Life In 19x19

It's been a while since I actually worked at improving my go, but the 2022 Go Congress is being held near where I live and I'm planning to attend. I'd like to see what I can do to improve my game before then.

My previous study journal is here. In my first reply to a comment in that thread, I said,

I would be happy to play a game devoid of brilliance but filled with good, solid moves.

That still holds true, but I've grown enough from that time to realize what a lofty goal that actually is! Especially in the age of instant AI analysis, I can see that most of my games have wild swings in the projected score and winning percentage. It would take a very good player indeed to consistently win with a series of small but steady gains! (Especially if his or her losses also lacked wild swings.)

Perhaps I won't be able to avoid making blunders any time soon, but I think there is still room for rapid improvement in my game with the right sort of training. As I said in Knotwilg's study journal, I think I could gain at least a stone in strength by simply not making mistakes that are way below my level. In other words, if I make a reading error in a complex position, that's one thing. But there is no need to lose a game because of a mistake in an easily readable capturing race. (Ignore, for a moment, the errors that led me to be in that capturing race in the first place.)

So what's my plan to reduce these types of errors? I think that most of these issues are due to a lack of proper attention, not ability. To improve attention, I believe I need to steward the context of my practice as well as its content. Blitz 9x9 games on GoQuest, as fun as they may be, are likely to build in bad habits for my 19x19 games. Similarly, solving one or two tsumego when I have a few minutes in between tasks (and am still partially distracted) doesn't build up my stamina or train my attention. Instead, I would like to focus on solving tsumego in longer sessions.

I own a slew of go books. Among them is One Thousand and One Life-and-Death problems. I've never completed the entire book, partially because my stamina for solving a lot of problems at a time tends to come in bursts. I think that if I spend an extended period of time solving problems every day, it would improve my life-and-death abilities AND my attention. And I think both of these points are key for improving my performance in games.

I'm on problem 465 right now. If I do two pages a day (18 problems at a time), it would take me about a month to finish the book. It would be nice to do more, but that seems like a realistic goal with the rest of my schedule, especially since I'm in the back half of the book where the problems are getting harder. I can still read some of them on sight, but for others I can get stuck for a bit. Anyway, that's where my focus for improvement is going to be at the moment; we'll see how it goes.

Looking forward to catching up at the US Go Congress. Let's both improve before that time.

Jeromie: your goal quoted above;

I would be happy to play a game devoid of brilliance but filled with good, solid moves.

reminds me of a statement by the great Sakata to the effect that we don't win games by making great moves, we lose games by making bad moves. So, if you make good solid moves it is likely that your opponent will make some bad moves so we want to keep an eye out for them.

I suppose I should update this journal (such as it is) with how I’m doing.

I posted my initial goal right before my busiest time of the year, and I underestimated the mental toll that would take on me. I didn’t make much progress in my problem book for a while, and the quality of my games fell off a bit, too.

I’ve recovered since then, and I’ve made some progress in the book. I think I’m at about problem 700. I also did a bunch of basic problems in the Tsumego Pro app, read Fuseki Revolution and most of Joseki Revolution, and started paying attention to playing slower games. The result is that I’m currently sitting at 2 kyu on OGS. It’s a tenuous hold, though, so my next goal is to finish the problem book and try to get a solid 2 kyu ranking. I’m happy that I’m trending up before go congress; hopefully I can officially bump up my AGA rating while I’m there.

By far the best tool I have found to do daily tsumego is TsumeGo Pro, a mobile app that has new problems every day. The app is on my main line at the front page of my home screen, so I will easily be triggered every day.

Besides the "daily problems" feature, there's also a challenge to grade up to high amateur dan. When you solve a tsumego, you gain a few points. Every 50 points you gain a rank, so it takes about 15-20 problems to gain a rank. Consecutively! Because one mistake loses 20+ points, half a rank!

The main flaw in the program is that some problems have alternative, equivalent solutions, which are counted as mistakes, so you need to remember the program's solution or playing order to score points. Not often, but often enough to be a burden and not leading to actual success. There's a feedback feature for such events, but it's not a very user friendly one and you don't get any feedback that your remark was validated.

Memorizing solutions gets too easy after a while but with 700 problems in there, I find that there's enough space between them recurring. First sets are free, additional sets cost a few bucks, typical app/feature fees of 1-3 euros. I find that negligible for being such a good, motivating resource.

Yes, I have and use the Tsumego Pro app. I do find it to be good, as long as I can resist the temptation to tap the screen before I've actually read the answer (though the same could be said about turning the page in a book!). I've done several hundred problems on the app in addition to the ones I've done in a book.

