OK, this is the one weak group between two type of position. This would typically be advantageous for the player with the single weak group, i.e. White here. The logic of "striding out" is that the player with the single weak group can jump once, and then the player with the two weak groups then has to decide whether to jump out on the left, or on the right. This is basic stuff about running fights, in the abstract.

Here is Black's attempt to make it harder for White simply to jump out. That is why it is worth a diagram: to make the point that seems an adequate resource.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W Black is heavy
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . b . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X 1 . . X . . . O . X . a . . . |
$$ | . . X O O . . . . O . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O X O . . . X O . X X . . O . . . |
$$ | . . O , . X . . X O . O X . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . O . X . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O O X O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

I think that things are going well here for White. Playing here seems compulsory, right now.

On the right, either a or b might be good, depending on the situation in the centre. Your choice of connection for Black is fundamentally very heavy.

If you stand back, neither black group here has eyes, or even any definite points.

Just a frinstance variation, anyway. The whole-board situation actually shows Black with an unusual top right framework, as well as the stretched extension visible on the left in the half-board.

The club player's questions are not really addressing the same points as the dan player's, normally.

Okay, maybe I just want to much because I overestimate the fact that W outnumbers B.


I agree that B's shapes are weird and in my opinion suboptimal. But what I was intrested in how W can use his advantage at the bottom without saying "B played suboptimal, so W can take a small loss"


This one surprises me. Can you explain that?

Maybe with an illustration.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$ 8.8 As above
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X . . . X . . . O . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O O . . . . O . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O X O . . . X O . B X . . O . . . |
$$ | . . O , . X . . X W . O X . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . O . X . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O O X O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

We got to this diagram because, it seems, you were concerned about the black marked stone being captured (save the stone!)

I think a dan player would look sadly at the exchange of the black and white marked stones, and wonder why we were discussing light-heavy here, at all.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Black to play
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . 8 . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X . . . X . . . . 7 . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X O O . . . . O . . b 4 1 . . . . |
$$ | . . O X O . . . X O . 5 3 2 a O . . . |
$$ | . . O , . X . . X 6 . O X . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . O . X . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O O X O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

This is a sort of fantasy variation.

But here is supposed to induce White: White at a, Black at b would be OK. The question with the diagonal jump is always about the answer shown here. In response Black does go through with the "bad exchange" for , but after (say) has some options.

Nope, I would have no problems with sacrificing that stone, but making a strong for me to escape with the least possible advantage to W(like the peep/closing-in-attempt at in your second diagram). If that was wrong, please always tell me the better variations, even if you were right that I just wanted to save the stone. Never going to improve if nobody tells me my wrongs


I'm very intrested in this variation and I think at least the players in my local club would be as well
That said the big difference in the two variations seems to be sente, right? So is more or less a sacrifice to force W into playing along in a way that make him waste stones? ( and seem suboptimal if wouldn't be there)

Err, I don't actually believe that giving more and more variations is the best I have to offer in the way of teaching. Now, with a pro teacher, they probably are happy to generate variations. I try to target what I say.

I remember my friend Kim talking about British players, and how they would request more and more variations. He clearly thought that they were missing opportunities to improve faulty perceptions.

To pull back a bit: positions with five groups struggling on one side are a bit unusual.

(A) The player with three groups should try to settle one group, and get down to one weak group quickly. This is a kind of common sense of the game.

(B) Strengthening the future weak group a bit is part of the knack of fighting.

(C) One weak group between two is advantageous. This is a heuristic. (You could call it a proto-proverb, since generating new proverbs here leads to linguistic sidetracks.)

(D) Heavy play is a kyu-level player's standard mistake. DDK players, for example, get cut when they aren't expecting in; SDK players connect more solidly, but make themselves heavy, which is over-correction.

Where C applies, worry about D. This is roughly what I'm saying.


I'm very intrested in this variation and I think at least the players in my local club would be as well
That said the big difference in the two variations seems to be sente, right? So is more or less a sacrifice to force W into playing along in a way that make him waste stones? ( and seem suboptimal if wouldn't be there)[/quote]

Here Black is also leaning in the other direction, first (as preparation). Theoretically, once White has strengthened the right-hand corner, Black ought not to worry about White making small extra profits on the right. The logic here is overconcentration.

Otake, a purist, once commented that it was "bad taste" to add territory to a strong group; which is a relatively deep thought about balance.

In any case, nice talking to you.

I agree with the argument that to much variations are bad. What I meant was that if you find something that is fundamentally wrong, like playing to heavy, it is worth making a diagram for that.



Agreed with that and I know this principles, but trying to use them ingame is difficult. In this game for example I was also trying to make my one group stronger, but by attacking one of the other weak B groups.


True, this makes a lot of sense.



Big thanks for explaining/discussing all this stuff!

Currently I'm testing tengen-openings. That doesn't mean I'm playing it as my first move, but before the midgame starts. It worked very well against openings were black plays his first three moves at one side:



Another intresting opening is the diagonal san-ren-sei:


My worst time with a tengen opening I had against the mini-chinese

What are your thoughts/experiences playing with/against tengen?

How does it compare to the game below (the only example in my database)?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm7 Kitani Minoru (White) - Go Seigen; 1935-09-07
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . 8 . . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . 2 . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 1 , . . . . . O . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . 9 . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

_________________
Dave Sigaty
"Short-lived are both the praiser and the praised, and rememberer and the remembered..."
- Marcus Aurelius; Meditations, VIII 21

Against the san-ren-sei white tengen doesn't feel too silly to me, and the diagonal san-ren-sei seems perfectly fine to me, but white tengen against mini-Chinese just seems so forced and playing tengen for the sake of it. Black is building side based moyos and tengen is pretty irrelevant to those (except maybe some ladder though I note you already have the ladder going to top left from bottom right for josekis there).

As for my thoughts on tengen generally, I might play it rarely in casual games, I don't think I have played it in a serious tournament game for a long time if at all. David Ward played the one point jump either side of tengen against me in cafe games a few times, and I returned the favour. My friend Matt Crosby opened on tengen against me in our game at the Belfast tournament a few years back: I think he viewed himself as the underdog and thought he might as well have fun instead of doing his usual boring territory game (I won that game despite some byo-yomi blunder excitement, but had to think carefully to avoid tengen becoming a good move). As for that other recent thread about it being disrespectful, I don't mind if my opponents play it though it will of course elicit a raised eyebrow. If I were going into some Japanese/Korean etc go club for the first I wouldn't start on tengen because I am aware some people might view it as impudent, even if that were not my intention.

was never played against me, but I see that it is a good move. The biggest difference in this game seems to be that here the fighting will start in W's lower left corner while in my game the big fights were mostly in B's area of influence. The reason for this might be that I would have played at


I completly agree with this. This is also the reason I don't like playing tengen as the first move. There are just to much scenarios were I wouldn't like to play it.


I'm also only playing it in serious games if I got some positive experience with it. I guess this is why we see it that rare: Only a few bother to train and explore this move. I think a good part of why I like this move is excactly what you described: It becomes a struggle between your and your oppennent whether it was a good move or a bad one. Sure, that can be said for a lot of moves, but I feel it is very extreme with this one.


Does this also apply to tengen as 5th or 6th move? I thought this was only about tengen as first or second move.