don't approach thickness
Eric Osman
Here's a lesson from the pros on how to deal with thickness.
O has a very thick position at the top right. X wants to counter this
thickness. What is the best move for him to do this ?
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10 . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . 10
9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4 . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . 4
3 . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . 3
2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
I'll wait to hear from some of you on your ideas, and then I'll
say what the pro suggests.
By the way, mention your rank. It's interesting to see how people
of different ranks think. Thanks. /Eric
John Smith
Jackie & Barry
R9, and if w pincers you can extend to R12.
If w plays r11, w's thickness is wasted.
7K on IGS
Barry
Ted S.
<3AA2DC43...@mediaone.net>:
>
>Here's a lesson from the pros on how to deal with thickness.
As a beginner, I have to ask: Would the pros have let White get this much
thickness in the first place? I could certainly see myself ending up with
such a position, but I don't claim to be very good.
I'm somewhere around a 25k on IGS. (I think I may have an inflated ranking
because people around 28k and below keep challenging me to games, I keep
winning, but the one time I was able to convince a 24k* to play me, I got
my you-know-what handed to me.) If I were really playing on IGS, my
immediate thought would have been to attack at S15. But after White plays
at S14 and T14, Black's in even bigger trouble. Now if I can just remember
this when I'm actually playing. :-)
So, upon further reflection, I'd guess something like F3 or C6.
Also, could Black have done a better job in top left corner?
--
Ted, who's close to getting an established rating
To reply by e-mail, change .spam to .net
Robert Jasiek
> A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
> 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
> 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
> 17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
> 16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
> 15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
> 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
> 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
> 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
> 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
> 10 . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . 10
> 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
> 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
> 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
> 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
> 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
> 4 . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . 4
> 3 . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . 3
> 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
> 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
> A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
The first question is whether to exchange f16-g17. To
justify such an exchange one would want to extend to,
say c10. (Extending to c6 would only weaken k3.)
However, after f16-g17-c10-r6-o4-s4-r3-q8 X would be
low on both c10 and k3, which is not attractive
because O can reduce either from above. Thus X does
not play the exchange but plays in the lower right
immediately. In view of O's thickness only o4, n4,
r6, r7 seem possible. After o4 or n4 O might r4-r3-
r5-s3-q5-p4-q9 but then he would make territory
with his thickness and X would even encourage him by
o10-p11, letting look O a little over-concentrated.
So O would rather not play on the right side now and
also not on the upper side, which is open, but play
c10, which negates X's high d15. X still has scope
for c17, c12, or f3, so one cannot really say that X
is worse, however, X need not let d15 be reduced so
easily. IOW, X should seek sente for the left side
and o4 or n4 do not guarantee this. What about r6 or
r7? r7-q3 immediately or a little later nicely uses
O's thickness (or X has to spend yet another move).
After r6 O can still try q2 or so but he would feel
cramped and not play so deeply too early in the game.
So locally r6 is a nice move but O has sente to get
c10. Either side gets its nice move and no side
should complain. Hence r6 is possible. Is r7 better?
r7-c10-c12 leaves both c10 and e17 a little weak,
OTOH, if O defends c10, then O has the two options
to defend e17 or to play q3, whichever X will have
done. Still e17 is light so X happily chooses his
preferred option: defend at p3. This means that O
c10 gives X the strategic choice. Just for this
reason O might prefer r7-q3-... and X gets c10,
according to his plan. Then d4 is safe because of
miai and O can defend e17, his last weakness. This
sequence seems to be natural for both, so we are
still left with the choice between r6 or r7. I am
too weak to decide between these two:)
--
robert jasiek
German 5d
Barry Phease
wrote:
> A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
>19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
>18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
>17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
>16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
>15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
>14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
>13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
>12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
>11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
>10 . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . 10
> 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
> 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
> 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
> 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
> 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
> 4 . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . 4
> 3 . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . 3
> 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
> 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
> A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
Obviously the right side is most urgent. If black extends too far
then white will invade and white will be using the thickness.
