A question on openings.

[Joelnelsonb]

I feel like you answered your own question.

Yes joseki are "even" exchanges in the same way trading a bishop for a knight is "even"
but if on the other side of the board you play a joseki that blocks the white diagonals, then you trading your bishop for the knight was a good fuseki.

I think this concept is called direction of play.

But if you really wanted to understand joseki through chess, I would say that joseki are like forced exchanges. You can't keep all your knights and all your bishops. So in one corner you'll trade a knight for a bishop (Territory for influence) or (Influence on one side for influence on the other side) and then in the end you hope your exchanges fit the board better than your opponent's exchanges fit the board.

Sure your opponent can play anywhere to sour your strategy, but if you stay more flexible you can adjust your strategy to make any of his moves seem inefficient.

Thank you for this post. This is exactly the sort of thing I was talking about in the previous post above; using principle analogies from one game to better understand the other. I guess I didn't realize that joseki is so much about exchange for territory vs influence. I thought when people said "equal for both sides", they meant just that. So you're saying that choosing the proper joseki is about creating the imbalance which favors you're strategy for the rest of the game? While were on the topic of joseki, I do have some basic questions: with so many joseki out there, are there such things as like the "common" ones that any real player ought to know? I always wonder when I study pro games "how do they agree upon which joseki variation to use?" What are the odds that two different players would not only know the same joseki but choose to use the same one at the same time? And what if one player starts the joseki and the other player see's that it's ultimately better for his opponent and doesn't want to play it? Is there a battle of the josekis as both players try to player their own way? Furthermore, what if your opponent doesn't even know you're playing a Joseki? I mean, do all strong players always settle every corner with joseki? Is that just standard play for corners?

[quantumf]

I feel like you answered your own question.

Yes joseki are "even" exchanges in the same way trading a bishop for a knight is "even"
but if on the other side of the board you play a joseki that blocks the white diagonals, then you trading your bishop for the knight was a good fuseki.

I think this concept is called direction of play.

But if you really wanted to understand joseki through chess, I would say that joseki are like forced exchanges. You can't keep all your knights and all your bishops. So in one corner you'll trade a knight for a bishop (Territory for influence) or (Influence on one side for influence on the other side) and then in the end you hope your exchanges fit the board better than your opponent's exchanges fit the board.

Sure your opponent can play anywhere to sour your strategy, but if you stay more flexible you can adjust your strategy to make any of his moves seem inefficient.

Thank you for this post. This is exactly the sort of thing I was talking about in the previous post above; using principle analogies from one game to better understand the other. I guess I didn't realize that joseki is so much about exchange for territory vs influence. I thought when people said "equal for both sides", they meant just that. So you're saying that choosing the proper joseki is about creating the imbalance which favors you're strategy for the rest of the game? While were on the topic of joseki, I do have some basic questions: with so many joseki out there, are there such things as like the "common" ones that any real player ought to know? I always wonder when I study pro games "how do they agree upon which joseki variation to use?" What are the odds that two different players would not only know the same joseki but choose to use the same one at the same time? And what if one player starts the joseki and the other player see's that it's ultimately better for his opponent and doesn't want to play it? Is there a battle of the josekis as both players try to player their own way? Furthermore, what if your opponent doesn't even know you're playing a Joseki? I mean, do all strong players always settle every corner with joseki? Is that just standard play for corners?

Some pros like to joke "I don't know any joseki, I invent joseki" I'm sure they are both joking and serious, i.e. they have already studied and committed to memory all the standard josekis and their outcomes, and are now exist in a different sort of post-joseki world where they really do just play the best move in the circumstances, and if that means making up new josekis then that will be the outcome. New joseki sequences are still being invented. With a few small exceptions, josekis don't even have names, which to me indicates (a) how many there are and (b) how they simply are the best move for the current situation.

Pros do not agree on joseki sequences, and if they can refute the line the opponent is taking then they will, provided it gives them a good outcome.

Note that josekis are not exclusively about territory vs. influence, there are some which give a roughly equal balance of territory, e.g. http://senseis.xmp.net/?44PointLowAppro ... ionSlide33

[xed_over]

I always wonder when I study pro games "how do they agree upon which joseki variation to use?" What are the odds that two different players would not only know the same joseki but choose to use the same one at the same time? And what if one player starts the joseki and the other player see's that it's ultimately better for his opponent and doesn't want to play it? Is there a battle of the josekis as both players try to player their own way? Furthermore, what if your opponent doesn't even know you're playing a Joseki? I mean, do all strong players always settle every corner with joseki? Is that just standard play for corners?

I think you're still missing the point.

Its not that they agree... many joseki often have so many different variations that players do just that... trying not to let their opponent get the upper hand.

I've read stories of at least one famous professional (and I've forgotten his name) who claimed not to know any joseki, but instead simply worked out what the best response should be while playing. Another (if not the same one), since he was unaware of the proper joseki move, ended up playing a move that wasn't in the books, but ended up being better, and therefore proving the books wrong.

here's an interesting article about not blindly following joseki
http://361points.com/articles/20/1/

don't just play a move because its joseki. play a move because its the best response to the situation (which may just happen to be joseki).

edit: ninja'ed by quantumf (and his answer is better than mine anyway)

[joellercoaster]

The reason for my original post though was just that I was curious if there were some mainlines I could learn and start practicing beyond the first few moves.

