And we're off... 4-4 is nice and flexible. I'll probably aim to turn into a Chinese if he lets me. There's not much more analysis to do here until he puts a stone down.

Why not.

Getting that Chinese opening started. Without komi, I think I'm right in saying a more settled game favours me slightly. But I want to work my reading muscles a bit, so I'm gonna stick with this plan and aim for a somewhat combative game.

I did consider a diagonal move, but I don't really have any clue how to follow that up.

If he plays the other 4-4 point, I will continue as planned. If he mirror's my move, I will consider diving into his lower corner at the 5-3 point.

Also considered D3, but I didn't think too long about this move

I did consider getting out of line with 3-3 invasion or enclosing the bottom right with a knight's move. But we got all the corners locked up so a side is next, and I already planned on the Chinese. So... awaaaaaaay we Go.

I haven't actually played against a Chinese opening in a while, but I studied this approach a bit at Internet Go School, so let's give it a shot. If he protects the corner, I'll back off. If he pincers, I'll attach.

Okay. Not one of the approaches I expected, so I guess we have to do some thinking now.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B WriterJon v. kferg
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . c . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . c , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 a . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . 4 . 2 . . a a . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . 5 . . 1 . W . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

My first instinct is to enclose the bottom left with one of (a). (3) feels a bit too invade-able. But that seems a mite passive.

I like the idea of pincering or approaching his last move. My hope is that pincering would look like 1-5. But I suspect that his best follow up would be 4 at an (a) or in the corner.

I looked at ignoring and playing one of the big moves (one of the (c)s) but I can't bring myself to ignore that approach. Urgent first and all that.

I'm going to go with the slightly higher pincer over another pincer more for variety’s sake than anything else. Then if he extends I'll enclose right-hand side, if he invades I guess I have the fight I'm looking for. If he attaches to the pincering stone I'll aim to connect over the top if possible and make a base on the bottom if not.

I've studied the variations with the low pincer in the past. At first glance, I think this attachment should still work OK against the high pincer. Let's see how it goes.

I wanted a fight and now I got it. I think I have to respond to the attachment with another attachment.

Extending from my cornerstone seems slow and passive. Attacking his approach stone gives him a second bite at the corner as does any loose enclosure.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Left to right (A), (B), (C).
$$ - . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . -
$$ - . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . -
$$ - . . . . . . , . . . - . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . -
$$ - . . . . . . . X . . - . . . . . . . X . . - . . . . . . . X . . -
$$ - . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . -
$$ - . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . -
$$ - . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . -
$$ - . . . . 7 . 5 . . . - . . . . . . 1 a . . - . . . . . 5 a . . . -
$$ - , X . . . 1 O 6 . . - , X . . . 2 O 3 . . - , X . . 4 3 O 1 . . -
$$ - . . . O 3 2 X x . . - . . . O . . X b . . - . . . O . 2 X 7 . . -
$$ - . . . . . 4 . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . 6 . . . -
$$ - . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . -
$$ --------------------------------------------------------------------[/go]

(A) I like that this splits his stones and (1-7) looks plausible for me if a little loose on enclosing the corner I give up. White 2 at 5,6, or x give me a nice chance to attack his other local stone.

(B) I think I like this one because it feels clever more than because it is. I think 2 or 3 are my opponent's most likely moves (2 seems less likely)? And the responses are probably miai. But then I have cuts at a and b (or their miai-mirrors) and he's nicely connected. So this doesn't feel great as a plan.

(C) One extends from this sort of thing (White 2 at a or b) or he could sacrifice a stone (with something like 2-7). I don't love my follow-ups to an extension.

My reading isn't good enough to be sure of coming out with sente (which seems worth a lot with two sides unclaimed).

So I'm going with A as it seems most likely to give me a good position to fight from.

I think the most likely outcome from here is I live in the corner and he gets something on the outside. But I guess lots of other things could happen.

White appears to be outnumbered, but is remarkably resilient here. He has the 3-3 point, and so appears to have the upper hand in all fights for the corner. He has the 4-4 stone in the upper left, so all ladders favor him.

IMHO, black can't fight - yet. He has to strengthen himself first. Connecting is the only move.

Hmmm. There are a few moves that immediately suggest themselves for investigation. First the ataris at (a) and (b). The first lets him connect at or above (b). I like the look of (b) splitting them again but it also creates a weak group for me. At the moment I feel loosely connected on the outside and chucking a move into the corner doesn't work well with that fact.

I looked at defending at (c) which puts a little pressure on white's lonely stone. But it feels slow.

(d) plays into the outsideness of my position, but would let white connect underneath (which I now realise might be a problem with previous moves) hmmmm...

I went with (e) because it seems to meet most of my goals. It aggressively attacks the stone on the left, strengthens my stones in the middle, keeps him split, me protected, and defends a bit against possible nastiness around (c).

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a . . . -
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , X . d . X O b . . -
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . O e c X O . . -
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Hoping to just live in the corner. I considered exchanging Q2 atari first. But there may be some case where I'd want to atari from the other direction, so let's keep our options open

I would have exchanged the atari first. There is no way White can obtain the atari in the other direction. Black will probably play N4 next to connect his stones, and if White ever plays P5, then Black will respond with O5.

The last move by each side seemed slack.

Black's last move was too passive. I think that white could have played this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c WriterJon v. kferg
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , X . . . X O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . O 1 . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

IMHO, best play would have been like this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c WriterJon v. kferg
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , X . . . X O 2 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . O . 1 X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

...or maybe this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c WriterJon v. kferg
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , X . . . X O 2 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . O . 1 X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

My instinct is to play something like (a), (b), or (c). The first makes a pretty shape and stops white playing there (white at a seems like a potential irritant). The other two keep me all linked up on the outside and pressure the circled stone.

In the interest of thoroughness I also considered something around (d). My initial thought is that those three white stones are pretty cramped. Maybe I can lean into that. But I think there's plenty of ways for him to make his stones safe.

I also considered a camel-move that tries to balance everything around (e). But I think that does nothing well.

(c) feels slow, but aggressive, (b) just feels kind of slow. I went with (c).

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B WriterJon v. kferg
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e d d . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b . . d . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , X . c . X O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . W X . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

I'm hoping for something vaguely like this, allowing me to play around 5 and 7, but I am unconvinced that he will let me get away with this.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B WriterJon v. kferg
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , X . 1 . X O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . 7 . . . . . . O X 3 X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

I almost played the hane at P5 without thinking. But ... his group is probably too strong to care, and then if he peeps at R7 it's pretty annoying to deal with. Maybe this move is a bit slow, but I'm happy enough to just have a stable group that's not sealed in. Perhaps I can even counterattack at R11 or something later.