Joseki with tricky intentions

[Twitchy Go]

In the past few months I've began to study joseki more seriously, and I have been excited to try out the new variations that I've learned. I began to notice that there were some variations on common joseki that players my level would not answer optimally.
For example many people descend at b instead of a. letting white push up at a to break out.

$$c This is a label for the diagram.
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . a 7 1 5 b . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . 2 . 6 4 8 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c This is a label for the diagram.
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . a 7 1 5 b . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . 2 . 6 4 8 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Or when black descends white will descend(6) or bump(b) in stead of connecting(a) or extending(c)

$$c This is a label for the diagram.
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a 4 6 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c 2 3 5 . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . b . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c This is a label for the diagram.
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a 4 6 . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c 2 3 5 . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . b . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Now these aren't game breakers by any means. But being able to push out in the first diagram erases some of blacks influence. And getting the cut at a in the second diagram is a fun fight for black. So I tend to view these lines as favorable for me. (They might not be, but the spirit of the question assumes they are)
I have fallen into the habit of playing these somewhat off beat lines because there is a good chance my opponent doesn't know them(at my level) and will potentially make a mistake. I should note I don't play any joseki that I am dissatisfied with perfect play by both sides, (i.e. hamete) but what I'm doing has the same feel. Do you guys think this habit might be detrimental to my growth in the long run? Or is off beat joseki knowledge another part of a skilled players repertoire and something worth developing?

[Bill Spight]

Well, if your opponent never makes a mistake, how do you win?

That said, when I was a young bridge player I was impressed by something that Marshall Miles, a champion player, wrote about playing in a regular club game. (Sort of like playing even against people more than 9 stones weaker than you. OC, there is a lot of luck in bridge.) He noted that he and his partner could have scored better by playing to the foibles of their opponents (something that Terence Reese, another champion, called slap-dash tactics), but that they took care to play as though they were playing in a national championship. They did not want to relax their attention or to get into other bad habits.

When I was learning go, the pros and other strong players plainly advocated playing the board, making overplays and plays that put the game on the line only as necessary. I followed the lead of the bridge and go pros and have no regrets.

If you were making bad plays in hopes that your weak opponents would make mistakes (well founded hopes, to be sure ), that would be one thing. But you are using your better knowledge of the game to gain an advantage. As you advance, you will meet players who do not make those mistakes.

[Kirby]

Well, if your opponent never makes a mistake, how do you win?

That said, when I was a young bridge player I was impressed by something that Marshall Miles, a champion player, wrote about playing in a regular club game. (Sort of like playing even against people more than 9 stones weaker than you. OC, there is a lot of luck in bridge.) He noted that he and his partner could have scored better by playing to the foibles of their opponents (something that Terence Reese, another champion, called slap-dash tactics), but that they took care to play as though they were playing in a national championship. They did not want to relax their attention or to get into other bad habits.
...
If you were making bad plays in hopes that your weak opponents would make mistakes (well founded hopes, to be sure ), that would be one thing. But you are using your better knowledge of the game to gain an advantage. As you advance, you will meet players who do not make those mistakes.

Thanks for this post, Bill. This pretty much precisely answers a question I had earlier about "expected value", but my method of asking was convoluted and inaccurate.

I have difficulty in playing the way that Marshall Miles advocates. It is very tempting to use "slap-dash tactics", and I have a difficult time controlling myself to follow this advice.

What you describe certainly seems like the "best" way to play. I don't know why, but it's very hard for me to do, even though I tell myself that it's for the best.

In short, I have no self control

[Joaz Banbeck]

You should loath bad moves to the very depths of your soul. Playing one deliberately is a form of partial suicide.

( OK, yes, I've been reading Kageyama recently )

[Kirby]

You should loath bad moves to the very depths of your soul. Playing one deliberately is a form of partial suicide.

( OK, yes, I've been reading Kageyama recently )

I don't disagree. I should loath bad moves.
But I don't loath bad moves (especially when they give opportunity for faster and/or greater profit).

[Twitchy Go]

Thanks for the post Bill. Part of the reason this question was because I'm worried about taking obscure joseki to the extreme. I've gotten incredibly good results venturing off the beaten path. Sometimes even having total victory(play a joseki that takes center influence but due to a mistake getting to kill the corner and take the territory too for example) in the corner. I think that as I face stronger opponents I'll start searching for less played/ complicated joseki that greatly benefit from having been studied,(i.e. taisha, small/ large avalanche)
How far could this hipster go be taken?