I think there are, though you are depending on your opponent to cooperate to some degree - to agree that your opening "line" is right about the choices it is forcing on them (and see http://senseis.xmp.net/?HighConceptOpeningMyth).

As Black, I spent a little while starting out with the Low Chinese opening, as a way of imposing some order on the beginning and getting a feel for what is going on. A friend did the same with Sanrensei. Now I think it hampered my understanding a bit (though probably not a terrible idea), and instead I try to see the opening as a series of tradeoffs and come out of it even (this is probably starting to sound familiar).

I second the suggestions to have a look at Opening Theory Made Easy. For me, this better filled the need I felt to impose some order on the early phases. Actually I think I should probably read it again.

[Uberdude]

Instead of learning whole board openings or other chess-inspired ideas, I would suggest you focus on your local fighting skills: beginners* lose not because of opening mistakes but because they run out of liberties and get captured. There are a lot of local shapes that will keep coming up again and again and recognising these and what the important points are and how they are affected by slight changes in the configuration of the stones is far more valuable. Can you solve the problems in this post? Was it second nature solve in a glance, or did you need to read?

* I seem to recall you are still quite a beginner, apologies if this is too easy.

[Unusedname]

Thank you for this post. This is exactly the sort of thing I was talking about in the previous post above; using principle analogies from one game to better understand the other. I guess I didn't realize that joseki is so much about exchange for territory vs influence. I thought when people said "equal for both sides", they meant just that. So you're saying that choosing the proper joseki is about creating the imbalance which favors you're strategy for the rest of the game? While were on the topic of joseki, I do have some basic questions: with so many joseki out there, are there such things as like the "common" ones that any real player ought to know? I always wonder when I study pro games "how do they agree upon which joseki variation to use?" What are the odds that two different players would not only know the same joseki but choose to use the same one at the same time? And what if one player starts the joseki and the other player see's that it's ultimately better for his opponent and doesn't want to play it? Is there a battle of the josekis as both players try to player their own way? Furthermore, what if your opponent doesn't even know you're playing a Joseki? I mean, do all strong players always settle every corner with joseki? Is that just standard play for corners?

Every move you play is about creating an imbalance that favors your strategy. Since no two stones can occupy the same intersection, there is an imbalance.

I would think yeah there are a lot of common joseki that most players know. Understanding is more important than knowing.

Your questions sound kind of weird. But I'll try to answer them.

Go is like a disagreement.
Yes if White thinks Black is offering a poor exchange White has ways to resist.
Sometimes White will take a loss locally to get a good position globally. Like Quantumf said there's more to exchanges than territory and influence.
Sometimes White will tenuki (play away) because he thinks a different part of the board is more important, or if White settles a different side of the board first he can get a better idea of how to respond to Black locally.
So yes if you don't want to respond to your opponent's moves you do have options.

When pros both agree on a joseki I imagine it's for one of two reasons:
More likely they disagree on who benefits more from the exchange
Less likely they have found the actual best move on the board

Also no games aren't always settling each corner individually.

I think joseki is a weird place to look if you want chess analogies.

Understanding joseki comes from understanding other concepts like having a base, shape, sacrifice, cutting, aji

Making a base is like protecting your pawn before it's under attack. Sure you could wait until it's under attack to defend it, but then your opponent is controlling the flow of the game. If your pawn is steady now, you can decide later whether you want to continue strengthening it or develop elsewhere.

Some moves are made just to give your opponent bad shape. Like a move that forces your opponent to put a knight on the side.

Sacrifice's are kind of the same you give up material for tempo (sente) or some other advantage. Or there's large scale sacrifice where you and your opponent might disagree on the value of certain positions.

I'm not sure how to describe cutting. Sometimes it's like a fork where you start two attacks at the same time. Sometimes it's disrupting communication and making stones not work together like blocking rooks from sharing the same rank.

Aji is like when your knight is stuck on the side. You want to move him, but you don't really have time.

I would agree with the other people in the thread and say that if your goal is to improve quickly this might not be the most efficient path. But I enjoy thinking about it.

The reason for my original post though was just that I was curious if there were some mainlines I could learn and start practicing beyond the first few moves. You know, something I could use every time I play until I learn something new. It's recommended that you play a new Chess opening for a year before moving onto another one so I would probably stick to that. I'm just craving deeper strategy in my play and so I'm looking for ways to be thinking about advantages right from the get go and how to ride them through the middle and into the end game.

Yeah there are some common beginner joseki.
There is a book called 38 basic Joseki.
But if you read a book like Opening Theory Made Easy, you could find these moves for yourself.
But I like Uber's suggestion too. Ignore that you're getting some loss in the corner and just learn local fighting skills.

[Bill Spight]

beginners* lose not because of opening mistakes but because they run out of liberties and get captured.