I would play at Q6 as it provides a nice balance between defending the
corner and diminishing the influence of white's thickness, while
maintaining a central posture.
If white doesn't play on the side then an extension to R9 is almost
perfect for black. So white probably answers Q6 at R8 and black can
attach at Q8 and force white to make territory in front of the
thickness.
I envisage the following which seems to lead to a good game for black.
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10 . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . 10
9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . 9
8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3 2 . . 8
7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . 6
Robert Jasiek
> Obviously the right side is most urgent.
Using words like obvious and urgent one can "justify"
everything. IMO, there is no obvious is go and urgent
should rely on value arguments.
> I would play at Q6 as it provides a nice balance between defending the
> corner and diminishing the influence of white's thickness, while
> maintaining a central posture.
This is an interesting suggestion.
> So white probably answers Q6 at R8 and black can
> attach at Q8 and force white to make territory in front of the
> thickness.
You offer a counter-proof for r8 so why do you suggest r8
to be good?
--
robert jasiek
Andre Engels
> As a beginner, I have to ask: Would the pros have let White get this much
> thickness in the first place? I could certainly see myself ending up with
> such a position, but I don't claim to be very good.
One thing is to count the stones - there are 9 white and 6 black stones
in the top right, and it looks like 1 white and 2 black ones have been
captured (more importantly, that is the number of stones that makes the
number of moves at the whole board come out even. White's thickness in
the top right is impressive, but given that white has played two moves
more than black, the result might well still be reasonable.
Nevertheless, I still think that a professional would not want his
opponent to get this much thickness this early in the game.
--
Andre Engels, eng...@win.tue.nl, ICQ #6260644
http://www.win.tue.nl/cs/fm/engels/index_en.html
The joy of computers is that they allow people to repeat their mistakes
much more efficiently than would otherwise be possible. -- anonymous
Andre Engels
>
> Here's a lesson from the pros on how to deal with thickness.
>
> O has a very thick position at the top right. X wants to counter this
> thickness. What is the best move for him to do this ?
My feeling is that a move at the right is more important than one at the
top. The question is how far to extend here. Given the impressiveness of
white's thickness, R9 might well already be too far, even though it
permits a three-point extension. R10 is certainly too close. R8 is
'neither fish nor flesh', which leave R7 and R6, in my opinion. I would
not know which of these two would be best, but I would play R6, because
it is more 'my personal style'.
Resume: I prefer R6, but see no objective reason to find it better or
worse than R7.
Rank: 2D/3D Europe
> A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
> 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
> 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
> 17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
> 16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
> 15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
> 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
> 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
> 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
> 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
> 10 . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . 10
> 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
> 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
> 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
> 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
> 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
> 4 . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . 4
> 3 . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . 3
> 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
> 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
> A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
Jan van der Steen
I agree with the general considerations made by Barry
but want to play Q7 (one line higher than 1 in the diagram)
just to be a little bit more greedy.
Jan van der Steen
Jan van der Steen
By the way, I found one game with the right side position:
http://www.cwi.nl/~jansteen/go/games/japan/titles/oza/25/game-2.sgf
(attached below)
When searching for positions with similar properties
(white *THICK* in upper-right and black hoshi in lower-right)
all showed the same continuation by black. Replay the above
game to see what black did in the right side position.
Jan van der Steen
mar...@concentric.net
Eric Osman wrote:
Here's a lesson from the pros on how to deal with thickness.O has a very thick position at the top right. X wants to counter this
thickness. What is the best move for him to do this ?
The best way to counter O thickness is to build opposing X thickness; therefore, to accomplish this, X plays at R4. My rating is IGS 14.
Roy Schmidt
> O has a very thick position at the top right. X wants to counter
this
> thickness. What is the best move for him to do this ?
