Thanks for your input judicata!
judicata wrote:5: This approach usually gives white more points in the corner, and is less commonly played. But there is nothing wrong with it--especially at your (or even my) level, you'll benefit just from playing with it.
Usually I approach one-space low, I decided to go a little different here.
judicata wrote:7: I'm not sure about this one. Black is welcoming an invasion, but I don't know that this is a bad move. I would probably attach at D3.
Yeah, throughout play in the lower-left, I constantly felt like I would have liked a stone attached, but I'm a little timid about attachments (fights tend to go poorly for me, I feel).
judicata wrote:17: This is sometimes considered a mistake, though it appears ocassionally. Uusally, H16 or J17 are better, and I think that is true here. I'm a fan of H16 (of course it depends on the board), but some disagree. Because Q16 is high, J17 is probably better.
I agree. J17 was my alternate choice as a secure, profit-oriented move. I went for

because I felt that I wanted something for my lower-left chain to run towards. That idea might be completely wrong-headed, but if it isn't, I H16 seems the better move, tighter to the stones on the upper-left, more of a parry to any white encroachment in that area (at the expense of leaving an open skirt on the top.
judicata wrote:21: I think you should play the cut at E4 to give the D5 stone any meaning. Black's F6 and F8 stone may get cut off, but white's H4 and H6 stones will be weak if so, and black would get a good base and some territory on the bottom. Sorry, but I can't really play out variations right now--perhaps someone has a better one anyway.
I think it's another casualty of my timidity. I usually feel outmatched in fights - I always worry I've started reading too late and any response to my moves means the opponent has thought of a refutation.
judicata wrote:51: I would block the other way--more potential for territory.
59: Next time, let white crawl along the second line.
51: I guess I don't really have to worry about white's 3-3 invasion linking up with its side invasion then? This is what I was thinking of: keeping those two white groups as separated as possible.
59: Will do.
judicata wrote:That is all I had time to review.
It's still plenty to think about. Thanks for your help!