It is currently Wed May 07, 2025 11:10 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 
Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Nirensei v Nirensei: Approach or enclose?
Post #1 Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 5:24 am 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 660
Liked others: 25
Was liked: 124
Rank: Miserable 4k
KGS: STOP STALKING ME
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$c
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . a . . . . . . . b . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]


I was thinking recently about the nirensei v nirensei fuseki when it occured to me that in the vast majority of cases, we tend to favour the approach rather than an enclosure. Given that approaches and enclosures have an equal weight in the fuseki stage, I'm wondering why is it that we tend to play a instead of b more often. I only used one pro game search, and an approach was listed as #1, followed by sanrensei at #2, and all the way to #8 at 5 out of 68,000 pro games was an enclosure like b.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Nirensei v Nirensei: Approach or enclose?
Post #2 Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 5:27 am 
Oza

Posts: 2180
Location: ʍoquıɐɹ ǝɥʇ ɹǝʌo 'ǝɹǝɥʍǝɯos
Liked others: 237
Was liked: 662
Rank: AGA 5d
GD Posts: 4312
Online playing schedule: Every tenth February 29th from 20:00-20:01 (if time permits)
Well, it is not really an enclosure because the corner is still open. Nirensei goes for quick development and so the enclosure seems contradictory. I am surprised that it is found even once in a pro database.

_________________
Still officially AGA 5d but I play so irregularly these days that I am probably only 3d or 4d over the board (but hopefully still 5d in terms of knowledge, theory and the ability to contribute).

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Nirensei v Nirensei: Approach or enclose?
Post #3 Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 5:28 am 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 660
Liked others: 25
Was liked: 124
Rank: Miserable 4k
KGS: STOP STALKING ME
DrStraw wrote:
Well, it is not really an enclosure because the corner is still open. Nirensei goes for quick development and so the enclosure seems contradictory. I am surprised that it is found even once in a pro database.


So only a 3-4 shimari is a true enclosure? What about the large knight 3-4 shimari where you can live in the corner?

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Nirensei v Nirensei: Approach or enclose?
Post #4 Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 5:35 am 
Oza
User avatar

Posts: 2414
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Liked others: 2350
Was liked: 1332
Rank: Jp 6 dan
KGS: ez4u
Abyssinica wrote:
... Given that approaches and enclosures have an equal weight in the fuseki stage, ...

I'm interested. What makes you think this?

_________________
Dave Sigaty
"Short-lived are both the praiser and the praised, and rememberer and the remembered..."
- Marcus Aurelius; Meditations, VIII 21

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Nirensei v Nirensei: Approach or enclose?
Post #5 Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 5:36 am 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 660
Liked others: 25
Was liked: 124
Rank: Miserable 4k
KGS: STOP STALKING ME
ez4u wrote:
Abyssinica wrote:
... Given that approaches and enclosures have an equal weight in the fuseki stage, ...

I'm interested. What makes you think this?


Probably Nick Sibicky videos when I was weaker in the "5 stages of the opening" thing.

No, I'm not saying a 3-4 approach has the same weight as a 4-4 approach. Chinese variants and Sanrensei aside, is it wrong to say that, in concept, they're about equal? Why is it wrong?

Enlighten me as to why a here is not just as big a move as b. Or c with D or any other combination you can think of.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$c
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . c a . . . . . . . . . . . b d . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Nirensei v Nirensei: Approach or enclose?
Post #6 Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 6:29 am 
Lives in sente
User avatar

Posts: 866
Liked others: 318
Was liked: 345
I think DrStraw answered your question perfectly. The 4-4 is played for speed of development. Having a presence in three corners after three moves is consistent with this purpose. 2/3 completing a corner isn't.

If you want the corner, a 3-4 opening can do it in two moves, and completing it ASAP is consistent with that purpose.

In your second, 3-4, example, I'd agree that approaching and enclosing are of approximately equal value. But, that is different than your original question, right?

_________________
- Brady
Want to see videos of low-dan mistakes and what to learn from them? Brady's Blunders


This post by wineandgolover was liked by: Shawn Ligocki
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Nirensei v Nirensei: Approach or enclose?
Post #7 Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 6:30 am 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 660
Liked others: 25
Was liked: 124
Rank: Miserable 4k
KGS: STOP STALKING ME
wineandgolover wrote:
I think DrStraw answered your question perfectly. The 4-4 is played for speed of development. Having a presence in three corners after three moves is consistent with this purpose. 2/3 completing a corner isn't.

If you want the corner, a 3-4 opening can do it in two moves, and completing it ASAP is consistent with that purpose.

In your second, 3-4, example, I'd agree that approaching and enclosing are of approximately equal value. But, that is different than your original question, right?


