When I started studying Go, I remember I saw, don't know where, about this protection of three stones in a diagonal, like after a double hane. The result was referenced as "good shape".
Well, not long after I played this shape in a game, and something like this happened locally:
I ended with a terrible overconcentrated B2 Bomber shape. Today I was thinking a lot about good shapes with 3-5 stones and remebered about this incident. The matter is, there is no way that this is a good defense for a double-hane. Or maybe a should not have to connect after the peeps... I don't know.
So, what is the opinion of the more experienced player. Is this a good shape? There is a something better to do after a double hane? And let me use the opportunity: Is the double hane a good move? More and more a prefer the single hane + extension, like this:
I admit that I am afraid of the extra cut point of the double hane, but maybe is the case that I just don't see the trade-offs (like the bigger territory)... what are the forum's opinions?
Skepticism about a certain "good shape"
-
illluck
- Lives in sente
- Posts: 1223
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 5:07 am
- Rank: OGS 2d
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: illluck
- Tygem: Trickprey
- OGS: illluck
- Has thanked: 736 times
- Been thanked: 239 times
Re: Skepticism about a certain "good shape"
I would play as below in your first diagram. The tiger's mouth is good for protecting against cuts, but must consider the possibility of the peeps.
I think the double hane is better than the extension, but not completely sure.
Edit: Actually, the below might be better than the atari:
I think the double hane is better than the extension, but not completely sure.
Edit: Actually, the below might be better than the atari:
-
Uberdude
- Judan
- Posts: 6727
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 11:35 am
- Rank: UK 4 dan
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: Uberdude 4d
- OGS: Uberdude 7d
- Location: Cambridge, UK
- Has thanked: 436 times
- Been thanked: 3718 times
Re: Skepticism about a certain "good shape"
As well as connecting with the tiger's mouth shape you show, solid connect (and there are 2 of them) is another option. This only gives your opponent one peep instead of 2. On the other hand it only locally defends one of the 2 cuts, the other cut may rely on a ladder or net to be captured. Which one is better is a tricky question which will depend on the whole board situation. However, you are right that a downside of the tiger's mouth connection is it gives peeps which, if you can only submissively connect (which is usually the case), lead to an ugly shape.
Your example is too general to make any definite conclusions (and even hane at h15 is another good possibility to consider), but basically if you can get away with the double hane, it is usually better than just extending as it presses the battle further around your opponent.
Your example is too general to make any definite conclusions (and even hane at h15 is another good possibility to consider), but basically if you can get away with the double hane, it is usually better than just extending as it presses the battle further around your opponent.
-
Samura
- Dies in gote
- Posts: 57
- Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:06 pm
- Rank: KGS 14 kyu
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: Samura
- Location: Porto Alegre, Brazil
- Has thanked: 70 times
- Been thanked: 17 times
Re: Skepticism about a certain "good shape"
illluck & Uberdude
Thank you, I liked your sugestions, and they convinced me that the original "double tiger's mouth" shape is just bad when compared with the alternatives.
Now I see that the solid conection is good enough and if the opponent cuts, a lot of things can be done, like:
PS: This example has a shape that I grew fond of and have seen half a dozen times in every game. A shape that I call "the scorpion tail". Anyone know if it has an official name? A think "the hook" would be a fair name too.
Thank you, I liked your sugestions, and they convinced me that the original "double tiger's mouth" shape is just bad when compared with the alternatives.
Now I see that the solid conection is good enough and if the opponent cuts, a lot of things can be done, like:
PS: This example has a shape that I grew fond of and have seen half a dozen times in every game. A shape that I call "the scorpion tail". Anyone know if it has an official name? A think "the hook" would be a fair name too.
-
Solomon
- Gosei
- Posts: 1848
- Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 9:21 pm
- Rank: AGA 5d
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: Capsule 4d
- Tygem: 치킨까스 5d
- Location: Bellevue, WA
- Has thanked: 90 times
- Been thanked: 835 times
Re: Skepticism about a certain "good shape"
Sometimes I'll peep and waste the aji just to force my opponent's stones to look bad and try to gain the psychological advantage.
