It seems as though whenver my opponents get a moyo and I try to do anything about it, I wind up with a weak group. My opponents, however, are able to invade my moyos willy-nilly and get good positions out of it.

I suppose I could also have titled this post, "Make territory while attacking?" I certainly attacked, and what did I get out if it? I was very surprised that I had lost by almost 50 points.

Hi Fedya,

If this pincer was one space closer, at R8, and still attaches at 3-3 (R3),
there's a joseki starting with R4 hane and W cross-cuts -- good to study.

M5 feels more like the spirit than the game move, yes.

Why is this not the tiger's mouth at o3 so you're all connected ?

You've wasted one move here: and are redundant.

Instead of pushing W out and helping W, did you also consider the peep at M6 to make W heavy first ( then attack ) ?

You came out OK in the early fighting. But you failed to keep up the pressure, not once but twice. You made a greedy invasion that left you with a vulnerable group and let your opponent profit from attacking it. This invasion allowed White to turn the tables. Also, you often failed to attack by keeping in front of the group you were attacking.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

39: The proverb make territory while attacking isn't referring to capturing a few stones. It refers to building your own area while putting pressure on a weak group. I think this move might be fine, but it doesn't fit the proverb.

Overall, I feel like you're attacking a bit bluntly, and always playing directly next to your opponent's stones. Here are some tactical questions.

74: I think you can play M6. After he pushes, his group is still weak.

79: You're cutting him off from a single stone inside your area of influence. You should be trying to drive him into your stones to kill! I think if you play M9, his group dies.

85: I don't like this move. It's destined to end up weak. Maybe M10? It's a bit hard to find an attack that'll profit at this point.

89: Avoid pushes and cuts like this.

_________________
Occupy Babel!

At the end of the game, what is the stone at R 14 with the dot on it called? A dead stone? Is that where if you were playing on a real board you would remove those and they would count as both one captured and one territory? My math works out right when each stone with a dot is counted as two. Since you both passed, do you just assume that these are dead because they are in a group's territory when adding up the score, or at your level do you know they are actually dead by looking at them?

In general, do you avoid going after dead stones because by going after dead stones you are losing a point for every stone you put down? And losing a point for every one you capture?

What is the stone at S 15 that is inside the territory but not necessary to define the group called? It is actually taking away one point by sitting in the territory.

It is fascinating that white took only one stone.

Thanks for posting.

Yes the stone at R14 is dead. The usual way to count over a real board is to place dead white stones in white's territory, since +1 point from capture is the same as -1 point to white's territory.

In this case both players passed because they both agreed that the white stone was dead. The stronger you get the better you get at knowing when stones are dead, but it's never perfect. When in doubt, play it out.

Hi Tim, we avoid doing things that are bad, and try to do things that are good.

If 'going after dead stones' is bad on a particular board, we don't do it.
There are situations where we are forced to actually remove the dead stones off the board -- this happens, and for those situations, cannot be helped.

There are also other situations where actually removing certain dead stones off the board is good for you -- then we do it, too.

So, it depends.

Another way to pose the question: why would you want to go after dead stones (unless you have no choice, or unless it's good for you ) ?

Excellent. Thank you.

I played through it a few times, and it feels like black keeps attacking, while white occasionally pops a stone out in an empty area of the board. It feels like black created its groups by lots of next to placements. And white created its groups by playing with lots of gaps and then later filling in. It looks like black liked attacking and making lines of stones, and white liked placing in corners and sides and two point gaps. Is that true? Is corners and sides and two points good strategy?

Hi Tim, may I ask how long have you played Go, and how many total games have you finished ?
If you have much fewer than 100, I recommend you finish 100 games as soon as you can afford to -- that's a first step.

Beginner. Reading. Playing. Here.

Answering the thread subject "What makes some moyos better than others?":

Moyos have current properties in their current positions and are affected by how well they are used. Both are relevant, and so one should not only view moyos as static objects.

Current properties of a moyo include:
- current territory
- maximal territory if the whole moyo becomes territory
- degrees of connection and life of the moyo defender's and attacker's (real or virtual) stones in or around the moyo
- influence of the moyo's stones on other parts of the board (this includes fighting potential, territory potential and the attacker's reduction potential)
- how well does the moyo fit in the global positional content

The stones of a moyo can be used like every influence stones or thickness can be used. E.g., to make (more) territory in the moyo, to make territory elsewhere, to attack, to defend, to reduce elsewhere, to exchange etc.

Other people have commented about the slow play around moves 23-29, but I want to focus on move 31. What happens if you ignore black and play a big move like k16? Don't believe your opponent's moves so much, a lot of them are rubbish (30 looks like minus one point in gote to me).

Mmm, the way to improve, IMO, is to get one thing out of every game you lose.

Here, if you didn't see the issue at - you should have played one line higher.

