Page 2 of 3

Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?

Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 4:39 pm
by Unusedname
"other such trickery" lol

Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?

Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 9:29 pm
by Kirby
One of the suggestions for play was this move:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . 1 . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . O , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]
This move has benefit in that it hits a key shape point for both sides: black's shape is good, and it keeps white from taking this point, which would help white's shape a bit.

It is important, however, to consider the reason you might play this move from a global standpoint. Looking at a "normal" joseki, under what circumstances does black play this move?

For example, here's a common local joseki:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . 4 . O , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . 6 . . . . 2 1 3 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]
It's even - white gets a position on the bottom, and black gets points. Great, right?

But let's consider a board position where black has some solid stones up top:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ ----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . O . X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . O . O , B . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . O . . . . O X X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]
Above, the marked black stones are very low. Black has invested stones on the right, and he can't really develop there - his stones aren't doing that well together. Black could consider a pincer or something else in response to the 3-4 approach, but there is another way of playing, which is also joseki:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ ----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . O . X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C C . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C C . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C C . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . 7 . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . 4 6 O , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . 8 . . . . 2 1 3 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]
Note black 5 and 7, above. These stones have a drawback compared to the earlier joseki: the marked area isn't yet solidly enclosed, so if white invades later, black might not get the territory. But the benefit of these stones is that black is no longer so low on the right, as he is in the earlier joseki. His stones are balanced, and he has potential for development. To be sure, white can still reduce (eg. shoulder hit), but the high stones working together with the 3rd line stones offer more than all 3rd line stones on the right. That's at least one of the powers of this joseki.

This brings us to the discussion at hand of the weird joseki deviation by white. Supposing the board position is similar to above, where black wants to maintain some sort of future potential, it might make sense for black to want to play the diagonal move instead of the more territorial joseki:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ ----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . O . X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . 5 . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . O , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1 3 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]
But this doesn't quite work as well in relationship with the stones on the right as the joseki does. In the joseki, black gets stones both at the locations of :w4: and :b5:, above. But above, black only gets :b5:. To be sure, white is at disadvantage locally, because he deviated from the joseki, and the bottom can't turn out great for him.

But the point, in my mind, of :b5:, above, would be to offer development on the right - and to that effect, :w4: hinders this development.

In the above position, I don't think playing low would be good either, for the same reason discussed earlier. Probably just something simple to benefit locally. For example, since black is solid above, this would seem OK for black to me:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ ----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . O . X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . 6 7 . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . O , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2 1 3 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]
This all being said, it is probably still better to play this way:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . 1 . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . O , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]
instead of playing on the 3rd line in a situation like the one above. But I'd rather not play there at all, since black doesn't get as much development potential on the right than in the joseki.

Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?

Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 9:42 pm
by Kirby
Thinking about this a little more, *maybe* if this happened:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ ----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . O . X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . C . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . O , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2 1 3 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]
I would be inclined to play the marked spot - it's maybe better than 3rd line locally, but white can redeem himself (at cost of black playing elsewhere) after this:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ ----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . O . X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . 8 9 . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . O , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2 1 3 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]
(Supposing that :b7:, above, is tenuki)

Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?

Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 10:57 pm
by Bill Spight
Kirby wrote: For example, here's a common local joseki:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . 4 . O , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . 6 . . . . 2 1 3 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]
It's even - white gets a position on the bottom, and black gets points. Great, right?
Actually, it is not even. Black has the advantage. IIRC, Fujisawa Hideyuki (Shuko) pointed that out long ago. That is one reason that White frequently plays elsewhere for :w4:. (It is still joseki, since it is still a standard pattern of play, but White should not play it too early.)
Kirby wrote:Thinking about this a little more, *maybe* if this happened:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ ----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . O . X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . C . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . O , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2 1 3 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]
I would be inclined to play the marked spot - it's maybe better than 3rd line locally, but white can redeem himself (at cost of black playing elsewhere) after this:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ ----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . O . X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . 8 9 . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . O , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2 1 3 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]
(Supposing that :b7:, above, is tenuki)
The exchange, :b5: - :w6:, is good for White. White repairs his shape. (Black loses the peep and the clamp.) And Black still needs to protect against :w8: in the last diagram. Then after Black protects, White can play elsewhere.

Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?

Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 11:08 pm
by Kirby
Bill Spight wrote:
Kirby wrote: For example, here's a common local joseki:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . 4 . O , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . 6 . . . . 2 1 3 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]
It's even - white gets a position on the bottom, and black gets points. Great, right?
Actually, it is not even. Black has the advantage. IIRC, Fujisawa Hideyuki (Shuko) pointed that out long ago.
Why?