You should loath bad moves to the very depths of your soul. Playing one deliberately is a form of partial suicide.

( OK, yes, I've been reading Kageyama recently )

Well said, and well read!

[billywoods]

Do you guys think this habit might be detrimental to my growth in the long run? Or is off beat joseki knowledge another part of a skilled players repertoire and something worth developing?

To answer this: a) all habits are detrimental to growth and you should aim to shake them off as soon as you're strong enough to, b) well, you know these joseki and their refutations now, so you can go about developing something else. A different question: should you play them in a real game? Sure, if they give you the best result you can find, like any move!

For what it's worth, I don't know either of these lines, but I don't think I'd fall for them. In the first example, I'm taking outside influence, so I should be playing thickly, and descent to the second line is weirdly territory-oriented and inconsistent; in the second, a hane at the head of two stones is always a nice thing to look for, but those stones have support whereas mine don't, and the solid connection is sente.

[shapenaji]

I would like to advocate for "slap-dash tactics".

I like it when go isn't confined to the board, when I can understand my opponent well enough to play certain kinds of scary probes. (Note: I wouldn't strictly call these overplays, since I probably don't mind if I lose the stone (I'll still have some aji), but they can be aji keshi, strengthening your opponent if they respond correctly)

Often, if you see them paying a little too much attention to one group, you can make a move that seems to threaten it (even if it doesn't), in order to get the knee-jerk, slow-move response.

The same move played against someone who enjoys a good tenuki might be useless, and so I would never use it, but instead stretch just a little further with my extensions, the feeling of getting behind should be palpable for them, and I might induce an overplay.

I happen to love these psychological elements, I don't think they're scummy at all. Go is, after all, a game between minds.

[Fedya]

When I was learning go, the pros and other strong players plainly advocated playing the board, making overplays and plays that put the game on the line only as necessary.

This requires being able to tell which moves are overplays in the first place. I don't know how many times I've played something that looks reasonable, only to find at some point a few moves further than I was able to read that it was a bad idea.

[jts]

I would say if you're going to play weird joseki in hope of getting a mistake, better to learn a few out and out hamete. That way if you want to trick someone into a reading puzzle you can do that, and if you want to play it straight you can do that, too, and you won't be confused about which is which.

[Twitchy Go]

Do you guys think this habit might be detrimental to my growth in the long run? Or is off beat joseki knowledge another part of a skilled players repertoire and something worth developing?

To answer this: a) all habits are detrimental to growth and you should aim to shake them off as soon as you're strong enough to, b) well, you know these joseki and their refutations now, so you can go about developing something else. A different question: should you play them in a real game? Sure, if they give you the best result you can find, like any move!

For what it's worth, I don't know either of these lines, but I don't think I'd fall for them. In the first example, I'm taking outside influence, so I should be playing thickly, and descent to the second line is weirdly territory-oriented and inconsistent; in the second, a hane at the head of two stones is always a nice thing to look for, but those stones have support whereas mine don't, and the solid connection is sente.

(emphais added) This is an interesting point. I remember a higher dan once commenting( I think it was shapanji?) that he had never really studied joseki because he could in effect create his own from a good sense of shape and strong reading ability. And I don't think I'll be moving on from joseki quite yet, I want to become comfortable with multiple pincers. Right now I'm just 1 space high or lowing it.

I would say if you're going to play weird joseki in hope of getting a mistake, better to learn a few out and out hamete. That way if you want to trick someone into a reading puzzle you can do that, and if you want to play it straight you can do that, too, and you won't be confused about which is which.

I think this is a little unfair. I originally started playing these lines because I A) was tired of playing the same joseki all the time. and B)was quite happy with the joseki result for both sides. It was later that I noticed that these off beat lines seemed to be hard to handle. I like winning and since this increases the likelihood of a good result I do play them a lot. And I do admit that by factoring in probability for mistakes I blur the line between idealized play(playing the board not your opponent) and hamete. But it is still joseki and does not rely on my opponents mistake to give an even/favorable/disadvantageous result.(considered globally). As a counter argument, take this position originating from the san san invasion double hane line. One of the follow ups is the push and hane by white( ) However is an overplay. It lets white pull out his stones at a and black doesn't really have a good answer.

$$Wc This is a label for the diagram.
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . 1 X X X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O O a . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O B B . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc This is a label for the diagram.
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . 1 X X X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O O a . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O B B . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

The hane is a perfectly normal move, a standard follow up to a standard joseki. And I know when I was first taught the san san invasion I was told that the marked black stone kills the corner stones. No one said anything about aji! And with one liberty they look pretty dead. And White really only has this move to capitalize on this. As such I think your argument can work in reverse too. By knowing the joseki lines you know when you should pause and see if there is a reading puzzle.

