| Life In 19x19 http://prod.lifein19x19.com/ |
|
| My Opening Seems Too Textbook... http://prod.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=8840 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | moyoaji [ Wed Jul 31, 2013 8:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | My Opening Seems Too Textbook... |
A 5k and I played two games yesterday at my local go club. We split them, but in both our openings were similar. I was white in both games, here are the first few moves of each. Are there other moves I missed that I could have done? Both games felt very stale and textbook to me. At that point black invaded my upper left corner. My aim at this point in the game was to get an extension at 'a'. At this point black made a slow move at 'a' and I expanded my framework on the bottom at 'b'. |
|
| Author: | skydyr [ Wed Jul 31, 2013 8:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: My Opening Seems Too Textbook... |
In the first game, for move 6 you could consider an approach of black's lower right, or an enclosure of your own, or setting up a chinese-type formation on the left side. Move 9 is also not sente. In the second, 12 at 13 looks to build one side or the other, though it will probably induce black to take the lower side. In general, though, letting black make two corner enclosures is often thought to give black an easy game. An approach to a 3-4 point is almost as big as the original move in the corner. |
|
| Author: | EdLee [ Wed Jul 31, 2013 8:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
At these levels, I think both openings are OK -- the (bigger) moves and (bigger) mistakes that decide the game would come later. In game 1, you may consider instead of  in the real game, to extend toward B's shimari --then, an approach toward your  would be big for B:Otherwise, B could have taken it himself for  :If you could post the full SGF's for both games, then we can see the rest, and spot the (bigger) mistakes later. 
|
|
| Author: | moyoaji [ Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: My Opening Seems Too Textbook... |
skydyr wrote: In the first game, for move 6 you could consider an approach of black's lower right, or an enclosure of your own, or setting up a chinese-type formation on the left side. Move 9 is also not sente. In the second, 12 at 13 looks to build one side or the other, though it will probably induce black to take the lower side. In general, though, letting black make two corner enclosures is often thought to give black an easy game. An approach to a 3-4 point is almost as big as the original move in the corner. You are right. Move 6 would have been better as a high approach toward the bottom. My gut instinct for an orthodox opening is always to get in the middle and break it up directly. I'll need to brush up on my pincer variations because that is always what I'm afraid will happen since I'm not great at those kind of joseki, but if my opponent plays the most common 3-4 high approach joseki the result will be ideal for me. I also had not considered a high enclosure. I feel like that would have made the bottom and left miai. If black extends on the bottom I'm willing to play that game as white because I've already broken up the framework on the right. EdLee wrote: At these levels, I think both openings are OK -- the (bigger) moves and (bigger) mistakes that decide the game would come later. In game 1, you may consider instead of in the real game, to extend toward B's shimari --then, an approach toward your would be big for B:If you could post the full SGF's for both games, then we can see the rest, and spot the (bigger) mistakes later. Well, I know they're okay. They honestly seem like the kind of artificial openings that you see in textbooks to illustrate opening principles. (First the corners, then approach moves, then the sides. If your opponent gets and enclosure, however, then you should consider taking the side before an approach to limit that enclosure. - Here is the example to illustrate - my games.) Yeah, I learned from game 1 to approach the bottom enclosure immediately. That was why I played that way in game 2. It felt difficult for me to deal with wanting an extension of my own so badly and knowing that black just needed sente to take it away. I could try to come up with the SGF for the games. They were played in person, but I suppose I can try to remember them. The first game ended with a quick resignation so I know I remember all the moves for that one. The second was much longer, but I could give it a shot. Thanks guys. |
|
| Author: | Splatted [ Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: My Opening Seems Too Textbook... |
I have the same problem, though I wouldn't describe it as textbook so much as being unable to see beyond my own biases. I've been thinking that a good way to get past it might be to look at what you don't like about a move and then experiment with moves that correct that, even if you're sure they're sub-optimal. For example, in your game move 6 look's like the right move to me too, but I don't like how it puts no pressure on any of black's stones and allows him to make a shimari in sente and then move to the other side. I'd probably combat that by playing 6 at 7 for a while and experiment with different follow ups. I also feel like 12 was somewhat questionable. I can see how keeping black's group weak could be worth it, but I don't like how it makes "a" a huge move for both players when it's black's turn. Perhaps black needs to reply, but I'm not sure he does so I'd be tempted to take a big point on the bottom and let him settle. |
|
| Author: | EdLee [ Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
moyoaji wrote: It felt difficult for me to deal with wanting an extension of my own so badly and knowing that black just needed sente to take it away. Remember that if both B and W play "perfectly," it's natural W will always feel a little behind --it's because W plays  . That's what the komi is for.