Thank you all for your replies. I'll try to respond to them in order:

Ed Lee: I didn't play the tiger's mouth at because I distinctly recall having another game reviewed where I did play the tiger's mouth and was told I should connect directly. Obviously I don't know when it's right to play the tiger's mouth, and when it's right to connect directly.

And for no I didn't consider M6. Is that one of those inducing moves Ishida talks about in Attack and Defense? The chapter on inducing moves is the one that went way over my head.

Bill Spight: I'm afraid I don't see why Black should just ignore . It doesn't look to me as though Black gets much of a base for his group.

Hyperpape: The point of was, I thought, really to try to make territory, especially over on the left side, while attacking. If I could kill all those stones, great, but stil I thought I'd be making territory while White was having to save his group. (And I actually thought I had been doing a good job of doing just that.)

Uberdude: with I was afraid of White putting pressure on the stone at F3. I figured that if I lost that White would get a lot of territory, and my group wouldn't be very big at all.

Charles Matthews: What issue at ?

Here are a couple of variations if Black plays elsewhere.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm27 Variation 1
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . 1 . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . X X O O . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . X 5 3 X X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2 X O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . B O O . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

ignores the threat in the bottom. If cuts, Black sacrifices the stone. Where is Black's weakness?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm27 Variation 2
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . 1 . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . |
$$ | . . . . . 7 . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . X X O O 6 . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . X 3 4 X X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5 X O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O O . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

This variation gives White some chances, but where is the problem for Black?

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Several times this game you had a good attack going, but then went for small profit, rather than effectively prosecuting the attack. Perhaps you thought you were taking profit while attacking, but you were actually giving up a strong attack for too little compensation.

was your best move of the game, attacking on a large scale, not going for small corner profit. Keep looking at the big picture like this!

may feel like an attacking move (taking away W base), but it is actually quite submissive. W can now regard his previous play as a successful forcing move -- he made a deep invasion and you responded with a low defensive move. If W later runs out to the center, this will turn out to be a great exchange. Your suggestion of M5 would be a true attack, threatening to capture W on a large scale. If you succeed in enclosing W here, it is not obvious he can live, and even if he lives, you will make overwhelming outside influence. You could also consider a really grand attacking move like L7. If you can force yourself to look for and play ambitious moves like this, your game will improve.

The cut at L6 is an example of missing the big picture and going for small profit. This cut is not an attacking move! Your goal here should be to attack all of the W stones within your extremely strong sphere of influence. Moves like K7 or L8 are the right direction, strengthening your weaker stones and pushing W toward your strong stones. This way even if W escapes, you will create outside thickness which will be useful in other directions. The game move gave W the opportunity to sacrifice a few stones on a small scale, leaving your outside stones weaker and your inside stones over-concentrated.

The later cut at M7 was exactly the same mistake. Again you went after the lure of a very small profit. This cut is the wrong direction, making incremental territory where you are already extremely strong, while forcing W to move toward your weaker stones in the center. Large scale plays like L8 or M9 would be true attacking moves in the right direction. If your position is not yet strong enough to support these plays, simply defending at J9 (preparing for M9) would be good. This simple defense would constitute much more of a threat against the W group to the right than the game move.

Hi Fedya, Yes, this is not uncommon.
Assuming the reviewer was correct in that case, they meant it for that particular situation.

I can understand that fear, though I think it is misplaced: did you read anything that resulted in f3 dying? I too thought maybe white could do something against f3, but had no fear that f3 would die. At most I would think white might be able to live with a tiny group in the h3 area, whilst making black strong around and damaging white's lower left corner. This is not to be feared, it is to be welcomed. But if you did want to assuage your fears, playing 31 at f5 would be a better way to make sure f3 is safe and white can't do any funny business inside, whilst also being a valuable move on the outside for yourself instead of playing inside your own territory.

Ah yes. From this point until nearly move 100 you play as close as you can, to the white group you are supposed to be attacking. And it doesn't work out. So this is an attack-and-defence perception matter: don't play so close.

You can start by looking for plays that are not in contact, sitting "one line away", but still attack. My suggestion is a type of capping play.

Seems to me, "what makes some moyos better than others?" might come after the question "what makes some attacks better than others?" You have to think of a framework as an arena, of sorts, for attack and defence, before you can sort out the moyo issue. Which must be tough, because a typical go career will meet frameworks of different types, running into four figures.

My personal rule of thumb is: play the direct connection unless you have a precise reason not to.
Usually the reason will be one of: make eye shape (for a group not yet alive), make good shape (helps to go out), or resist to the first-line hane in sente, as in this case.

I would say that in general people around your level play too many tiger mouth connections (especially in yose), but of course each case should be considered separately. If you can dig out the other game's position someone could underline the difference to help you understand.

_________________
La victoire est un hasard, la défaite une nécessité.