My take : )
In my opinion the only "hard-to-cope-with" situation is this follow-up-play by Black.
$$Bcm11 First Diagramme
$$ -----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . X O . . . . . . . a . . . . . |
$$ | . . 1 X X O . . . X . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . X O . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . b . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
- Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bcm11 First Diagramme
$$ -----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . X O . . . . . . . a . . . . . |
$$ | . . 1 X X O . . . X . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . X O . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . b . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |[/go]
Let's compare this to the "normal" Joseki.
$$Bc Second Diagramme
$$ -----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . x . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . c . 1 O . . . . . a . b . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . 2 . . . 4 . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
- Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bc Second Diagramme
$$ -----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . x . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . c . 1 O . . . . . a . b . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . 2 . . . 4 . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |[/go]
First of all, let's look at White.
White has obviously no territory in the first diagramme but is considerably strong at the outside. The resulting shape is also hard to attack. That makes me wonder if Black's K16 is not too close to White's thickness? White could possibly invade at 'a' if Black does not defend. And when Black defends White has Sente (huge in the opening).
White does not have Sente in the second diagramme and Black does not have to defend anything locally. And again, White hasn't surrounded territory with his shape. Black can poke with 'a' for example. The results in both diagrammes favour influence. Notice how White has a big follow-up in the second diagramme with 'b', which is coincidentally the same point at which White could attack in the first diagramme. This leads me to think, that Black's K16 would be better at O17 to counter White's thickness and that K16 is indeed to close to White's thickness.
So, to look at Black.
If I'm correct with my above reasoning, Black's K16 ends up being a burden. Of course it prevents a White extension but White does not need to extend after the exchanges against the corner. White's safe in the center. So, not only loses K16 it's usefulness since it does not keep White weak, it becomes considerably weak itself and needs to be defended, which loses the initiative Black would have otherwise (with the "normal" Joseki) kept.
Let's compare Black's corner-shape.
The first diagramme is obviously tremendously solid and White has no way of trying nasty things. But Black is also confined to its corner. Sure, Black can push from behind but this gives White an even more solid wall and when Black jumps to 'b', I think White can still jump ahead at 'c'. So Black is solid but lacks prospect.
Completely different in the second diagramme. Black's ahead of White has considerably more prossibilities to develop this group (he could expand at the side, he could possibly attack White when gets a stone around 'a' etc.) But, sure, this comes with a price. White has nice points at 'c' and 'd'. But White has to always pay attention to his upper group. If White plays 'c' carelessly, Black could just extend up at 'x', let White live in the corner and then approach with 'a' or something like that. Black will then dictate the flow. Carelessly playing 'd' can also result in an attack (free forcing moves) on the upper group.
So this shape is really flexible for Black, he has a lot of possibilities to react to changes on the board.
To put in a nutshell: I think the first diagramme lacks spirit. It greedily takes the corner but either loses Sente or gives White a nice attack. It does not give Black any follow-up, he cut away his possibilities and White will have the chance to play his game.