|Table of contents|
|Index of sub-pages|
Ironic trivia: Agilis in Latin means "Quick" and by all accounts, I'm a slow and steady player, often hitting byo-yomi long before my opponent.
Otherwise, I'm a graduate student, collector of quote-ly amusements and all around overworked and sleep deprived. But I still play go! wow!
According to reports, I exhibit a certain set of traits in my play.
Overall - I'm on the average weaker at tactics, being more comfortable on large scales. Running battles covering half the board happen more often than I'd like though. Ambitious opening - aiming to get a big loose sketch of territory early on, and then "gracefully retreat like a rabid squirrel." That's where being firm comes in handy.
Chasing - I'm not sure why, but chopping groups loose and chasing them seems to happen in my games a great deal. Catching the groups or even profitting is still tricky business.
Aggressive - I hate letting something happen uncontested, so I have a tendency to do things that boarder on the insane... So I am told.
Serial, not really parallel - Probably something of a weakness, but I like having one plan leading to another, one attack ending just in time to switch to another. I could probably be more vicious if I wound up doing things in parallel.
I rely deeply upon my intution, because of that, I rely on accumulating as many ideas and concepts I can wrap my mind around to play Go. I figure, the tactical reading will come with experience and practice, the important part is to think good thoughts, happy thoughts =). To further this, I'm going to start dropping things I think are 'good ideas' into the bank and if any healthy debates spring up.
Yes I know I'm only 10k. Nothing too special about that. But I do enjoy, and spend a fair amount of time, teaching newcomers to the game. Some of it seems to work okay, Some I'd bet isn't, but I figured I'd write about it.
For awhile around 23-21k, I thought Takemiya was cool, and then learned that I'm too greedy and aggressive of nature for anything close to resembling his style to come out of me naturally. But that brief experimentation taught me a lot about large frameworks, especially spotting the weak points used to shatter one to little pieces, which I apply in my games. Learned that attacking an omoyo requires you not to be afraid of it. Respectful of it's power maybe, but not afraid. A brief flirt with big payoff! I'll have to come back when I'm stronger and learn more.
I have grown curious about Ma Xiaochun's style which is floaty and very exciting to watch since in recent games he plays tenuki until both sides are in a million pieces whereupon it becomes extremely complex battle between two baseless dragons. The board looks so fragmented it feels very different than other games I've watched. If I look at the games more I can hopefully learn more about what's really sente or not.
If I ever come up with more of these I'll add them here. Origins will be placed in the bloggy.
Thinness is like a sleazy dress - They're very delicate and if clinging against someone, easily sliced to ribbons. If you're out to kill something, try thinking more Victorian: thick, constricting, and covers up a lot of things.
I've been hearing a rather interesting pair of statements lately about mistakes. From one strong player comes the advice, "Simply wait for your opponent to make mistakes, they will come." From another strong player (probably not nearly as strong as the first) comes "You shouldn't play counting on your opponent to make mistakes." They feel somehow contradictory don't they? But I believe the contradition is an illusion and they're talking about different aspects in the game.
The first I feel is partly obvious, partly style. The obvious part is, if you don't overplay and stay steady, you should be in the perfect position to strike at a mistake when it does appear. The style part I think is that this requires a certain outlook and patience. It's not easy to maintain the balance of score if one side tries hard to force mistakes through unimaginable complexity. Nor is it easy to remain steady when you're ahead or behind, it's a personality thing. Also, there are those extremely rare instances where top level players play games where neither side makes a move that can really be said to be a true mistake at the time, and yet one side edges out by more than just 0.5. What then?
The second is common sense. Errors tend to be unpredictable, and engaging in wishful thinking will only lead to bad habits later on when opponents don't make those mistakes nearly as often. Even outside of tactical situations, there are just times where you can't see that a mistake has been made, or worse, no true mistake appears at all. If you've been hoping to get that one good punishment (however little you need) to win, it might be too late to catch up.
As resolution, perhaps the second should read "Don't play a bad move hoping for a mistake." Play a good one instead and hope they can't wriggle out of the iron claw you have around their neck! =)
I'm reminded of a quote from some book (source would be appreciated, I think Robert Jordan's "Wheel of Time" series) "Always expect the worst, and then all surprises will be pleasant ones."
Books I bought because I thought they'd help me a lot for the money spent:
Tesuji - It's one of my weak points and knowing certain kinds of moves are *possible* lets me sometimes find places to use them. One day I'll probably spend more on the bigger dictionaries on Tesuji, but for now, this is cheap but good!
Invincible - I love watching games, I feel it helps me get a feel for the flow of games. Even if I'm too weak to understand fully, it all gets logged into my subconscious anyway.
I'm long-winded, shuffled them off to another page for sanity and brevity.