>
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10 . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . 10
9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A . . 7
6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4 . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . 4
3 . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . 3
2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
I would play the large knight's move at R7 ("A" in the diagram).
> By the way, mention your rank. It's interesting to see how people
> of different ranks think.
It would also be interesting to see how long people took to decide on
their play. I decided in one glance. Rank is about AGA 1 dan.
Cheers, Roy
Steve Harvey
>
>Here's a lesson from the pros on how to deal with thickness.
>
>
>O has a very thick position at the top right. X wants to counter this
>thickness. What is the best move for him to do this ?
>
> A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
>19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
>18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
>17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
>16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
>15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
>14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
>13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
>
>
>By the way, mention your rank. It's interesting to see how people
>of different ranks think. Thanks. /Eric
I'm answering this cold, without reading any of the other responses in
the thread first.
I'd almost certainly play S15, which I'm sure isn't the best move, but
it at least guarantees X some (a little) space in the corner and an
anchor to the right side. With any luck, X can even avoid that group
in the corner turning into a big fat dumpling.
My rank is probably somewhere in the mid-20s kyu range -- I still get
occassionally trounced by 30kyu players on IGS, haven't played enough
against rated players in real life to get a good feel for my current
strength.
--
http://ishmail.prmsystems.com/hh.html
Over 200MB Original MP3
Drum & Bass / Hip-Hop / House / Psychedelic Punk
Nick Wedd
<ste...@itc001472.usitc.gov> writes
>> A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
>>19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
>>18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
>>17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
>>16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
>>15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
>>14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
>>13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
>I'm answering this cold, without reading any of the other responses in
>the thread first.
>
>I'd almost certainly play S15, which I'm sure isn't the best move,
It certainly isn't. What do you do if O makes the obvious response at
S14?
If you capture at T16, you have given up sente for the sake of about
four points. You ought to be able to find a far better use for a move
at this stage of the game.
If you ignore O's response at S14, you have made a local loss through
the S15/S14 exchange.
> but
>it at least guarantees X some (a little) space in the corner
What matters in the corner is not increasing the space from ~7 points to
~10 points, it is life. X's group in the corner is already alive.
> and an
>anchor to the right side.
But if O makes the obvious response at S14, you don't get an anchor to
the right side, and you have destroyed your chance of putting one there
later.
> With any luck, X can even avoid that group
>in the corner turning into a big fat dumpling.
If this is your modest objective, a move at N18 is more efficient.
>My rank is probably somewhere in the mid-20s kyu range -- I still get
>occassionally trounced by 30kyu players on IGS, haven't played enough
>against rated players in real life to get a good feel for my current
>strength.
Nick 7k on NNGS, 4k on KGS.
--
Nick Wedd ni...@maproom.co.uk
Andrew Martinez
Eric Osman <os7...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>
>Here's a lesson from the pros on how to deal with thickness.
>
>
>O has a very thick position at the top right. X wants to counter this
>thickness. What is the best move for him to do this ?
>
> A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
>19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
>18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
>17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
>16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
>15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
>14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
>13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
>12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
>11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
>10 . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . 10
> 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
> 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
> 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
> 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
> 4 . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . 4
> 3 . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . 3
> 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
> 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
> A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
I would play at Q6 or R6, labelled 'A' in the diagram. The large knight's
move doesn't feel right to me and anything larger would likely invite
an invasion.
>I'll wait to hear from some of you on your ideas, and then I'll
>say what the pro suggests.
>
>By the way, mention your rank. It's interesting to see how people
>of different ranks think. Thanks. /Eric
I am 7k* on IGS.
Andrew Martinez
Ming Y. Choy
> > O has a very thick position at the top right. X wants to counter
> this
> > thickness. What is the best move for him to do this ?
> >
> A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
> 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
> 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
> 17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
> 16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
> 15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
> 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
> 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
> 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
> 10 . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . 10
> 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
> 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
> 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
> 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
> 4 . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . 4
> 3 . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . 3
> 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
> 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
> A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
>
How about s14?