DrStraw did answer it succintly for this exact fuseki, but I'm responding to ez4u at that point.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Nirensei v Nirensei: Approach or enclose?
Post #8 Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 6:32 am 
Tengen

Posts: 4382
Location: Caldas da Rainha, Portugal
Liked others: 499
Was liked: 733
Rank: AGA 3k
GD Posts: 65
OGS: Hyperpape 4k
I think that the "approach is equal to an enclosure" rule of thumb may be mentioned by Yilun Yang in "Fundamental Principles of Go", but perhaps only with regard to a 3-4 point? The reason is that a 3-4 point wants an enclosing move, so it's often equally valuabel to either make it or prevent it.

On the other hand, a 4-4 point is more oriented towards large scale development. So approaching the opposing 4-4 point is very natural, as it aims at staking out a position across the entire bottom of the board, while preventing white from doing the same.

There are certainly exceptions to this kind of rule, and it does seem as if pros are putting more value on an enclosure from a 4-4 point recently. One example is White's reaction to the Chinese opening in the following position. However, I think that's still a bit of a special case idea, perhaps.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Wc
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

_________________
Occupy Babel!

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Nirensei v Nirensei: Approach or enclose?
Post #9 Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 6:44 am 
Oza

Posts: 2495
Location: DC
Liked others: 157
Was liked: 443
Universal go server handle: skydyr
Online playing schedule: When my wife is out.
Abyssinica wrote:
ez4u wrote:
Abyssinica wrote:
... Given that approaches and enclosures have an equal weight in the fuseki stage, ...

I'm interested. What makes you think this?


Probably Nick Sibicky videos when I was weaker in the "5 stages of the opening" thing.

No, I'm not saying a 3-4 approach has the same weight as a 4-4 approach. Chinese variants and Sanrensei aside, is it wrong to say that, in concept, they're about equal? Why is it wrong?

Enlighten me as to why a here is not just as big a move as b. Or c with D or any other combination you can think of.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$c
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . c a . . . . . . . . . . . b d . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]


Given either the top or the bottom having 4-4 stones instead, I'd much rather take a side point like K3/4 or K15/16 to prevent my opponent from getting there first, since they're big points for both sides. Certainly, if black makes an enclosure on the bottom right, white would prefer to take K3 or K4 to prevent black from getting it if white makes his own enclosure, as it would be a huge point, which may make K3/K4 more sente for black.

With all the stones on 3-4 like this, though, the top and bottom are miai as well, so black can give one up to take the other.

In this particular position, also, there's an open question of how to treat the left and right sides. Certainly each side would like the other to approach so that they can loosely pincer to build a strong formation from the other corner, but the symmetry again makes everything miai. I'd go so far as to say that if white's not planning on playing mirror go or otherwise to the miai of the situation, :w4: should have been played differently to break it up.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Nirensei v Nirensei: Approach or enclose?
Post #10 Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 8:11 am 
Judan

Posts: 6727
Location: Cambridge, UK
Liked others: 436
Was liked: 3720
Rank: UK 4 dan
KGS: Uberdude 4d
OGS: Uberdude 7d
Something to note about hyperpape's white enclosure against the Chinese opening (Gu Li likes it, it's my usual move too) is that this move is thwarting black's most valuable development direction of his Chinese framework from the 3-4 corner. For this reason black often approaches there first. Also answering when your 4-4 stone is approached is more urgent than answering when a 3-4 is approached: 4-4 double approach is more severe.

Another example of the sort of place you see it is here against a white Chinese opening:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$c
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . |
$$ | . . . 2 . . . . . , . . . . . , 1 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . 3 . . . |
$$ | . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . 7 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]


Ye olde opening theory might suggest taking the right side hoshi (or 3rd line), but then white approach is rather nice and black's moyo is just one one side of the board and has plenty of invasion points (marked). It's probably playable, certainly at out levels, but particular among modern Korean pros they seem to prefer getting some real territory over a nebulous moyo.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$c
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . |
$$ | . . . 2 . . . . . , . . . . . , 1 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . 7 . . . |
$$ | . . 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . 0 . . . . . 3 . . . |
$$ | . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . 8 . . a . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]


A common theme here is the knight's move is played not only for building yourself, but because you want to prevent your opponent from approaching there if it's a good direction for him. You could say the same for a 3-4 shimari, but as I said above approaching a 4-4 is more sente so it's generally easier to ignore the 3-4 approach. So the 4-4 knight's move has a reverse sente feel to it.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Nirensei v Nirensei: Approach or enclose?
Post #11 Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 12:34 pm 
Honinbo

Posts: 10905
Liked others: 3651
Was liked: 3374
The idea that approaches and enclosures are equal can be derived from the idea that the opponent's best move is my best move. And if they are gote, the average gain from playing either one is the same.

However, the approach is more likely to be sente, and in general a sente should be played before a reverse sente. And even when it is not sente, it is generally better to make a play with a good follow-up than a play without one.

You also have the global question of overconcentration or lopsided development, which is more of a danger with the enclosure.

All of which indicates that if you are unsure which to play, the approach is generally better.

I have proposed a heuristic for helping to decide between two gote plays, which is to treat them as miai and assume that if you take one, your opponent will take the other. (You do not have to play on the exact spot in the fuseki.)

