Life In 19x19

Decisions decisions, will try to spend a bit more time thinking about my Malkovich this time!

So, initial thoughts:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bc
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , 1 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . |
$$ | . . . 4 . . . . . , . . c . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 b . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

"a" is a nice point to have to get some form of edge stability, but I strongly dislike the fact White can kick it in the corner and leave it feeling clumpy and unhappy. Almost definitely not playing this ... yet

"b" Fairly standard, quick and easy to settle the stone fairly well, and quite tempting.

"c" My 4-4 in the lower left quite likes the idea of switching sides, and the loose nature of Black's pincer makes me suspect it will be hard for Black to cleanly and quickly deal with even given an extra move there. So this is probably leading as an idea, but I ought to think about some continuations first.

Ok, I've gone for my switch. I deliberated about low or high for some time, even after I'd decided on the switch, and the reason being is that I want my extension to be as sente as possible:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

I simply wasn't convinced that this was good enough - with low, Black can run, or play "a" or "b" in the above diagram, and it's all fairly urgent. Playing high makes me suspect that "c" lets Black settle in yet another way, and I'm less keen on it. It's possible I'll get all this higher outside thickness that I can put to good use, and that my judgement is off here, I just like the idea of Black sweating a bit more about making sure he deals with

The kosumi (a) seems a very nice point for B.
Attaching at (b) also looks OK for B… ?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

Okay, I must say I would have played the same in this situation. Looks like the most fun.
I guess this strategy a bit "whole-boardy".

Anyway, I'm not one that knows too many Joseki, so I play because it looks again like a sound move. Dividing White's stones and making Miai where to attack.

I'm eager to see what White does with his Sente. I still think it will be an enclosure, which then leaves me with the decision how to enter the left ^^

b is a bit strange. By contacting the weak stone you help it get stronger.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm13
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . 1 O , . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . X , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

Given that we reach this position, I wonder whether probing with helps me in deciding how to handle the left...

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm13
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . 1 O , . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 3 , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . X , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

Like this Black feels a bit cramped and White might be induced to kill the Aji in the top right corner immediately. On the other side, I really don't like White's bottom left formation. Both extensions are low, so 3*3 seems like a net gain for Black.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm13 :b23: at 'a'
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . 1 O , . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 3 , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . 6 a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . c 5 . 7 . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . b . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ | . 0 . O . 8 . . . , . . . . X , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

Like this I feel that it's not so easy to see who gets the last big point in the opening.
With the Joseki White played in the bottom right (one point farther to the right than I anticipated), I feel that the 'b'-'c'-exchange might be better than jumping down with .

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm13
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . O . . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . 1 O , . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . 2 b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . X , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

If White defends the corner I'm thinking about splitting here. If White approaches with 'a' I can later play 'b' and attack this stone.
If White takes 'c' I still think his shape is not so good and 3*3 is splendid for Black.

We'll see : D

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . 7 . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . b 6 . . |
$$ , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ . . . 8 . . 3 . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$--------------------+[/go]

Uberdude wrote:b is a bit strange. By contacting the weak stone you help it get stronger.

Perhaps you fell into the proverb trap.

(b) is an occasional pro move.
And if was instead on the 4th line,
then (b) contacting the "weak" stone is even more popular,
although still second choice as a pro move.

In the 4-4 situation, the top pro moves (x) and (y)
are both attaches, and the popular one is (x) which contacts
the "weaker" stone. In this case, (y) is an occasional move.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . 3 . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . x 2 . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ , . . . y . 1 . . . |
$$ . . . . 4 . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$--------------------+[/go]

EdLee wrote:

$$B
$$ , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . 7 . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . b 6 . . |
$$ , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ . . . 8 . . 3 . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$--------------------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . 7 . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . b 6 . . |
$$ , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ . . . 8 . . 3 . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$--------------------+[/go]

Uberdude wrote:b is a bit strange. By contacting the weak stone you help it get stronger.