-MY Choy (1d)
Richard Jones
I would probably have played something like G17 had I not read all of
the other posts. Having read them, I've come round to believing that
something like R6/R7 would be the best move. My original intention
would have been to obtain some thickness on the top left to counter
white's on the top right. If I'd lost the fight for the left top
corner, I'd hope to extend along the top (with a move at something like
N17/N18).
> By the way, mention your rank. It's interesting to see how people
> of different ranks think.
I'm tentatively considered to be around 12kyu, but I don't have an IGS
rating or anything, so I'm not sure.
Regards
Richard
Hubert Quatreville
thickness. What is the best move for him to do this ?
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10 . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . 10
9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4 . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . 4
3 . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . 3
2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
This discussion seems very quiet now but I would like to know the answer.
Personnaly, I would play R6, I feel R7 overextended and R6 enough to destroy
much of white potential but
BEFORE
I would exchange F16-G17.
I'm only 4k* on IGS and I don't see why many players dismiss this exchange :
Robert Jasiek say "To justify such an exchange one would want to extend
to,say c10"
but I think this extention can wait I just the exchenge F16-G17 is a plus
for black because it reduce more options for white than for black. The
options black loose, G17 or H17, have very few chances to become reality
because of white thickness.
Of course, there must be something wrong in my reasonnig, white could answer
F16, not with G17 but with R6. But in taht case, black can kep sente with
attach and extend joseki then play F17 destroying much of white thickness
and making terrotory.
H. Quatreville
Eric Osman
ok, here's what the professionals say. This problem is number 111
in "Get Strong at the Opening", a very good book, published by Kiseido.
First, to repeat the problem:
O has a very thick position at the top right. X wants to counter this
thickness. What is the best move for him to do this ?
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10 . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . 10
9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4 . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . 4
3 . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . 3
2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
What's particularly interesting is the reasons given why certain
moves are not the correct move.
For example, if X starts with R10, O uses the thickness to attack,
like this:
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T (bad for X)
19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10 . . . , . . . . . , . . X5. X3, X1. . 10
9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8 . . . . . . . . . . . . O6. O4. O2. . 8
7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4 . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . 4
3 . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . 3
2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
Similarly, if X holds back to R9, O invades, like this:
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T (not good for X)
19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10 . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . 10
9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X1. . 9
8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O1. . 7
6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4 . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . 4
3 . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . 3
2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
The correct restraint by X is to hold back to R7 as several of you
realized. It doesn't approach too closely, plus it doesn't let
O make a full extension from the thickness:
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T (what X should do)
19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10 . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . 10
9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X1. . 7
6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4 . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . 4
3 . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . 3
2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
O2 is as far as O can extend, which leads to O's moves 2,4,6 not fully
utilizing the thickness and hence not working efficiently:
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T (O thickness not
working)
19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10 . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . O4. . . 10
9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X5X3O2. . 9
8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O6. . 8
7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X7X1. . 7
6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4 . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . 4
3 . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . 3
2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
The following X is also still considered a bit thin, because
O can immediately invade. Note the use of what I call the "inside
hane" :
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T (X extention too thin)
19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10 . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . 10
9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X1. . 8
7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X3O2. . 6
5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O4. . . 5
4 . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . 4
3 . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . 3
2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
Thanks. /Eric
Simon Goss
The F16-G17 exchange also loses the option to play D17, which makes
territory and reinforces the corner group if fighting later breaks out
on the left side. White's usual reply at E17 is less attractive than
usual for him because the upper side is open on the other side.
The question at the moment is perhaps just: how at present do we make a
rational decision between the various options on the corner? What reason
is there to say that we prefer one option so clearly that we are ready
to give up the other options right now?