Because of this approach?
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . 4 . O , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . B . 6 . . . . 2 1 3 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]

Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?

Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 11:47 pm
by Bill Spight
Fujisawa noted that Black retains sente, and produced the following diagram.
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$ Good for Black
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . X . . . O . . . O X X . . . |
$$ | . . X , . . . . . , . . . O O , X . . |
$$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O , . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X . . |
$$ | . . X , O O . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . X X O . . . O . . . X . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
It is evident that Black is ahead, and still has sente. Black has a winning position. If the result of the joseki were even, then repeating it four times should leave an even result.

Altering the joseki by having White make the hanging connection instead of the solid connection does not alter the conclusion. :)

Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?

Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 11:58 pm
by Kirby
It's an interesting analysis. I'm not against the idea that the joseki might be favorable toward black, but this seems somewhat contrived, since direction and the global position matters. In the example given all of white's side stones are facing solid black stones.

Direction matters, because I feel white might not be as bad in a position like this:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3 5 . . . |
$$ | . . 9 , 0 . . . . 8 . . . 6 2 , 1 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
(Maybe we can argue that :b9: is not the best choice, but the same could perhaps be said of white continuing to follow the same pattern in Fujisawa's example)
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 3 1 2 . . . . . . . O X X . . . |
$$ | . . X , O 4 . . . O . . . O O , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
Now white has sente. Of course, this example is contrived, too. But since the direction and selection of joseki matters, it seems difficult to prove whether a position is even in this way.

It may very well be true that black has advantage for the joseki in question - it is nice to get sente and solid profit like this...

Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 9:50 am
by skydyr
Kirby wrote:It's an interesting analysis. I'm not against the idea that the joseki might be favorable toward black, but this seems somewhat contrived, since direction and the global position matters. In the example given all of white's side stones are facing solid black stones.
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 3 1 2 . . . . . . . O X X . . . |
$$ | . . X , O 4 . . . O . . . O O , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
Now white has sente. Of course, this example is contrived, too. But since the direction and selection of joseki matters, it seems difficult to prove whether a position is even in this way.

It may very well be true that black has advantage for the joseki in question - it is nice to get sente and solid profit like this...
More than anything else, I think this particular example may show that if you play mukai komoku, you should not respond to the high approaches in this manner. Of course, I think I recall that Go Seigen has commented on this position as being advantageous to black, so take your pick.

Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 11:29 am
by Bill Spight
Kirby wrote:It's an interesting analysis. I'm not against the idea that the joseki might be favorable toward black, but this seems somewhat contrived, since direction and the global position matters. In the example given all of white's side stones are facing solid black stones.

Direction matters, because I feel white might not be as bad in a position like this:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3 5 . . . |
$$ | . . 9 , 0 . . . . 8 . . . 6 2 , 1 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
(Maybe we can argue that :b9: is not the best choice, but the same could perhaps be said of white continuing to follow the same pattern in Fujisawa's example)
That was, in part, Fujisawa's point. ;)

Go Seigen addressed this kind of position in his 21st Century Go series. Here is an SGF file with some of what he had to say. :)



Edit: Note that the nirensei seems to be of significance in Go Seigen's assessment. Note also how important it is for Black to keep sente in this joseki early in the game. :)

Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 11:56 am
by Kirby
Thanks, Bill.

What's interesting to me from the SGF is the comparison of this:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B O . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
to this:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
Presumably, the first diagram is good for black - I think I can see this, because the marked stones are flexible, and black has potential for moyo on the left. White has some solid territory, but black has a nice global position. In the second diagram, white again has solid territory, and black appears more oriented toward the center. It is hard for me to wrap my head around the idea that black is behind, but if I have to guess, maybe black's center development is limited with white's move on the left... :scratch:

What do you think of the following type of development:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 8 0 . 6 . 7 . . . . . . . 2 . . . |
$$ | . . 9 1 . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 5 . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 3 . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . 2 O O . O . X . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . X X 1 3 . . . , . . . . . , 8 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 0 . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . O O O . O . X . . . . . 6 . O . . . |
$$ | . . X X X X . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . 7 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , 2 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
I'm trying to contrast this with Go Seigen's idea to see under what circumstances it might make sense to play out the joseki.

In this last diagram, black's right stones are somewhat center oriented, and black has the beginning of a framework on the left. Would this be good for black? In this position, :w4: and :w6: are somewhat annoying for black's development toward the center, but at least the stones seem to be more consistent than when white splits black on the left.

Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:09 pm
by Bill Spight
Kirby wrote:Thanks, Bill.

