Pick even or odd Dave, and open up the box - if you're right, I can't remember if you're Black or get to pick your colour (I thought it was black but recently, someone picked), but if you're wrong, I'll take Black and we can get the game under way either way
Have a great game!
To observers:
If I don't die (in real life) in the middle of the game, I promise to finish this one!
Re: 127. ez4u vs topazg
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:04 am
by perceval
good game to both, all those high level are exciting and i know i will love the comments
Re: 127. ez4u vs topazg
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:08 am
by cdybeijing
So, 6 dan vs 1-2 dan even?
Re: 127. ez4u vs topazg
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:22 am
by topazg
cdybeijing wrote:So, 6 dan vs 1-2 dan even?
Looks that way, although Dave is very modest about his rank, so I'm surely he'll claim otherwise
I suspect he's about 2-3 stones stronger than me. However, I'm hoping that make it more instructional rather than less, as it might be interesting to watch the gap develop rather than the handicap disappear - am I the only one that finds even games, even between different strength players, more instructional than handicap games ?
Re: 127. ez4u vs topazg
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:28 am
by ez4u
I picked even, so it is all yours Graham!
@cdybeijing: we all know how the net is full of sandbaggers
Re: 127. ez4u vs topazg
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:41 am
by cdybeijing
topazg wrote:
cdybeijing wrote:So, 6 dan vs 1-2 dan even?
Looks that way, although Dave is very modest about his rank, so I'm surely he'll claim otherwise
I suspect he's about 2-3 stones stronger than me. However, I'm hoping that make it more instructional rather than less, as it might be interesting to watch the gap develop rather than the handicap disappear - am I the only one that finds even games, even between different strength players, more instructional than handicap games ?
No, even games are very instructional for teaching purposes. But, I would generally think that if a game was being played for the said purpose of being a teaching game, one wouldn't want it to take weeks or months to complete. Hypothetically in a teaching game between players of approximately 4 ranks difference, I would expect the teaching portion to encompass mainly the opening and early middlegame. If the same two players played a game with say a 2 stone handicap, the teaching portion might include a very instructive endgame. Different handicaps for different purposes.
Just to be clear, I think this will be a very interesting game nonetheless and I'm not trying to suggest that there is really 4 stones between topazg and ez4u. I have never met either player, I just hope to learn as much as I can.
Re: 127. ez4u vs topazg
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:43 am
by cdybeijing
ez4u wrote:I picked even, so it is all yours Graham!
@cdybeijing: we all know how the net is full of sandbaggers
Yeah, I didn't notice that your rank says 6 dan Japanese. That's probably about 2 dan Chinese anyway, so even game seems in order.
Re: 127. ez4u vs topazg
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 6:26 am
by topazg
cdybeijing wrote:No, even games are very instructional for teaching purposes. But, I would generally think that if a game was being played for the said purpose of being a teaching game, one wouldn't want it to take weeks or months to complete. Hypothetically in a teaching game between players of approximately 4 ranks difference, I would expect the teaching portion to encompass mainly the opening and early middlegame. If the same two players played a game with say a 2 stone handicap, the teaching portion might include a very instructive endgame. Different handicaps for different purposes.
Just to be clear, I think this will be a very interesting game nonetheless and I'm not trying to suggest that there is really 4 stones between topazg and ez4u. I have never met either player, I just hope to learn as much as I can.
I guess I always saw these games as supposed to be instructional for observers, so I figured it would make better forum fodder even if I end up being Dave fodder
I've been playing these a lot recently, instead of my wacky but interesting nonsense, so lets see how it goes. We may even get to see my woeful lack of mainstream fuseki theory coming out.
I have spent tons of time over the years studying fuseki. With the end result that I know the first seven or so moves of all kinds of things. Recently I read a book by Yamashita Keigo where he said that mistakes in middle game fighting are more severe than in the fuseki because in the beginning there are many good plays to choose from. Even if you don't pick the best one, you will still be able to get value out of what you do play. So these days I mainly think about trying to be comfortable with the way the position develops and who has the initiative. I generally do not try to avoid particular fuseki if my opponent seems to be headed that way. My studies with GoGoD over the years show that few of the "famous" fuseki give Black a lasting advantage anyway.
Re: 127. ez4u vs topazg
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 7:29 am
by Kirby
@ez4u:
First of all, thanks for playing this game. I look forward to the commentary, and I'm sure it will be quite interesting and educational to follow.
I was wondering if you had time to elaborate any on this part of what you said:
ez4u wrote:... So these days I mainly think about trying to be comfortable with the way the position develops and who has the initiative. I generally do not try to avoid particular fuseki if my opponent seems to be headed that way. My studies with GoGoD over the years show that few of the "famous" fuseki give Black a lasting advantage anyway.
1.) Are there any famous fuseki that do give black an advantage? What leads you to believe that black and white are even in most famous fuseki?