Let's try it with your examples. :)

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$c "a" or "b"?
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . a . . . . . . . b . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]


First, let's look at the enclosure.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$c Enclosure?
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . W . . . . . . . B . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]


Well, we have an equal position.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$c Approach?
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . B . . . 1 . . . W . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]


With the double approach, the position is equal, but Black has a nice pincer with :b1: or one point to the right. This suggests that the approach is better.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$c "a" or "b"?
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . a . . . . . . . . . . . b . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]


First, let's look at the double enclosure.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$c Double enclosure
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . W . . . . . . . . . . . B . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . 1 . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]


With the double enclosure :b1: is the ideal point for both sides.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$c Double approach
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . B . . . . . . . . . . . W . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]


This position is more complicated, with no obvious advantageous play for Black.

Here the heuristic suggests the enclosure. :)

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.


This post by Bill Spight was liked by 4 people: Bantari, joellercoaster, Shawn Ligocki, SoDesuNe
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Nirensei v Nirensei: Approach or enclose?
Post #12 Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 4:10 pm 
Oza
User avatar

Posts: 2414
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Liked others: 2350
Was liked: 1332
Rank: Jp 6 dan
KGS: ez4u
Abyssinica wrote:
ez4u wrote:
Abyssinica wrote:
... Given that approaches and enclosures have an equal weight in the fuseki stage, ...

I'm interested. What makes you think this?


Probably Nick Sibicky videos when I was weaker in the "5 stages of the opening" thing.

No, I'm not saying a 3-4 approach has the same weight as a 4-4 approach. Chinese variants and Sanrensei aside, is it wrong to say that, in concept, they're about equal? Why is it wrong?

Enlighten me as to why a here is not just as big a move as b. Or c with D or any other combination you can think of.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$c
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . c a . . . . . . . . . . . b d . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

71%!
Yes, 71% of the time this position has occurred in the professional games included in SmartGo Kifu the professional Black has chosen to enclose the bottom right rather than approach the bottom left.

The interesting part of the OP was that in the face of clear evidence to the contrary (= actual choices made by hundreds of professional Go players) we persist in describing the world, err... Go board in this case, using verbal heuristics that do not fit the facts that we know. The first time I read it I was nodding my head along with A until I suddenly had one of those "Hmmm..." moments.

Although the original post on Nirensei vs Nirensei was interesting, so is this alternative fuseki pattern. It is relatively rare in pro Go. It is also a symmetrical one where there is a clear preference for enclosing next. There are many alternatives with an equally clear preference for approaching next. To me that shows there are no "givens" regarding enclosures versus approaches. Those terms are too general to be fruitfully applied to real fuseki choices. It is our desire to make sense of our complex world (d@mn! ...game, I meant game, as in, "Go is only a...") that leads us to such oversimplifications.

Of course YMMV! :salute:

_________________
Dave Sigaty
"Short-lived are both the praiser and the praised, and rememberer and the remembered..."
- Marcus Aurelius; Meditations, VIII 21

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Nirensei v Nirensei: Approach or enclose?
Post #13 Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 12:48 am 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 699
Location: Switzerland
Liked others: 485
Was liked: 166
Rank: DDK
KGS: aco
IGS: oca
OGS: oca
hyperpape wrote:
I think that the "approach is equal to an enclosure" rule of thumb may be mentioned by Yilun Yang in "Fundamental Principles of Go", but perhaps only with regard to a 3-4 point?

I'm currently reading that book.

Given the rules he give in its book, (and from what I undertstand of the book at my level)... I think the most valuable point would be a or b... (but saddly I think I cann't tell more why I think of that as that would mean I would then need to post copyrighted content :-? ...)

Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$c
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . a . . . . . , . . . . . b . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

_________________
Converting the book Shape UP! by Charles Matthews/Seong-June Kim
to the gobook format. last updated april 2015 - Index of shapes, p.211 / 216

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Nirensei v Nirensei: Approach or enclose?
Post #14 Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 12:52 am 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 660
Liked others: 25
Was liked: 124
Rank: Miserable 4k
KGS: STOP STALKING ME
Shouldn't "a" be on the third line if anything?

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Nirensei v Nirensei: Approach or enclose?
Post #15 Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 1:07 am 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 699
Location: Switzerland
Liked others: 485
Was liked: 166
Rank: DDK
KGS: aco
IGS: oca
OGS: oca
Abyssinica wrote:
Shouldn't "a" be on the third line if anything?

Sure that's possible too, what's important is that it take a point that is a large extension to both white hoshi.

_________________
Converting the book Shape UP! by Charles Matthews/Seong-June Kim
to the gobook format. last updated april 2015 - Index of shapes, p.211 / 216

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Nirensei v Nirensei: Approach or enclose?
Post #16 Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 12:46 pm 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 507
Location: Germany
Liked others: 176
Was liked: 46
Rank: terrible
OGS: paK0, paK0666
Universal go server handle: paK0
I think I watched a game that Redmond was commenting where he said that splitting on the 4th line was more modern style, but not really better or worse.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group