What's interesting to me from the SGF is the comparison of this:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B O . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
to this:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
Presumably, the first diagram is good for black - I think I can see this, because the marked stones are flexible, and black has potential for moyo on the left. White has some solid territory, but black has a nice global position. In the second diagram, white again has solid territory, and black appears more oriented toward the center. It is hard for me to wrap my head around the idea that black is behind, but if I have to guess, maybe black's center development is limited with white's move on the left... :scratch:
In the second diagram I don't think it's that Black is behind as that White has limited his development. Black's moyo on the right is small, and if he extends it on the top or bottom, White can reduce it on the other side.
What do you think of the following type of development:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . 8 0 . 6 . 7 . . . . . . . 2 . . . |
$$ | . . 9 1 . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 5 . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 3 . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . 2 O O . O . X . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . X X 1 3 . . . , . . . . . , 8 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 0 . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . O O O . O . X . . . . . 6 . O . . . |
$$ | . . X X X X . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . 7 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , 2 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
I'm trying to contrast this with Go Seigen's idea to see under what circumstances it might make sense to play out the joseki.
I start with the tenuki as the default, and then think about whether it makes sense not to tenuki. :)
In this last diagram, black's right stones are somewhat center oriented, and black has the beginning of a framework on the left. Would this be good for black? In this position, :w4: and :w6: are somewhat annoying for black's development toward the center, but at least the stones seem to be more consistent than when white splits black on the left.
Black has two frameworks. I like that. :)

Edit: I just noticed the tenuki for :b5: in the next to last diagram. That's questionable, eh?

Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:17 pm
by Kirby
Bill Spight wrote:
I start with the tenuki as the default, and then think about whether it makes sense not to tenuki. :)
In practice, I probably often do this, too. I did this in my current Malkovich game, for example. Though, more than thinking of whether the joseki is even or not, I usually tenuki because I want to play somewhere else more than continuing the joseki.
In the second diagram I don't think it's that Black is behind as that White has limited his development. Black's moyo on the right is small, and if he extends it on the top or bottom, White can reduce it on the other side.
Black has two frameworks. I like that. :)
Okay, thanks. This seems consistent with my current understanding (although the meaning of black not being behind but having a "hard time overcoming the komi" is somewhat cryptic to me :-)).

Thanks for the explanations.

Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:59 pm
by Kirby
Bill Spight wrote: Edit: I just noticed the tenuki for :b5: in the next to last diagram. That's questionable, eh?
I think it's a weakness that white might use to start a fight later. Basically, I wanted your thoughts as to whether black is still behind with the position on the right if he achieves center potential. In Go Seigen's diagram, like you said, white limited black's development. I wanted to create a position where this wasn't so much the case.

Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 3:02 pm
by Bill Spight
Kirby wrote:
Bill Spight wrote:
I start with the tenuki as the default, and then think about whether it makes sense not to tenuki. :)
In practice, I probably often do this, too. I did this in my current Malkovich game, for example. Though, more than thinking of whether the joseki is even or not, I usually tenuki because I want to play somewhere else more than continuing the joseki.
In the second diagram I don't think it's that Black is behind as that White has limited his development. Black's moyo on the right is small, and if he extends it on the top or bottom, White can reduce it on the other side.
Black has two frameworks. I like that. :)
Okay, thanks. This seems consistent with my current understanding (although the meaning of black not being behind but having a "hard time overcoming the komi" is somewhat cryptic to me :-)).

Thanks for the explanations.
I have changed my mind about the two frameworks. I overlooked the tenuki in the top left corner. :(

As for not being behind but having a hard time overcoming komi, I would usually say that after only 18 plays White got the last move of the fuseki, and is so solid in the two right hand corners that the temperature has dropped a good bit. So if the board is about even, Black will have a hard time gaining 7 points. (I am trying to explain what Go Seigen said. My assessment is not so keen. ;) )

Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?

Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 3:06 pm
by Kirby
Bill Spight wrote:I have changed my mind about the two frameworks. I overlooked the tenuki in the top left corner. :(

As for not being behind but having a hard time overcoming komi, I would usually say that after only 18 plays White got the last move of the fuseki, and is so solid in the two right hand corners that the temperature has dropped a good bit. So if the board is about even, Black will have a hard time gaining 7 points. (I am trying to explain what Go Seigen said. My assessment is not so keen. ;) )
Okay, that makes sense, I suppose. Regarding the tenuki, dailyjoseki.com lists tenuki as the most common pro response to the joseki in the top right: http://dailyjoseki.com/browse/bwpwxibxg ... owxmbwnwyd