Influencial Opening?
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:44 pm
What is the best opening to play an influence game? And is the follow up too difficult for me?
Life in 19x19. Go, Weiqi, Baduk... Thats the life.
https://www.lifein19x19.com/
To be honest, it's not a good idea for player of your strength to play an influence oriented game. The reason is that you have to be very strong at attacking and killing. When your opponent decides to invade or reduce your moyo, if you cannot attack him and either A) kill him or B) make profit then you will invariably be behind on territory. You might find that you get better results in your games if you play for solid points rather than influence.WeakPlayer wrote:And is the follow up too difficult for me?
I beg to differ. The reason is that his opponents will be very weak at reducing, invading, and living. More beginners err by playing for territory than by playing for influence. (Edit: Also, they will often play too slowly, enabling an influence player to take the lead.) It is never too early to learn how to use influence.moboy78 wrote:To be honest, it's not a good idea for player of your strength to play an influence oriented game. The reason is that you have to be very strong at attacking and killing. When your opponent decides to invade or reduce your moyo, if you cannot attack him and either A) kill him or B) make profit then you will invariably be behind on territory. You might find that you get better results in your games if you play for solid points rather than influence.WeakPlayer wrote:And is the follow up too difficult for me?
You make an interesting point, but, what you fail to take into account is that DDKs are weak at Go in general. Just because his opponent plays slowly, who's to say he'll recognize those moves as slow and play a big one. DDKs will constantly follow you around the board, and when they do tenuki there's usually some weakness left behind in their position. And DDKs are usually just as bad at attacking as they are at reducing, invading, and living. I would also like to say that there's nothing wrong with him playing an influence oriented game if he wants to, but it is a risky strategy for all go players, not just DDKs.Bill Spight wrote:I beg to differ. The reason is that his opponents will be very weak at reducing, invading, and living. More beginners err by playing for territory than by playing for influence. (Edit: Also, they will often play too slowly, enabling an influence player to take the lead.) It is never too early to learn how to use influence.moboy78 wrote:To be honest, it's not a good idea for player of your strength to play an influence oriented game. The reason is that you have to be very strong at attacking and killing. When your opponent decides to invade or reduce your moyo, if you cannot attack him and either A) kill him or B) make profit then you will invariably be behind on territory. You might find that you get better results in your games if you play for solid points rather than influence.WeakPlayer wrote:And is the follow up too difficult for me?
It seems to me that this is precisely what Bill has taken into account. The way I read the quote is that the underlying assumption is that Black is mainly concerned with trying to win. Bill's assumption, which I think is the right one, is that the DDK should be mainly concerned with trying to learn, and for that using the influence of handicap stones is quite possibly the best way forward. Rather than "influence" think of "connectedness". The handicap stones are relatively easy to connect, especially at high handicaps, and that gives the floundering weak player something to work with in terms of overall perception of the board. Grasping that overall perception for the first time may be what gets rid of the first D in DDK. Grasping that handicap stones are there to help you learn and not to win will get rid of the second D.You make an interesting point, but, what you fail to take into account is that DDKs are weak at Go in general. Just because his opponent plays slowly, who's to say he'll recognize those moves as slow and play a big one. DDKs will constantly follow you around the board, and when they do tenuki there's usually some weakness left behind in their position. And DDKs are usually just as bad at attacking as they are at reducing, invading, and living. I would also like to say that there's nothing wrong with him playing an influence oriented game if he wants to, but it is a risky strategy for all go players, not just DDKs.
WeakPlayer wrote:And is the follow up too difficult for me?
moboy78 wrote:
To be honest, it's not a good idea for player of your strength to play an influence oriented game. The reason is that you have to be very strong at attacking and killing. When your opponent decides to invade or reduce your moyo, if you cannot attack him and either A) kill him or B) make profit then you will invariably be behind on territory. You might find that you get better results in your games if you play for solid points rather than influence.
Bill Spight wrote:
I beg to differ. The reason is that his opponents will be very weak at reducing, invading, and living. More beginners err by playing for territory than by playing for influence. (Edit: Also, they will often play too slowly, enabling an influence player to take the lead.) It is never too early to learn how to use influence.
That is precisely the point I am making. At a high level you cannot say that playing for influence is better or worse than playing for territory. Why should it be better to play for territory at a low level?moboy78 wrote:You make an interesting point, but, what you fail to take into account is that DDKs are weak at Go in general.
Slow play is in general territory oriented play. Influence players, even DDKs, tend to develop quickly.Just because his opponent plays slowly, who's to say he'll recognize those moves as slow and play a big one.
As an influence oriented DDK I did not follow my opponents around the board. I did leave weaknesses behind, and I usually paid the price. C'est la vie.DDKs will constantly follow you around the board, and when they do tenuki there's usually some weakness left behind in their position.
John, I do think that DDKs should be more concerned with learning than with winning, and I do think that playing for influence is a good way to learn. When I see two DDKs patiently and politely plodding along, each adding to their secure territory two space extension by two space extension, I wonder how they are ever going to learn anything. But I also think that playing for influence is just as good a strategy when DDK faces DDK as when dan faces dan.John Fairbairn wrote:The way I read the quote is that the underlying assumption is that Black is mainly concerned with trying to win. Bill's assumption, which I think is the right one, is that the DDK should be mainly concerned with trying to learn, and for that using the influence of handicap stones is quite possibly the best way forward.