I think Robert's point was that, even if Black doesn't follow up the
F16-G17 exchange immediately, the exchange itself is saying that Black
considers the left side more important than the corner. I can't see why
Black would decide that unless he were planning to play on the left side
fairly promptly.
--
Simon
John Smith
Roy Schmidt
> Hubert Quatreville writes
>
> > A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
> >19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
> >18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
> >17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
> >16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
> >15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
> >14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
> >13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
> >12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
> >11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
> >10 . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . 10
> > 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
> > 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
> > 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
> > 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
> > 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
> > 4 . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . 4
> > 3 . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . 3
> > 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
> > 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
> > A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
> >
[Hubert proposes exchanging F16 for G17 before playing around R7.]
> >Robert Jasiek say "To justify such an exchange one would want to
> >extend to,say c10"
> I think Robert's point was that, even if Black doesn't follow up the
> F16-G17 exchange immediately, the exchange itself is saying that
Black
> considers the left side more important than the corner. I can't see
why
> Black would decide that unless he were planning to play on the left
side
> fairly promptly.
The right side is more important because a B extension on the left
side lets W make an ideal extension/kakari on the right. If you play
R7 first, then after White extends down the right side (and both sides
might make further plays here to solidify their holdings), it seems B
comes away with sente and can still press at F16 and extend on the
left side. If W rushes away to prevent B from making the big play on
the left, then B can spoil W's right side. Besides, as Simon also
pointed out, how do we know at this time which option is best in the
upper left corner? W might be equally happy to take profit in the
corner with D17. After W E16, B can attack the two heavy stones
because of the open skirt in the upper right.
Cheers, Roy
-------------------------------------------------
my reply-to address is gostoned at home dot com
-------------------------------------------------
Roy Schmidt
Part-time Translator for Yutopian
Full-time Professor of Business Computer Systems
Bradley University
Bill Spight
Thank you for sharing the problem. :-)
> What's particularly interesting is the reasons given why certain
> moves are not the correct move.
>
Just curious. What variations (if any) are given after B R6?
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 18
17 . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X X X X . 17
16 . . X , . . . . . , . . O O O O X O . 16
15 . . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . 15
14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . 14
13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10 . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . 10
9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 6
5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4 . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . 4
3 . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . 3
2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
Moi, I don't see much to choose between B R6 and B R7. R7 reduces
White's influence more, but R6 is stronger in the corner. This and that.
Thanks,
Bill
Bernhard Herwig
Pekka Karjalainen
>Do not worry about that: Some very strong players pretend to be
>30kyu, and it is no surprise, that they beat you heavily.
It is also possible that someone has just started to play Go recently
and set him/herself up as 30 kyu, yet they have just learned something
really astounding about the game that has made their effective skill shoot
up five or more stones. These strong-seeming 30 kyus (to a 20 kyu player)
are not necessarily sandbaggers.
It is possible to spot most sandbaggers by doing a find command on their
e-mail addresses, unless they are from (panda@.jp). Please see 'help
find' on IGS. You can extend this paranoia to a complete background check
of their stored games, results, and whatever. But please do not forget
that most IGSers are still decent people who are there to play go. What I
am not advising anyone to do is to be paranoid about the few escapers,
rude people or other cheaters you might run accross now and then.
I haven't had anyone giving me trouble at IGS this year and only had one
escaper last year. I don't play that much, but it has been more than 30
games certainly.
Of course, what these sandbaggers are REALLY offering one is the
possibility of a free lesson. So, why should you avoid them? If your
rating ends up "too low" as a result of losses it will only rise more
easily in the future. Meanwhile, you have got some good lessons about the
weaknesses in your game as well :-)
It would probably be fair to say that the predictive value of a rank,
especially one without the asterisk, at IGS is quite low below 10 to 20
kyu at any rate. It seems to be so everywhere in the world.
Just my personal opinions,
Pekka Karjalainen
--
"To generalize is to be an idiot." -- William Blake