-
emeraldemon
- Gosei
- Posts: 1744
- Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 1:33 pm
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: greendemon
- Tygem: greendemon
- DGS: smaragdaemon
- OGS: emeraldemon
- Has thanked: 697 times
- Been thanked: 287 times
Re: Skepticism about a certain "good shape"
It depends on the situation. Sometimes the double tiger's mouth is better. One obvious example is when one of the peeps doesn't work, like in this joseki:
-
jts
- Oza
- Posts: 2665
- Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 4:17 pm
- Rank: kgs 6k
- GD Posts: 0
- Has thanked: 310 times
- Been thanked: 634 times
Re: Skepticism about a certain "good shape"
This is a bit of a mistake:
You're right that the peeps are a bit of a weakness in this double-hanging connection, but in general W should only get one peep in full force. The first peep threatens to cut and give atari at the same time, but the second one is just a cut, so if necessary you can resist more strongly.
For example. (Whether resistance makes sense or not depends on the situation.)
As to your other question - you can analyze the efficiency of the shape by looking at the following shapes. Where would you add at extra move to make the group maximally efficient?
It obviously depends a great deal on the situation and the position of nearby enemy and friendly stones, but I certainly wouldn't say that as a general rule, the marked space is best.
You're right that the peeps are a bit of a weakness in this double-hanging connection, but in general W should only get one peep in full force. The first peep threatens to cut and give atari at the same time, but the second one is just a cut, so if necessary you can resist more strongly.
For example. (Whether resistance makes sense or not depends on the situation.)
As to your other question - you can analyze the efficiency of the shape by looking at the following shapes. Where would you add at extra move to make the group maximally efficient?
It obviously depends a great deal on the situation and the position of nearby enemy and friendly stones, but I certainly wouldn't say that as a general rule, the marked space is best.
-
NoSkill
- Lives with ko
- Posts: 296
- Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 3:20 pm
- Rank: 1D
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: NoSkill
- Has thanked: 5 times
- Been thanked: 33 times
Re: Skepticism about a certain "good shape"
Double hane is good in the race to get ahead. If the opponent tries to peep just extend with the outside stone like this:
Of course it won't work the same everytime, read it out
.
Of course it won't work the same everytime, read it out
.-
Samura
- Dies in gote
- Posts: 57
- Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:06 pm
- Rank: KGS 14 kyu
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: Samura
- Location: Porto Alegre, Brazil
- Has thanked: 70 times
- Been thanked: 17 times
Re: Skepticism about a certain "good shape"
Thank you all! With all this examples you just destroyed my fear of the double hane! 
Thank you very much!
Thank you very much!
-
Uberdude
- Judan
- Posts: 6727
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 11:35 am
- Rank: UK 4 dan
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: Uberdude 4d
- OGS: Uberdude 7d
- Location: Cambridge, UK
- Has thanked: 436 times
- Been thanked: 3718 times
-
mitsun
- Lives in gote
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 10:10 pm
- Rank: AGA 5 dan
- GD Posts: 0
- Has thanked: 61 times
- Been thanked: 250 times
Re: Skepticism about a certain "good shape"
Sometimes it is good to be skeptical
Here is a common technique to reduce a large B framework.
After this sequence, where does W play to make shape?
Here is a common technique to reduce a large B framework.
After this sequence, where does W play to make shape?
is a good light move.
-
Samura
- Dies in gote
- Posts: 57
- Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:06 pm
- Rank: KGS 14 kyu
- GD Posts: 0
- KGS: Samura
- Location: Porto Alegre, Brazil
- Has thanked: 70 times
- Been thanked: 17 times
Re: Skepticism about a certain "good shape"
mitsun,
I must admit that I would not cogitate your suggested move.
As a beginner, I still struggle with the ideas of playing lightly and (heaven forbid) sacrifice stones
. In your example, the stone played just looks too far to help the group. But seeing your examples I understood the function played by that stone, especially the protection of the eye-space.
I liked it!
I must admit that I would not cogitate your suggested move.
As a beginner, I still struggle with the ideas of playing lightly and (heaven forbid) sacrifice stones
. In your example, the stone played just looks too far to help the group. But seeing your examples I understood the function played by that stone, especially the protection of the eye-space.I liked it!
-
EdLee
- Honinbo
- Posts: 8859
- Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 6:49 pm
- GD Posts: 312
- Location: Santa Barbara, CA
- Has thanked: 349 times
- Been thanked: 2070 times
-
EdLee
- Honinbo
- Posts: 8859
- Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 6:49 pm
- GD Posts: 312
- Location: Santa Barbara, CA
- Has thanked: 349 times
- Been thanked: 2070 times