The congress has finished, and I am back home. My last week was spent hanging out with great people, analyzing go games, and then analyzing some more; just as the first week. I had some problems with my net-provider for my phone, and was not able to update the blog as I would have wanted, and in the mean time my game-files grew out of proportion. I will save you from those.

I had hoped to play better during the last week, but I continued to find it hard to adapt to the new time control. In round 6 I met a young 2d from Finland:

I am Black, and here I ought to play the triangled point, making my moyo safer. Instead I connected at A, which is more solid, and Ilkka – correctly played the point just below the triangle. The game was very slightly favourable for me, but I had a good feeling about it, and overestimated my lead. Eventually I managed to invade the left side, and live there, and we got to a very critical moment in the game:

Here I ought to have connected at A, when the game would be slightly favourable for me (White’s last move was a mistake, and it would otherwise have been more even). But, I was already low on time, and continued to keep up the tempo in a position where I really needed more time. I answered in the wrong way, and Ilkka found a nice way to catch some of my stones:

After the netting move (2), my marked stones are lost. If only I had exchanged A for x earlier, then it would not have worked. (Something for the ambitious reader to find out on their own.) Now I was behind with about then points. The things got worse before they got better. In the end I lost the game with only 4.5. Immediately after the game I was quite unhappy about how it had played out. It irked me to have collapsed in the center, and I had the feeling that I had been much better earlier in the game. However, it seems my judgement was off, and my lead was at the best only about five points. It was a loss that I deserved.

Next day I played a Polish 2d. The game was good for me for as long as I remember the moves, but he played very fast, and at some stage I collapsed. Still, before that it was a rather good game:

I have a clear lead here, and have had since quite early on. Now I have a few very big ko-threats in the lower left, if I connect at A; in that case Black will be forced to spend four moves to take my stones in the corner so as not to lose the marked stones. I will probably win the ko, and it will lose Black a lot of points.

In the game I played the triangled point on the right side, and directly after the game I was unhappy about it, feeling it had been too soft. Lo and behold, the AI evaluates it as the best move. What I had failed to understand is that there is another ko looming at the horizon, which just as dangerous for Black:

As above, I can play the marked stone, and if Black answers at the key point, then 3 kills his group. What I had failed to grasp is that after…

…if Black answers with (2), I did not see that I can start a ko with (3). The reason why it is best to play like in the first picture, is that it would make my stones on the outside stronger. In these lines I would lead the game with about ten points. In the end I lost with 3.5.

In round 8 I played a 2d from Germany:

This was my best game from the last week, and in the position above I have allowed White to build a solid territory on the left side, but the prize is that White now have some weak stones (marked), and also needs to reduce my moyo at the bottom.

My last move was a rather grave mistake, and I wanted to play at A. I deccided against it, as I felt that the move in the game is less complicated, and ”good enough”. With less time, this kind of judgment becomes important in go.

In the end I won the game convincingly.

In the last chapter of my adventures in Warsaw, i will show a game that I learnt a lot from (and lost), and a game that I won.