It is currently Wed Apr 24, 2024 3:47 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: A particular double approach
Post #1 Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2015 4:50 pm 
Oza

Posts: 2356
Location: Ireland
Liked others: 662
Was liked: 442
Universal go server handle: Boidhre
I face this kind of position fairly often in handicap games as black:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$W
$$ ----------------------+
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . , . . . X . X . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . , . . . . . 2 . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . 1 . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . , . . . 3 . X . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------+[/go]


The issue is I'm not wholly comfortable with positions arising out of the bottom right corner. Specifically this one just makes me feel like Black has seriously messed up and has a heavy clumpy group even though a and b are options and maybe c (I dislike c):

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . c 2 . . . |
$$ . . . . . 3 1 O . . |
$$ . . . . . . . 4 . . |
$$ , . . . O 5 X 6 . . |
$$ . . . . b . . a . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ --------------------+[/go]


Any thoughts on this? The other attach for :b1: is something I've glanced at but it looks rather complicated.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: A particular double approach
Post #2 Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2015 6:55 pm 
Gosei

Posts: 1627
Liked others: 543
Was liked: 450
Rank: senior player
GD Posts: 1000
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . c 2 . . . |
$$ . . . . . 3 1 O . . |
$$ . . . . . . . 4 . . |
$$ , . . . O 5 X 6 . . |
$$ . . . . b . . a . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ --------------------+[/go]


The best move here is for Black to turn at c, as in

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . 9 8 . . . |
$$ . . . . . 7 2 . . . |
$$ . . . . . 3 1 O . . |
$$ . . . . . . . 4 . . |
$$ , . . . O 5 X 6 . . |
$$ . . . . b . . a . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ --------------------+[/go]


Black is thick and later, Black can close the right side as in

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ . . . . . . 3 . . . |
$$ . . . . . X O . 1 . |
$$ . . . . . X O . 2 . |
$$ . . . . . X X O . . |
$$ . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ , . . . O X X O . . |
$$ . . . . b . . a . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ --------------------+[/go]


Black b in the original diagram is slack when Black has the pincer on the right side.

There is good discussion of this situation in volume two of the Takao joseki dictionary.


Last edited by gowan on Mon Apr 06, 2015 2:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

This post by gowan was liked by: Boidhre
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: A particular double approach
Post #3 Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2015 7:02 pm 
Oza

Posts: 2356
Location: Ireland
Liked others: 662
Was liked: 442
Universal go server handle: Boidhre
Thanks gowan, my dislike of that continuation probably comes from undervaluing thickness. I feel pushing white along the fourth line is giving white too good a result. I suspect my evaluation is quite flawed.

Edit: Also I might be expecting too much after such a soft pincer.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: A particular double approach
Post #4 Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2015 10:05 pm 
Honinbo

Posts: 10905
Liked others: 3651
Was liked: 3374

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.


This post by Bill Spight was liked by: Boidhre
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject:
Post #5 Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2015 12:26 am 
Honinbo
User avatar

Posts: 8859
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Liked others: 349
Was liked: 2076
GD Posts: 312
Boidhre wrote:
my dislike of that continuation probably comes from undervaluing thickness.
I feel pushing white along the fourth line is giving white too good a result.
I suspect my evaluation is quite flawed.
There's another factor -- you mentioned you were worried about your "heavy clumpy group".

If you link up as Gowan and Bill said, then your potential weakness becomes strength.

When either of these happens --
  • Weakness becomes strength
  • Strength becomes weakness
-- it can be significant (i.e. big). ( Not always true, of course. )

Remember you tenuki'd once from the LR corner at :b2: , and you can still get a good result by linking up.

See if you recall from your previous games where your seemingly "strong" group suddenly became weak (or even died).
Conversely, when your dying group suddenly became a monster and killed your opponent.

It can be a big turning point.


This post by EdLee was liked by: Boidhre
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: A particular double approach
Post #6 Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2015 8:35 am 
Judan
User avatar

Posts: 5539
Location: Banbeck Vale
Liked others: 1103
Was liked: 1456
Rank: 1D AGA
GD Posts: 1512
Kaya handle: Test
I don't like the play at 1. It feels like the wrong direction.

Anytime you attach to a stone, you encourage it to become stronger. When the R6 stone becomes stronger, your pincer stone at Q10 becomes less effective.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bc
$$ ----------------------+
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . , . . . X . X . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . , . . . . . B . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . 1 O . . |
$$ . . . . . b a . . . . |
$$ . , . . . O . X . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------+[/go]


I would try 'a' or 'b', encouraging him to build strength on the bottom. Then R6 is still threatened by the pincer.

EDIT: I see that Bill has provided an example of this. Note that as white builds strengyh in the other direction, your Q10 stone becomes more relevant.

_________________
Help make L19 more organized. Make an index: https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5207


This post by Joaz Banbeck was liked by: Boidhre
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject:
Post #7 Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2015 12:45 pm 
Honinbo
User avatar

Posts: 8859
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Liked others: 349
Was liked: 2076
GD Posts: 312
Quote:
I don't like the play at 1. It feels like the wrong direction.
Anytime you attach to a stone, you encourage it to become stronger.
The situation is much more complicated than this.
As Boidhre and I discussed briefly in PM,
there is a (paid) online resource about the basic variations of the double approach.
It consists of about 13 lessons of about 30 to 45 minutes each.
I estimate that's about 1 year's worth of study (for an adult who has to support a family).
Also, this is only for the local considerations (as is the OP board),
not even looking at the whole board.
This amount of knowledge -- the immense number of variations -- cannot be abbreviated to a generic proverb.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: A particular double approach
Post #8 Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2015 2:28 pm 
Gosei

Posts: 1627
Liked others: 543
Was liked: 450
Rank: senior player
GD Posts: 1000
Joaz Banbeck wrote:
I don't like the play at 1. It feels like the wrong direction.

Anytime you attach to a stone, you encourage it to become stronger. When the R6 stone becomes stronger, your pincer stone at Q10 becomes less effective.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bc
$$ ----------------------+
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . , . . . X . X . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . , . . . . . B . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . 1 O . . |
$$ . . . . . b a . . . . |
$$ . , . . . O . X . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------+[/go]


I would try 'a' or 'b', encouraging him to build strength on the bottom. Then R6 is still threatened by the pincer.

EDIT: I see that Bill has provided an example of this. Note that as white builds strength in the other direction, your Q10 stone becomes more relevant.


Yes, attaching makes the stone stronger but it also makes Black's stone(s) stronger. Locally Black is weaker than White, two white stones versus one black. Also, attaching can make the White stone heavier. In this case, that allows Black to make his group thick. Bill pointed out that White sliding to S3 is usual instead of pushing at R4. This sliding move gets about as much territory as R4 and helps the white O4 stone somewhat, giving some momentum to a white move at O3 later.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group