I still like using books, for a few reasons. First, it gets me away from a screen. It's so easy to pick up my phone to do tsumego and then waste time on something else when my brain gets a little tired. Of course this is ultimately a discipline issue, but I know I am vulnerable to distraction on a device.

Second, I like the quality of problems in well-curated books. (Though many of the collections on Tsumego Pro are pretty good. Way better than the dross that is found on goproblems.com.)

Third, books exercise my mind in a slightly different way. Part of what I need to practice is not only my reading skill (though I do think that is the part of my game that is currently holding me back), but also my sustained attention. I don't mind when I lose a game because I simply couldn't read out a particular line. It drives me nuts when I lose a game because I simply didn't read something that was completely within my skill level.

I’ve been having fun at the U.S. Go Congress. So far I’m 2-1 in my Open games, and I’m enjoying the lectures and reviews. It was eye opening (no pun intended( to sit at a board and study joseki with a stronger player. I don’t think I’ve ever had someone show me how to study like that.

I’m trying to enjoy the surroundings and the time away as much as the go. This is practically in my backyard-it’s less than an hour and a half to my home-but I rarely get up here, and certainly not for a week straight on my own. Taking time to enjoy the mountains or read a good book has helped me to not get *too* caught up in whether I win or lose.

I’ll post some of my games, but might wait until I have something better than a phone to do it from.

Here are my games from the U.S. Go Congress:


I started off with a win, which was encouraging.


I was a head by a large margin in the second game, and then messed up the upper right corner. But it wasn't until today that I realized I could have started a ko on the upper right after all of the dame were filled that would have let me win the game.



I played more freely in the third game, and I won, but I made several big mistakes and inconsistent moves that I should not have gotten away with.

In the fourth game, I felt that I played well until I let a group in the bottom left get cut off. I thought that the turn at move 137 saved my group, but didn't notice that 136 meant that the bulk of the group couldn't be saved.


My final game was my only win against a 2 kyu opponent. Looking back at it, there are some moves my opponent responded to that he probably shouldn't have, and perhaps we would have given me trouble. But overall, I had a comfortably lead throughout.

One of the things I've been thinking about since the U.S. Go Congress ended is how to study if I want to get stronger.

At his final lecture, Inseong suggested that best way to get stronger if you've been stuck for a while is to change your style. The basic idea is that jumps in strength don't generally come from filling some knowledge gap, they come from playing differently and therefore working on a part of your game that has hitherto been lacking.

But at the same time, studying briefly with some stronger players was revelatory for me. There was a 3 Dan player with whom I spent a fair amount of time, and he played a brief teaching game with me and showed me how to study joseki. I also got to watch as a 6D and 7D player debated the proper path in an unfamiliar joseki. In both cases, it wasn't just a matter of looking the answer up in a book. They tried out different moves and tried to find refutations, sometimes checking online resources or AI evaluation, but only after they'd puzzled through things themselves. I've read about how to study joseki, but I've never really seen it done by a stronger player, and it was actually really interesting. I have huge gaps in my joseki knowledge, mainly because I don't like memorization, and I realized that it causes a too-formulaic approach in many of my games.

Similarly, in some of the lectures the teachers put tsumego on the board and there are positions that I should just know. I've read Davies Life and Death book, but even though I know there are correct answers for many common corner shapes (e.g. the L-group), I don't have most of them committed to memory. Sure, it's even better if I can read them out, but some of them are complex enough that I can't do so in most of my games.

Finally, the lecture that Ryan Li gave on the games of Go Seigen was really wonderful. It was encouraging to see his passion for the game and the beauty he'd found in the moves of the old masters. I could try to actually study some of those old games, and see if that is a way I could learn.

Perhaps there is a combination of these approaches. Maybe studying some professionals whose style differs from my own, and trying to play moves like them, would force me into unfamiliar territory. Maybe if I studied some new joseki, I could play patterns with which I have been unfamiliar and create a new style of games. Maybe if I was more confident about familiar corner shapes, I could read out some of those situations more quickly during my games. (I also feel generally deficient in reading ability, though that was a lot better in a slower game.)

I'm not sure where to start.

