Yeah, I wondered about your too Bill, that's where I try to play with a Black shimari in the top right and a Black 4-4 in the lower right when wedging - I wasn't sure if the application was the same here, so I played closer. Such a hard balance to get the point right, as always
Either extension makes it difficult for Black to come in on the 3-4 point and let White build a wall. But suppose that Black approaches on the 4-5 point and White secures the corner. Then White prefers the longer extension, no?
Edit: I wrote 3-5 instead of 4-5. Corrected now.
Author:
topazg [ Wed Feb 09, 2011 6:15 pm ]
Post subject:
Re: Go Back - Game 2
Yes, that's true - one of the reasons I picked the closer extension was the 5-4 approach joseki seemed to have perfect shape (high-low 3 point extension), and I wasn't sure if the knight instead of the kosumi to create that shape was too thin... heh, what a crazy game.
Author:
Bill Spight [ Wed Feb 09, 2011 6:33 pm ]
Post subject:
Re: Go Back - Game 2
topazg wrote:
Yes, that's true - one of the reasons I picked the closer extension was the 5-4 approach joseki seemed to have perfect shape (high-low 3 point extension), and I wasn't sure if the knight instead of the kosumi to create that shape was too thin... heh, what a crazy game.
I see I wrote 3-5 when I meant 4-5. Sorry.
Author:
topazg [ Thu Feb 10, 2011 4:15 am ]
Post subject:
Re: Go Back - Game 2
Fascinating, thanks Bill. I chose the tighter extension because I thought it worked better with the 4-5 approach. Having looked closer after your comments, my analysis would be:
Still looks kinda ok, and Black doesn't seem to have gotten a great deal from his invasion, especially when you consider that he's lost the extension from his shimari. If that really is the case, and locally Black's shimari extension is the better move than the invasion:
... Then this is better for White than the tighter extension. Unless, of course the increased aji in the final position still makes Black's invasion significantly easier - all above my pay grade! As always Bill, thanks for your insightful thoughts
And as an aside, presumably is too poor a shape for the following:
with only a 10 move history going back far in the past will be hard ... i am throwing my lot with , i has been told that points facing a shimari are big. I expect to be take back but i ll learn something. Here is my reasoning
I have the feeling that when is high it is sometimes ok to tenuki there but i don't know the specifics. Let the one who take my move back explain a bit my idea is that if W take the corner we will have another big point, say on the left. But if W plays a big point we will have more info to decider whether to block the corner C2 or to play B8 korean style or something else. corrected typos Edit2: as W i would be tempted to play on the left around C10 but that would let B set a perfect double wing formation.
Author:
Chew Terr [ Tue Jul 05, 2011 7:57 am ]
Post subject:
Re: Go Back - Game 2
Perceval: Personally, I prefer the obvious response instead:
My reasoning is: if white takes this point, she threatens to separate and attack the two black stones. This means that white can steal the corner in sente, yielding a lot of free points. Instead, black can take the corner, mostly in sente, and threaten to turn around and attack the approaching white stones. The extension on the right is fairly big, but not as big as you might think, since only one of the right-side enclosures are facing it. Long story short though, the biggest thing in the opening (perhaps game) is group stability, so if there is a double-sente group stability move in the opening, nothing but an outright kill seems bigger to me.
Author:
perceval [ Wed Jul 06, 2011 2:34 am ]
Post subject:
Re: Go Back - Game 2
Chew Terr wrote:
Perceval: Personally, I prefer the obvious response instead:
My reasoning is: if white takes this point, she threatens to separate and attack the two black stones. This means that white can steal the corner in sente, yielding a lot of free points. Instead, black can take the corner, mostly in sente, and threaten to turn around and attack the approaching white stones. The extension on the right is fairly big, but not as big as you might think, since only one of the right-side enclosures are facing it. Long story short though, the biggest thing in the opening (perhaps game) is group stability, so if there is a double-sente group stability move in the opening, nothing but an outright kill seems bigger to me.
get your point but i love B frameowrk here: [hide]
I'm not a huge fan of this for black. Black has two weak groups now, and even worse, they're right next to each other. Urgent before big ... yada yada yada.
I'm not a huge fan of this for black. Black has two weak groups now, and even worse, they're right next to each other. Urgent before big ... yada yada yada.
That's exactly the response I was going to post. Additionally, white has territory in 2.5 corners and opportunities for expansion, while black is basically ONLY going to get territory in the top right, anytime soon. The weak groups black is saddled with are too negative to be compensated for by any current advantages. I mean, if white attacks the leftmost black group from above, the whole left side is looking optimistic. Or white could choose to expand in the right side to R8, and doing so threatens the bottom and right-side black stones. Sorry if I sound a bit harsh, but lately I've been realizing just HOW much I've been suffering for leaving stones unstable and weak.
Author:
Redundant [ Wed Jul 06, 2011 8:00 am ]
Post subject:
Re: Go Back - Game 2
I've found that it sometimes helps to just keep a counter of your weak groups. If you have none, then you can play aggressively and invade. If you have just one, you should defend it before you can make another weak group. If you have two weak groups ... pray that they aren't at all near each other.
Author:
perceval [ Wed Jul 06, 2011 9:01 am ]
Post subject:
Re: Go Back - Game 2
Redundant wrote:
I've found that it sometimes helps to just keep a counter of your weak groups. If you have none, then you can play aggressively and invade. If you have just one, you should defend it before you can make another weak group. If you have two weak groups ... pray that they aren't at all near each other.
interesting, i didnt realize that it even worse if they are close to each other. It makes perfect sense of course once spelled out. Yes, urgent before big, but usually it s easy to assess that a play is big and difficult to assess how urgent soenthing is. To me this is the true difficulty with that proverb
Chew Terr wrote:
That's exactly the response I was going to post. Additionally, white has territory in 2.5 corners and opportunities for expansion, while black is basically ONLY going to get territory in the top right, anytime soon. The weak groups black is saddled with are too negative to be compensated for by any current advantages. I mean, if white attacks the leftmost black group from above, the whole left side is looking optimistic. Or white could choose to expand in the right side to R8, and doing so threatens the bottom and right-side black stones. Sorry if I sound a bit harsh, but lately I've been realizing just HOW much I've been suffering for leaving sto nes unstable and weak.
not harsh at all, to be fair i was already convinced by your first post above and i just pushed the discussion a bit to enter it further into my thick skull.
Author:
perceval [ Wed Jul 06, 2011 9:09 am ]
Post subject:
Re: Go Back - Game 2
as a consequence of the above .. i take back my own move and play the normal one:
Not getting a weak group here seems like a good idea, regardless of where white or black want to go with this game. Also an extension from top left. The ball is in black's court!
Author:
cyclops [ Sat Jul 09, 2011 4:24 am ]
Post subject:
Re: Go Back - Game 2
I like go back. Maybe now perceval's move at the right.
Author:
Loons [ Sat Jul 09, 2011 9:27 pm ]
Post subject:
Re: Go Back - Game 2
How do we feel about kibitzing the moves we are thinking of, versus playing a move (including normal planning) and then kibitzing go-back-ing if it seems desirable? I was quite happy with perceval's move and post-discussion-go-back.
too Bill, that's where I try to play with a Black shimari in the top right and a Black 4-4 in the lower right when wedging - I wasn't sure if the application was the same here, so I played closer. Such a hard balance to get the point right, as always 
seems really severe, so I figured Black couldn't play it, forcing instead:
is too poor a shape for the following:
and 
work well together.
, i has been told that points facing a shimari are big.