Perhaps you fell into the proverb trap.

(b) is an occasional pro move.
And if was instead on the 4th line,
then (b) contacting the "weak" stone is even more popular,
although still second choice as a pro move.

In the 4-4 situation, the top pro moves (x) and (y)
are both attaches, and the popular one is (x) which contacts
the "weaker" stone. In this case, (y) is an occasional move.

$$B
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . 3 . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . x 2 . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ , . . . y . 1 . . . |
$$ . . . . 4 . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$--------------------+

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . 3 . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . x 2 . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ , . . . y . 1 . . . |
$$ . . . . 4 . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . . . |
$$--------------------+[/go]

I don't think I fell into a proverb trap, rather I was lazy in using few words and chose one proverb which is applicable here rather than make a detailed explanation. In a bit more detail:

In a double approach joseki (be it 3-4 or 4-4) the corner stone nearly always wants to come out and separate the two approach stones. You want to do so with a good shape. In your 4-4 example the x attach on the pincered stone makes a good shape with the pincer stone: if white hanes then black cuts. So in the pick-an-appropriate-proverb-to-post-poc-justify-your-move style it would be "connect your stones". In this game the attach doesn't make a good shape with the pincer stone: it's too far away. In the 4-4 2-space-high pincer double approach joseki the old fashion was to attach on the "stronger" non-pincered stone, but nowadays it's much more normal to attach on the weaker pincered stone because the pincer ends up in a good shape point.

With a tighter white counter pincer with this 3-4 3 space pincer, black is more likely to attach because it's a narrower gap to come out between the two approach stones so the kosumi doesn't work so well (though can still be possible). And with 4-4 double approach kosumi is just a bit of a slack shape and ends up somewhat inefficiently not on the bulge point if they 3-3 and you block.

The Suzuki-Kitani Small Joseki Dictionary does not like the jump attachment (on an empty board, OC ). For instance,



Note It makes look misplaced.

Just to tempt SoDesuNe.

Uberdude wrote:I don't think I fell into a proverb trap, rather I was lazy in using few words and chose one proverb which is applicable here rather than make a detailed explanation.

So you were being lazy.

And threw out a proverb which we all know is notorious for being ambiguous.
That proverb applies in some cases; it fails miserably in others.
I don't know the percentages. I don't even know if it's even 50/50.
If that proverb is even close to 50/50, then it's a huge trap for beginners.
Who knows ? Maybe that proverb is applicable for less than 10% of all cases ?
You admitted in another recent thread you also fall into these traps -- we all do.

You say the proverb is applicable here -- is that your opinion or a consensus from pros ?
You stated it as a fact.

Bill showed one joseki dictonary instance which didn't like the result, for an empty board.

My reason in saying the attach was strange was not that first I thought of the proverb "don't attach to weak stones" and thought that implies it was bad. One important reason I say it is strange is because I have studied joseki and I know, thanks to the combined wisdom of many professional players, such as Suzuki/Kitani as Bill posted, that it is not the normal move in that joseki. The point about not combining well with the pincer is important. When white switches to the lower side black would like to gobble up the initial approach on a large scale. Of course he often does that by playing the r4 attach (is it right to call this an attach?) after the kosumi and white extends on the lower side, so we could say "Oh no! black just attached to a weak stone". However that's not really what we normally mean by an attachment you shouldn't do to weak stones as black has the 3-4 stone diagonally adjacent and the kosumi nearby too so white can't hane and put the attachment stone under liberty pressure to gain momentum to settle his group (and extend is heavy too thanks to black surroundings). That r4 move should be understood for its purpose of prevent white from making eyes by sliding to the corner, and securing a base for black in the corner too.

By giving a short "By contacting the weak stone you help it get stronger" when typing in bed on a phone I hoped to give you something to think about on your own journey of self discovery of why the attachment is not so normal in this shape. But yes I was also lazy to type loads of explanation.