Pincer attacks never seem to work for me, either.

[Fedya]

If you've read enough of my posts, you'll probably know that I've complained, probably too often, about thickness never working for me, even though it's one of those things that strong players say is good. Oh, I have some games where thickness has gone badly wrong that I could post, but another thing that always seems to go wrong is the pincer attack. When my opponents pincer me, I end up with a weak group; when I pincer my opponents, I end up with a bunch of weaknesses. In this game, I started out playing in the top corners, and after playing pincer attacks when White approached both of those corners I promptly ended up with utter weakness along the top. I've gone through the game, and am not certain where I've gone wrong or, more importantly, what I should have done differently.

[EdLee]

I've gone through the game, and am not certain where I've gone wrong or, more importantly, what I should have done differently.

Fedya, what did you learn from your research on joseki after your ?

[leichtloeslich]

A few comments. And I was quite shocked at b17, just to let you know.

[Fedya]

I've gone through the game, and am not certain where I've gone wrong or, more importantly, what I should have done differently.

Fedya, what did you learn from your research on joseki after your ?

I learned that I probably should have played E17, which is one of the moves I had been thinking of. Beyond that I'm getting lost in a thicket of variations.

I also learned that just because somebody says something is good, that doesn't matter if you don't understand why it's good and what to do with that goodness.

[skydyr]

I've gone through the game, and am not certain where I've gone wrong or, more importantly, what I should have done differently.

Fedya, what did you learn from your research on joseki after your ?

I learned that I probably should have played E17, which is one of the moves I had been thinking of. Beyond that I'm getting lost in a thicket of variations.

I also learned that just because somebody says something is good, that doesn't matter if you don't understand why it's good and what to do with that goodness.

In the game situation, you might want to consider a high pincer instead of a low one. This is more likely to either start a running fight, where you make territory on the bottom while two groups run into the center, or let white settle in the corner/side but be relatively trapped between black positions on both sides. The low pincer you played generally says that you want to emphasize territory over influence in the coming skirmish.

The reason people say to pincer here is that when a fight starts, black has backup stones in both corners as the groups start running outwards, so he doesn't need to worry about safety as much as white does. It might be worth playing a looser pincer, like a 2 or 3 space high pincer, since these give more room to maneuver and you are less likely to have a mistake cause a critical loss. In this position, a loose high pincer could also work well to build off of the upper right corner, meaning that black doesn't need to profit too much more than white locally.

Hopefully this is making sense?

[EdLee]

When my opponents pincer me, I end up with a weak group;
when I pincer my opponents, I end up with a bunch of weaknesses.

Beyond that I'm getting lost in a thicket of variations.

Exactly. There is a huge amount of knowledge; a vast continuum of levels of understanding.
As early as the 5th local move ( ), you were lost -- an immense amount of work (and adventure) awaits you.

[DrStraw]

Whoever told you that the standard move with B7 is a pincer was wrong. It is a possible move, but far from standard. I would think that attaching below, a keima onto the fourth line, and attaching above are all common moves. As for a pincer, I would think that the two point high is more common. Sure, the pincer you played is joseki, but there are many variations.

Personally, I rarely play a pincer in response to the high approach. If I do, it is usually the two point high. Playing the one point low, as you did, required an understanding of joseki and the knowledge to take advantage of the resulting cutting points.

[mitsun]

Your pincer attack at move 25 is perfect for this situation, since it also makes a base for your stones to the left.

When W plays a second approach at move 26, he is asking for trouble, since both approach moves are already pincered. The position is nearly symmetric, so either attachment is fine. You might also consider simply playing P15 to split W into equal weak groups. If W jumps into the corner, you can block on either side, for a great attack on whichever W group which does not get a base.

In the game, after your attachment on top, your play through move 35 was fine, but after that you got into trouble by playing too defensively. Through move 48, you let W connect his separated weak groups while confining B to a small corner. You forgot you were the one attacking here!

Move 39 was very slow, must be N14. Your previous moves protected your corner group against all cuts, at the cost of strengthening W on the right side. So now is the time to attack W on top. After N14, W is actually in a lot of trouble. If W plays hane, you can cut, and you should win the fight (try some sequences). If W plays an empty triangle to escape, you have made an excellent exchange, and you still have a nice attack going.

The W right side group is not all that strong either. Sometime between moves 39-48, B has a nice eye-stealing placement at S12.

[daal]

I played this only because when I haven't played the pincer attack in response to this White approach, I've been told that the standard move is to play the pincer.

While there is nothing to be said against exploring new ideas (in this case, pincering), playing the pincer because it's supposed to be standard doesn't sound like a good reason. I would suggest setting yourself an objective for the corner, and seeing whether or not you can achieve it.

[EdLee]

When my opponents pincer me, I end up with a weak group;
when I pincer my opponents, I end up with a bunch of weaknesses.

Beyond that I'm getting lost in a thicket of variations.

To re-iterate:
No problem with -- reference: Ishida, 265+131 pages; Takao, 286 pages.
No problem with -- reference: Ishida, 131 pages; Takao, 96 pages.
No problem with -- reference: Ishida, 19 pages; Takao, 11 pages.
Other possible replies to -- reference: Ishida, 112+ pages; Takao, 85+ pages.
The hane out -- reference: Ishida, 4 pages; Takao, 1+ pages.

The problem is not your pincer ; and if you choose not to pincer, that's also not the problem.
The problem is in your follow-ups. For example, study your ; another example: compare your evaluation of your ...

I have a feeling this pincer attack is wrong.

...to mitsun's evaluation:

Your pincer attack at move 25 is perfect for this situation

See also another poster's struggle with the pincer here.
We see a similar pattern there -- his emphasis is on the pincer, or the choice of it;
but that's not the problem. The problem is his follow-ups.