2.) The explanation that middle-game is less important than fuseki provides some rationale for not trying to "avoid particular fuseki" if your opponent wants to be headed that way. But is it not somewhat disconcerting if you are playing in a way, at any stage of the game, that leads you to what you believe is disadvantageous? For example, if your opponent is black, and plays a fuseki that makes you feel that black is ahead - why not try to mess up his plan?
Yep, it's the chinese. I'm doing better as Black with it these days, so hopefully this works out ok.
Re: 127. ez4u vs topazg
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 8:00 am
by Chew Terr
Noooo! It's not too late for the Kobayashi!
Thank you both very much for playing this game. I highly respect both of your play, so I am looking forwards to this a lot.
Re: 127. ez4u vs topazg
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 8:21 am
by ez4u
Kirby wrote:@ez4u:
First of all, thanks for playing this game. I look forward to the commentary, and I'm sure it will be quite interesting and educational to follow.
I was wondering if you had time to elaborate any on this part of what you said:
ez4u wrote:... So these days I mainly think about trying to be comfortable with the way the position develops and who has the initiative. I generally do not try to avoid particular fuseki if my opponent seems to be headed that way. My studies with GoGoD over the years show that few of the "famous" fuseki give Black a lasting advantage anyway.
1.) Are there any famous fuseki that do give black an advantage? What leads you to believe that black and white are even in most famous fuseki?
2.) The explanation that middle-game is less important than fuseki provides some rationale for not trying to "avoid particular fuseki" if your opponent wants to be headed that way. But is it not somewhat disconcerting if you are playing in a way, at any stage of the game, that leads you to what you believe is disadvantageous? For example, if your opponent is black, and plays a fuseki that makes you feel that black is ahead - why not try to mess up his plan?
Kirby, answering these points will take a little time. Since it is twenty minutes to midnight in Tokyo, we won't get very far today. That said, I form my opinions on fuseki based mainly on the experience reported in GoGoD. I concentrate on the current komi period (6.5/3.75), which is roughly 2002 to date. If there is any fuseki that has demonstrated an advantage for Black, in my opinion it is the Chinese. I won't try support that now but maybe more on that another day. Actually I think it is irrelevant for amateurs anyway since we are not able to play with sufficient precision to realize such small advantages.
Also I meant to say (or to report that Yamashita said) that the fuseki is not more important than the middle game. That in the end, the game is likely to come down to fighting in any case in order to reach a decision. By the way it was a book on fighting - 戦いのベクトル ("The Vectors of Fighting", or something like that)- so maybe he was exaggerating
As a result, I have been trying to think more in terms of balance in the fuseki as opposed to advantage. Here though my understanding of balance has changed recently. I used to think it had a static meaning similar to real life. After reading books like "In the Beginning" when I started, I had always carried an idea in my head that balance in Go was mainly about a good blend of high versus low stones. Currently I prefer the dynamic image of a fighter standing in a well-balanced position and able to strike or defend as necessary. Balance in the fuseki is about who will be forced to fight on less favorable terms - because inevitably we will fight. I think it is similar to some of MW's commentary and I have enjoyed following his games here quite a bit.
Twenty past midnight now and the alarm goes off at 5:30 so that is it for now.
Re: 127. ez4u vs topazg
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:47 am
by Kirby
@ez4u:
Thanks, ez4u. Though you said you didn't have much time to elaborate, I think that what you did say was quite informative.
I particularly liked this paragraph:
ez4u wrote:As a result, I have been trying to think more in terms of balance in the fuseki as opposed to advantage. Here though my understanding of balance has changed recently. I used to think it had a static meaning similar to real life. After reading books like "In the Beginning" when I started, I had always carried an idea in my head that balance in Go was mainly about a good blend of high versus low stones. Currently I prefer the dynamic image of a fighter standing in a well-balanced position and able to strike or defend as necessary. Balance in the fuseki is about who will be forced to fight on less favorable terms - because inevitably we will fight. I think it is similar to some of MW's commentary and I have enjoyed following his games here quite a bit.
It is very interesting to think of the idea of trying to think of balance as opposed to advantage. Though I am usually not very successful in doing so, I typically think purely in terms of trying to obtain an advantage (well, in even games, at least).
Nothing tricky. Despite what I wrote to Kirby - avoiding the Chinese tends to be worse statistically than meeting it head on. The Kobayashi has never provided a consistent threat to White. It does get a little tricky if Black plays F3 next. Do I accept with C6, expecting a Kobayashi or play more aggressively, expecting that otherwise Black will leave F3 as a forcing play and complete a Chinese formation on the right next? Personally I have tried F3 followed by R5 a few times recently. Let's see what happens.
Graham: We did not discuss whether our comments are open to each other or not. So far I have not been looking at yours because I wasn't sure how this works, but I am easy with handling it either way.
and i know i will love the comments
