Relatively successful professionals who eschew 4-4 openings?

[columbo]

I don't like the 4-4 point. (This is not a thread about the 4-4 point--yes, I realize it's likely the strongest opening/corner move, a hair better than 3-4, etc. I won't bore you with my reasons; just trust that I don't like it and you're not going to convince me otherwise.)

Are there any (relatively) good pros who more or less never play(ed) the 4-4 point? (Other than, of course, the classical players--I mean players after the 4-4 rose to prominence. Not that I have anything against studying the classics, but of course go is played by two people, and strategic considerations are different if your opponents are playing 4-4, something Jowa et al didn't have the displeasure of facing often outside handicap games.)

I'd like to do an in-depth study of such a professional's games, if such a professional exists. I should add that I'm not looking for players that exclusively use(d) the 3-4 point--other normal-ish corner moves (3-3, 5-3, 5-4) are also good in my book. Thanks in advance for your input.

[Uberdude]

It's a while back, but he definitely counts as successful: Sakata Eio played 3-3s and 3-4s a lot, particularly as white. I think he was saying "I grab these points, I have komi, I can fight and invade like a beast, bring it on!"

[gennan]

If you don't even want a combination of 4-4 and 3-4, you may need to look at pros who peaked before 1970.

But if you're looking for pros who are still active and not that old, Japanese pro Hane Naoki 9p seems to be very fond of the 3-4 move (even today). He has a very steady playing style and he has been one of Japan's top players in the past 15 years and he has won some of Japan's top titles a couple of times (Kisei, Honinbo).

[Jujube]

He is also the current holder of the Gosei title.

[emerus]

Sun Tengyu opens 33 and an AlphaGo enclosure. Xu Jiayang and Tan Xiao currently play 3-4 openings.

But not surw that there will be a pro post 1990s who never played them. Especially as white.

[Kirby]

Why not just have a study session with our friend, Leela? Or perhaps her buddy, KataGo?

[Gomoto]

Because he wants to study professional games in depth, he is not on the lookout for a more easier win probably.

[Gomoto]

I enjoy the early fighting in the lower left.

is questionable

[columbo]

Why not just have a study session with our friend, Leela? Or perhaps her buddy, KataGo?

Well, Kirby, I have no problem with analyzing my own already-played games or particular sequences with bots to get a sense for what moves were particularly good (well, particularly not-as-bad-as-the-rest) and which were particularly atrocious. But bots have no interest in aesthetic judgment as such and I personally find their style entirely distasteful. I'm more interested in seeing a professional's style and philosophy of go on the board than a robotic abstraction teaching me the best move or moves after a particular corner move is played.

Again, I don't intend to start a debate here on the well-worn grounds of style, robots, aesthetics, all that--this is just where I'm coming from. I like to examine pro games.

And thanks to the suggestions so far. I've certainly already examined parts of Sakata's impressive body of work before (by far the pro who I've most studied). I'd also heard of/seen Hane Naoki's games before this thread but I took a closer look at several matches last night and I must say I like the style I'm seeing and will give it more serious deliberation.

[Kirby]

Not trying to start a debate. I just don’t see the aesthetic difference as clearly as you describe.

I suppose beauty is in the eye of the beholder