 . O X . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . X . . O . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . O X . . . . . X . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]