Beginner fuseki strategy

[badukJr]

I agree that its not horribly slow. Its slow enough that the pros don't prefer it.

Probably for most amateur games the difference is not noticeable.

[JustAnotherKyu]

I play double 3-3 a lot, and don't agree that 3-3 is slow - it takes the corner in one move just like 4-4. I think the issue is with it being low and also harder to develop.

I think what you meant was that both 3-3 and 4-4 do not urge a shimari move, allowing you to move on freely.

The rest of this post is not in response to you.

4-4 exerts influence while claiming no territory. With two more moves, the 4-4 can be enclosed, in contrast to the 3-4 which only requires one additional move. 3-3 is a territorial move, it takes the corner in one move. This is why it is sometimes used when a person wishes to rapidly develop and move on. Indeed, a move on the 4-4 invites the 3-3, gladly giving up the corner all the while.

Through the natural course of play, a person might find themselves wishing a stone which was previously on the third line, would be on the fourth, or the other way around. This is just another part of strategy.

Of course, a person could play 3-3 under their 4-4, taking corner but, well....

The 5-4 and 5-3 also share this idea of influence over straight territory.

The biggest notion I would stress about playing in the corner, regardless of your move is that you placed the first stone there. This makes all the difference.

[judicata]

What is meant by "slow" is a bit ambiguous. I generally hear pros describe openings using the 3-3 and 4-4 points as relatively "fast."

EDIT: I'm not saying those who say the 3-3 is "slow" are wrong--but rather it isn't clear what they mean by "slow". I do understand (at least a little) why it is described as "fast."

[badukJr]

What is meant by "slow" is a bit ambiguous. I generally hear pros describe openings using the 3-3 and 4-4 points as relatively "fast."

EDIT: I'm not saying those who say the 3-3 is "slow" are wrong--but rather it isn't clear what they mean by "slow". I do understand (at least a little) why it is described as "fast."

I'll agree with that.

[hyperpape]

I don't know if pros actually call the 3-3 point slow, though I do know that fashion has strongly moved away from it. I would say that it's fast in that a 3-3 stone is self-sufficient: it doesn't look for a second stone right away the way a 3-4 or 3-5 point does. Thus, it allows a fast paced style where you get around the board a lot in the opening. I think that's why Go Seigen liked it. If it's slow, it's slow in that it just doesn't do enough--combining its influence and territory, you just don't get enough, compared to the other corner points.

Those would be different meanings of fast and slow, though obviously also related.

[Boidhre]

Side question: At what stage should one start experimenting with openings like the mini-Chinese etc?

[hyperpape]

Side question: At what stage should one start experimenting with openings like the mini-Chinese etc?

When you feel like it.

[Bill Spight]

Side question: At what stage should one start experimenting with openings like the mini-Chinese etc?

Move 3?