|
|
| Author: | judicata [ Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: My Opening Seems Too Textbook... |
The openings are fine--I echo EdLee. If you want to change it up as white, approach with your first move. As black, consider approaching with your second move, or starting on the 4-6 or 3-5 points. None of these are "wrong." |
|
| Author: | DrStraw [ Wed Jul 31, 2013 3:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: My Opening Seems Too Textbook... |
I would not want to play W4. If both players were to make the natural moves after it then each would play a shimari and it would be B's move to extend and thus remove W's extension. I would play the other 3-4, a 5-3 or the 4-4. |
|
| Author: | Shaddy [ Wed Jul 31, 2013 4:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: My Opening Seems Too Textbook... |
Why did you split his side instead of approaching his open corner? |
|
| Author: | Bill Spight [ Wed Jul 31, 2013 4:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: My Opening Seems Too Textbook... |
A few comments. Main focus: As White, do not let Black have an easy opening. |
|
| Author: | snorri [ Wed Jul 31, 2013 4:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: My Opening Seems Too Textbook... |
Fine if both players want to be 5k the rest of their lives. The 1st game shows a funny kind of fighting spirit.  says: "My endgame is better than yours!" says: "Wanna bet?"  I'm not going to dispute whether these moves are correct---they are in fact not textbook---because I don't think that's what the OP is getting at. But maybe they are boring. This kind of unwillingness to pincer or to allow pincers or to avoid the risk making any kind of weak group is not necessarily incorrect, but it can lead to the kind of game where you are counting the value of each move. People may be making fun of a certain amateur theorist in another thread for caring about the sizes of opening moves, but the openings shown are the kind where that sort of thing matters. The curious thing about that guy is he opens as black on the 7-9 so one wonders why he should care so much, but I digress. I read commentary on a pro game a few months ago with an opening like the ones shown (except with more pro-ish variations) and the reviewer just said that it's painful to play that kind of game because you have to count the score on every move. I'm biased because I dread such games. If you want to get out of the book, just get out of the book. Or at least go to a different book. A two-space high approach at move is at least a different book. (One of Go Seigen's). It's unlikely for most 5 kyus for that to be part of black's plan, but in a club, playing the same players over and over again, your opponents get used to your idiosyncrasies. Forget to approach at ? Do one at  , maybe knight's approach. That's a book, too. A really, really, old one. For black, well it's even easier. There's always that 7-9 after all...Both players should play as in the following game if they want break out of a quiet style. Ch'oe Ch'eol-han played these first 5 moves against Yi Ch'ang-ho and other players a lot in the early 2000s and won a lot. On the GoGoD CD you can find pro commentaries on a few of them. In this game I have truncated past move 66, which, coincidentally is the when the empty 4th corner is finally occupied. White: Yi Ch'ang-ho Black: Ch'oe Ch'eol-han 47th Kuksu Final, Game 5 2004-03-02 White, BTW, tried all kinds of stuff besides ., like 'a' and 'b'. Doesn't matter. Ch'oe is a Rottweiler. Later... Finally it's big enough to take an empty corner. I'm not saying a quiet, solid style is wrong. Please, don't take it that way. Just, you know, grow some... Let's pick apart how the earlier choices in the above game are different from yours in spirit. First approaching instead of taking an empty corner. White doesn't have to do this. This is a komi game. White can hang back and take the 4th corner like you did. No one can criticize that. But what does white do in this game? White approaches like it's some kind of pre-komi game. It keeps black off balance a little. White even makes the low knight's approach. White is not afraid of a pincer.What does black do? Black can take an empty corner. It's big. It's normal.  chooses a severe pincer. Seriously. It's like he did a web search for "most severe pincer" then played it. So the textbook says you're not supposed to tenuki from this pincer, because black has such a good move to seal in. So does white respond? Nah. White counter-approaches with . Black can tenuki or respond with a knight's move on the bottom. It's normal. It's stable, makes a base. Nah. Black pincers with  . Finally white has to defend a little and attaches with  . But really this has another motive, too...It's just a different way of thinking. If your opponent's groups are as weak as yours, you're fine. A few more pro continuations from the first few moves: |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|