I don't know if I am in a good position to give you advice, as I've never improved very fast, and I don't know if I'm still improving at all, but I had a quick look at some of your games. In game 1 you played at a but I think would put more pressure:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . a O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . O . . . . . X . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X , . . . . . , . . . . O O O . . |
$$ | . . . X . X . . . . . . . X O X X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X . X O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

A few moves later you played at "a" but this violates the principle that in a fight, you should play from your weakest group, so a move at would be more appropriate.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . O . . a . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X X X . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . O O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O . . O . . . . . X . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X , . . . . . , . . . . O O O . . |
$$ | . . . X . X . . . . . . . X O X X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . X . X O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

The move below looks very slow:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X X . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . O X O X X X . . . . . . O X . . . |
$$ | . . . O O O O . . , O . . . O O X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . O . . X . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . O . X . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . X X . . . . . O . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . X O . O . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O . . . X . , . 1 d X . X . . . |
$$ | . . O X O O O X X O b c . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X X X X X X O O O a O O . O . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . X . . X X . . . . . . . |
$$ | . O O O . O X . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O O . O X X X . . X . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X , . O . O O X . . . . O O O . . |
$$ | . . . X . X O . . O X . . X O X X X . |
$$ | . . . X . X O . . O . . X . X O O O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Were you afraid of Black a, followed by White b, Black c? In that case, White d would capture the cutting stone.

In game 2, you made a mistake in a classic joseki:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

You played "a" but this is wrong because this allows your opponent to play b (hane at the head of two stones). The proper move for Black was to play at "b", applying the principle to stay ahead of your opponent instead of pushing from behind. A possible local continuation:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

Black gets influence and White gets territory. Later Black can be cut, but can consider to invade at "a".

In game 4 (against another player from this forum!) the beginning of your problems was this shoulder hit:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

Normally you don't want to attach to a weak stone. A shoulder hit is not exactly an attachment, but it invites your opponent to play "c", so it becomes an attachment. Usually in this kind of position, you want to pincer the stone around "a" or "b" to use your wall E3. For instance:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

As for the question "what to study", I don't really know for myself either, but I'll throw out a few ideas:

• At (y)our level, don't expect that understanding a simple idea will make you gain one stone. Study everything, and each new information will gain a (possibly tiny) fraction of a stone.
• If you got a joseki wrong, check it with AI and/or josekipedia after your game.
• However I don't think studying joseki is a really crucial point, games are won or lost during middle game fighting. So maybe study tesuji?
• When watching games by stronger players, I notice that they play many surprising moves. Broaden your perspective! When playing your games, try to consider more alternative moves, and more alternative responses by your opponent (easier said than done though...)
• Replaying pro games can show you different ways of playing. I don't know if it helps much to improve, but appreciating the beauty of their moves, even if you don't understand them completely, is already a good incentive.

Thank you!

The first move you identified in game 1 was exactly where Andy Liu told me to play in a review. The other moves are all good suggestions, too. (I am honestly not sure what I was thinking with the slow move that you identified. I was probably concerned with keeping the three stones on the right separated from the group in the middle, but I’d have to spend more time looking at the position to have any hope of recreating my thought process.)

As for studying joseki, it’s not primarily because I think knowing the sequences would make a big difference in my games (though I did have a couple of self-paired games that collapsed early because I messed up a joseki). There are three reasons I am considering some joseki study as a possibility. First, the type of study I witnessed is a way of learning tesuji and proper fighting moves, not just a corner sequence. It’s a systematic process of considering what the opponent can (and can’t) do after each move, which helps with evaluating who is ahead in a fight. Second, I don’t usually remember joseki when I just check it after a game. (I’ve looked at that classic joseki quite a few times before!) I am not good at pure memorization, but I am good at remembering relationships if I diligently ask, “Why?” Finally, knowing some more joseki sequences would help me add some variety to my games and perhaps lead me to a new style of play. In particular, I rarely play pincers (which are kind of out of style, anyway), but they can lead to a fighting position that will make me work on my reading and tesuji.

I started my study by studying the early 3-3 invasion that has come into favor as a result of AI influence. One of the main reasons I’m starting there is that I had a position that I utterly misplayed in a rated game at the US Go Congress. (Not one of my US Open games, so I don’t have the game.)

I was playing a 2k player, and I played this joseki (I was black):

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Corner joseki?
$$ , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . 9 . . |
$$ . . . . . . . 7 8 . |
$$ . . . . . . . 5 6 . |
$$ , . . . . . 1 4 . . |
$$ . . . . . . 3 2 . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ --------------------[/go]

And then white extended one more time. Now I know that the main problem with this pattern is that white gets sente. So I tried to tenuki. So white played a hane… and I tried to tenuki again. I can’t remember exactly how things went, but I think it was similar to this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wm10 Collapse
$$ , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . 3 . . |
$$ . . . . . 5 . X 1 . |
$$ . . . . 7 6 . X O . |
$$ . . . . . . . X O . |
$$ 2 . . . . . X O . . |
$$ . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ --------------------[/go]

This collapse revealed a couple of things to me:

First, my understanding of this joseki was lacking. I knew that white was supposed to get sente, but I didn’t understand why I had to continue to push after white played 10.