Worth repeating.

Also, the key to advanced problems often has to do with liberties. It's not just a matter for beginners.

[Uberdude]

Also, the key to advanced problems often has to do with liberties. It's not just a matter for beginners.

Yeah, I often have a blind spot for shortage of liberties in harder problems. I tend to focus too much on the eyespace shapes and might not see a self-atari in the sequence.

[Joelnelsonb]

Instead of learning whole board openings or other chess-inspired ideas, I would suggest you focus on your local fighting skills: beginners* lose not because of opening mistakes but because they run out of liberties and get captured. There are a lot of local shapes that will keep coming up again and again and recognising these and what the important points are and how they are affected by slight changes in the configuration of the stones is far more valuable. Can you solve the problems in this post? Was it second nature solve in a glance, or did you need to read?

* I seem to recall you are still quite a beginner, apologies if this is too easy.

I was able to solve these at a glance, however, I would consider myself a beginner (14 kyu, OGS). From what I can tell, it appears that DDK = beginner, SDK = intermediate, 1 Dan+ = advanced. Thanks!

[EdLee]

1 dan+ = advanced

To some, a beginning level.

[Bill Spight]

1 dan+ = advanced

To some, a beginning level.

Sophomore: What do you do?

Astronomy professor: I am a student of astronomy.

Sophomore: Oh, that's an easy course.

[Joelnelsonb]

1 dan+ = advanced

To some, a beginning level.

Of course. Advanced study is the beginning. You crawl and then you walk. Once you begin to walk, the journey has just begun, not ended.

[Bantari]

The sooner you put aside attempts to apply learnings or analogies from chess to go, the better off you will be. They are utterly different games.

I would say the only things you can apply from chess are broad concepts that apply to most strategy games, like: read ahead, have a plan, don't panic, consider the whole board, and so forth.

This.

It amazes me how often people try forcing concepts from chess on Go. As quantumf said - there are completely different games. Would you try to understand chess in terms of bridge? Just go with a flow and enjoy the game, and eventually the enlightment will come. Or not...

But since you insist... to give you an idea of what Go is and how you might think of a joseki as opposed to a chess opening... Imagine four chess boards arranged in a loose square, each has its own game - but the pieces can influence and attack adjecent boards as well. So, while on board #1 you might aim to protect your king, the bishop move you made to avoid check can actually attack the opponent king of another board. Its sort-of hard to imageine, but this is how I used to think about it.

You still know the proper chess openings, and attempt to apply the on each board individually, but now you have the added dimension of the boards interacting, so what you learned and know about chess opening is only 'local play' and has yo be considered in a more global concepts. Some lines which are good on single board might be bad on the multi-board, depending on configuration.

Same with joseki. Each joseki is like a chess opening, locally - there are variations, and there are popular lines and less popular lines, there are outdated lines, there are novelties... but it is not as clear-cut as in chess because of the 'global' concept I mentioned above. A joseki can be a winning idea or a losing idea, depending what joseki your opponent chose in some other corner.

[Joelnelsonb]

Well, the reason for my post was simply that whenever I teach someone to play Chess, I always teach them the Philidor opening right off the bat. They don't have to understand anything about it to begin with; it simply gives the novice a skeleton to work with. Instead of sitting there, looking at a board full of pieces, thinking "lot options, why not move... This one!" Instead, it gives them a basic plan to play by. This being said, every game of Go that I play opens up completely different beyond the first three moves. I was just wondering if Go was such a game that you could learn structured openings and follow-ups so that you're not a goose in a hail storm, trying hopelessly to navigate through what I consider to be the most abstract part of the game.

[Uberdude]

Yes, there are 'structured openings' that have been studied and played a lot. Have you looked at any opening books*? There are thousands of pages of variations and analysis on them. For example here is a main line of what we call the micro Chinese which has been popular the last few years:

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

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

$$Bm11
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 O . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4 2 . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X 7 . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . X . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bm11
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 O . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4 2 . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X 7 . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . X . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

But if your opponent doesn't want you to play your favourite opening then he can do something different, for example this pincer prevents the micro Chinese above and then a different opening will happen:

$$B
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 2 . . . . . , . . . . . 1 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 4 . . . . . , . . . . . , 3 . . |
$$ | . . . . . 5 . 6 . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 2 . . . . . , . . . . . 1 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 4 . . . . . , . . . . . , 3 . . |
$$ | . . . . . 5 . 6 . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

However, for a 14k or so like yourself I would not recommend trying to memorise a vast number of opening patterns, but get a grounding in the basic opening principles that means you have a decent idea what to do in any situation. For this I highly recommend http://senseis.xmp.net/?OpeningTheoryMadeEasy.

* For starters:
http://senseis.xmp.net/?ADictionaryOfMo ... oreanStyle
http://senseis.xmp.net/?DictionaryOfBasicFuseki
http://senseis.xmp.net/?21stCenturyNewOpenings
http://senseis.xmp.net/?21stCenturyNewOpeningsVolume2
(Vol 3 only in Korean I think)