[jts]

Right, it's considering globally that I meant. For example, when you're deciding whether to double hane after the 3-3 invasion, your choice is based on whole board thinking, not on taste. If you start playing a certain line after the 3-3 invasion because the opponent often responds poorly, the global considerations start to drop out of your strategic thinking. It's like always wearing your green shorts because you love green; maybe check the thermometer first?

It wasn't meant to be critical. Maybe you misinterpreted the hamete reference as a jab? I really meant that seriously; if you get a kick out of unusual sequences that sometimes provoke blunders but usually just lead to something off-beat, why not hamete?

[Twitchy Go]

Right, it's considering globally that I meant. For example, when you're deciding whether to double hane after the 3-3 invasion, your choice is based on whole board thinking, not on taste. If you start playing a certain line after the 3-3 invasion because the opponent often responds poorly, the global considerations start to drop out of your strategic thinking. It's like always wearing your green shorts because you love green; maybe check the thermometer first?

It wasn't meant to be critical. Maybe you misinterpreted the hamete reference as a jab? I really meant that seriously; if you get a kick out of unusual sequences that sometimes provoke blunders but usually just lead to something off-beat, why not hamete?

Ah, I see your point about global awareness. Having thought about it for a bit, I don't think it matters to much for me yet.

$$Wc marked black stones are part of the upper joseki
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . O X . . . . . , . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . O O X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . B . . . . . . . . . . . . . B . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . O O X X . |
$$ | . . X , . . . . . , . . . X . X . . . |
$$ | . . . X . X . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc marked black stones are part of the upper joseki
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . O X . . . . . , . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . O O X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . B . . . . . . . . . . . . . B . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . O O X X . |
$$ | . . X , . . . . . , . . . X . X . . . |
$$ | . . . X . X . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

All joseki were played out until tenuki was the most common option on daily joseki.
Now while I can appreciate some of the differences in these joseki. On the top of the board exchanging a cutting point for undercutting B. And in the bottom left pulling back removes the options such as extending up in the lower right that lead to variations where white and black take proportionally more thickness and territory respectively. But I don't know if I'm at the level in my go yet where I can say any of these is absolutely better given the board. As a result isn't it a matter of style? I think this would tie back to becoming strong enough to shake off the habits as billywoods said. Of course if anyone will help me figure that out I'd be more then happy to adjust. I play Go to have fun, and as much fun as winning is, improving is much more so. Hence why I brought my worries to L19x19.

And I did consider the hamete statement as a jab, but one I'm thankful for. When I'm mulling something over I like bouncing them off of other people. I'm grateful to hear the thoughts of both the people who think I'm on the right track and who think I'm way wrong. I've always considered hamete were plays that will get a bad result if correctly answered. But since you were sincere about learning them I decided to snoop around senseis for a while and see if my definition was off base. I soon found out it was, and since there seem to be a good number of hamete that will end roughly even with correct play I might look into them.

[Uberdude]

The below is a good tricky joseki, people often don't push at b before d which means when black gets b white's shape and eyespace sucks. I've gained an advantage in many a KGS blitz with this.

$$c
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 6 d a 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 0 . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . b 1 . 8 7 . 3 , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . c . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 6 d a 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 0 . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . b 1 . 8 7 . 3 , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . c . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |[/go]

And this move is considered by some as an overplay/trick, but really it just starts very complicated fighting. Dan players can often kill themselves with an L group in the corner.

$$c
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 1 , 2 . . 3 . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 1 , 2 . . 3 . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |[/go]

And I quite like the 2 space counter pincer of . It's a move pros have been playing more recently but many haven't seen it so they may opt for the simple continuation as below in which the exchange of for is slightly better for white.

$$c
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 6 . 7 2 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 8 1 . 5 . . 3 , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 6 . 7 2 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 8 1 . 5 . . 3 , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |[/go]

[billywoods]

when I was first taught the san san invasion I was told that the marked black stone kills the corner stones. No one said anything about aji! And with one liberty they look pretty dead.

I posted this a while back. It doesn't quite answer this question, but it shows you where some of the aji is. The salient point is that black only just manages to capture white - in this case, three liberties to two with white playing first. So if white has any way to make taking any of those liberties sente, e.g. by playing atari on ...