Second, my reading was insufficient. I should have been able to see that a second tenuki would be disastrous for my position.

Third, as I looked further into this, I realized that my knowledge of joseki was out of date. Even though this pattern came into favor after AlphaGo, the weakness of the black wall has made this considered too good for white. Black 5 is now almost always an additional extension on the third line or a knight’s move.

I’ve looked into the various joseki that can result from either of those moves, and I think I understand the simple ones. And while I have usually avoided complicated joseki, I’m at least a little intrigued by the reading test that comes from playing the flying dagger joseki. I probably wouldn’t use it in a tournament game, but it seems like a good way to step out of my comfort zone and perhaps learn something in the process.

I don’t expect a little knowledge to make a difference in my strength. But the attitude that is inherent in a willingness to study might. So far, so good: I’ve been maintaining a steady 2k rank on OGS, and I beat a 1k in an even game for the first time.

There are times when I am playing a game and I marvel at how I have come so far and yet can make such huge mistakes. And then there are games where I am reminded that my opponent can do the same thing. A game I played last night allowed me to experience both extremes in the same game.

I was playing a 1 kyu player on OGS, and I made a significant mistake in the opening. I was trying to capture a group that would let me save a large dragon, but it was looking bleak. AI analysis after the game says I was behind by nearly 30 points. But then my opponent blundered, and I captured their dragon. It was an 80 point swing, and I was 50 points ahead. But I messed up my defense to a late corner invasion, and the game got very close again. I ended up winning by only 1.5 points.



After the game, I was left with a question. How do I review a game like this? I decided that I can focus on two things in my review: errors in mindset (I had the wrong idea at a particular point in the game) and errors in preparation (there is a move or shape that I should know from study, and I missed it). There are a few such moves that stand out to me in this game.

Here's the first:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

After the pincer at 1, I played the pressing move at 2. This came from reading Shibano Toramaru's Fuseki Revolution. He says that the pressing move is never bad against the pincer after a low approach to a 3-4 stone. But he also showed why, specifically using the high 2 space pincer and I forgot the follow-up entirely. Instead of the sequence I played, I should have played like this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O X . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . 6 . . 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . X . |
$$ | . 5 4 X 3 8 . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . 7 O 1 2 . . O . , . . . . . O X . . |
$$ | . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . O X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

I'm okay with getting it wrong in the game, though. It's a good chance to learn, and to review the joseki asking myself if I understand the reason behind all of the moves.

Still, the fighting went reasonably well for me, and I was ahead up to here:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

I played a when I should have made the simple extension to b. And I missed fixing that group several times over the next few moves. This is a mentality mistake, one that I make fairly often: it is not good to fight with a group that is weak. Of course, that requires good reading to see that the group is in fact weak. But this is a situation where I think that's obvious, and it's what put me into a dire position shortly thereafter.

Here's another position I should have known.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

I studied the 3-3 invasion josekis recently, and I know that after the marked move I should play the hane at a before responding at b. Well, I thought I knew. I forgot in the game, and it gave me a cramped position in the corner.

There are quite a few more moves where I made similar knowledge and mentality mistakes, but I'm going to stop there for now.

Last year, after the US Go Congress, I studied the modern 3-3 invasion joseki and frequently played them in my games. The incentive to study that I found at Congress, perhaps combined with my change in style, led to me gaining a stone after a long time being stable at about 3k on OGS.

This year, I read Cosmic Go by Takemiya and decided to try playing in that style for a while. So, instead of using an early 3-3 invasion, I’ve been playing the sanrensei as black, and playing for influence and center control whenever possible. Here’s the interesting thing: it’s made almost no difference to my strength. Wherever the problem with my go lies, it’s apparently not in the opening. (I do think that experimenting with different openings helps me to gain strength in aggregate, though.)

Here’s an interesting game I played recently. It was played against a 1k player on OGS with a one stone handicap (1/2 point komi), which is a bit unusual on there since so many games are played without a handicap. But what made it remarkable to me was how close the game remained throughout. According to the AI review, my biggest lead was by about 8 points. The most I was ever behind was about 4 points. That’s pretty unusual at my level.

That isn’t to say there weren’t any big mistakes. Twice I played a move that lost about 8.5 points, which would obviously be a lot for a stronger player. There were a few other moves that lost around 5 points, too. But it’s pretty unusual for there not to be any major swings or missed life and death moves in an SDK game. Here’s the game:



By the way, I’ve been having fun with moves 7 and 9. I know it’s suboptimal (KataGo says 7 loses nearly 2 points), but it’s fun to go all in on building a moyo. Takemiya played it in at least one of his games, so it can’t be TOO bad.