John Fairbairn wrote:
Hi Tami
Since you found Yang's classification style useful. I thought you may like a recommendation for a follow-up.
The book I recommend is a fairly new one (2015) and is called "Surrounding territory efficiently: the four basic points" by Kimu Sujun (ISBN 978-4-8399-5504-5).
Thanks for that. I'll look into that one, too.
The funny thing about the classification system is that it makes more sense to me in light of the second and third chapters of the book, and when one starts to diverge from and play freely it.
What I mean is the realisation that a move is only big (or not big) because of its relationship with what has been played before.
Now, corners are obviously Class 1 - experience, logic and AI all show that you cannot do better than start the game by playing in an empty corner. So it's the next lot of moves - "Class 2" and downwards that need the thinking.
I can tell you that if one tries to stick to Yang's ranking strictly, then it just won't work in real games. I've tried it, and the wheels come off pretty quickly. The reason is that the little table of moves on page 18 (of the edition I have, at any rate) assumes that the opponent is going to "play nicely" and not interfere with your own plans too soon. If your opponent were just to let you build away happily, making first your enclosures, then your happy little extensions in sides with facing corners, then your other extensions, etc., etc., you would indeed produce a pretty powerful opening. This is the ideal world.
But once the opponent decides to stick his oar in, then we enter the real world. However,
this is what I think I've learned: the better you understand the reasons for the each kind of move's prioritisation in the ideal world, the better you can adapt to living in the real world. Because I've seen how to build cathedrals in peace, I feel better able to improvise fortifications in war.
_________________
Learn the "tea-stealing" tesuji! Cho Chikun demonstrates here: