Greetings,

I was recently introduced to a sequence(after joseki) to a fairly common joseki.
However I have gotten mixed feedback on which sequence that can be considered better/correct.

The sequence starts with move in the next diagram.



At that time I was taught that this is the correct sequence for black & white.


Later I was "re-taught" that black is the best option because of the sequence shown in the next diagram.


Over to some full board positions played in a recent game, three stones handicap against 2dan EGF. I played black.


Is there anything I am missing, maybe a sequence which is more common that I have missed?
What is to expect and which of the two sequences looks better for black? Locally and globally?

Thanks for any feedback.

- Ares89

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ +--------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . O . . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . O . . O .
$$ | . . . X . . . . . ,
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . 2 1 5 . . . . .
$$ | . . 3 4 . . . . . .
$$ | . . 6 . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X , . . . . . ,
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

In this variation, why not ? is it a bad move ?

In that one, I suppose this is what we call a table shape... a good shape is it ?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +--------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . O . . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . O . . O .
$$ | . . . X . . . . . ,
$$ | . . . 5 . . . . . .
$$ | . . 2 X . . . . . .
$$ | . 3 X O O 4 . . . .
$$ | . . O B B O . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . B , B . . . . ,
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .[/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

Hi Ares, who taught you ? What was (were) the level(s) of the person(s) who taught you these things ?

To tell the truth, I'm not 100% sure.
If I remember correctly, call me out if I'm mistaken, I do think I saw this in one of SandStorm3[AGA 5dan/KGS 4dan] lectures.
The second variation I was told that Hwang In-seong[8dan EGF?] had taught in one of his lectures. Which I do not have access to.

Edit: It was in SandStorm's lectures, he did not directly say that the move was bad,
but the way he presented it, it seemed like that was what he was trying to express.
Showing what I mean in the spoiler below:




Oca I believe this is the reason for why black should not play like that.

After looking at more pro games it seems there are a little mistake in my diagram:

Some links to similar pro games:

You can't say hane under or nobi is correct, it depends on the position. There is also the option of hane on top. With hane under and then push up after the cut you can connect and keep the territory but white gets thickness. With nobi you get split (bad in your game) but don't fall behind in influence. How much you can profit from the fight after nobi depends on the rest of the board. As for your game, is much too slow and non-urgent. Without thinking much I like the 2 space pincer on the top side.

Brings back memories.
When I was starting playing Go, this way of playing was very common, happened a lot. Especially after those two joseki:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ +--------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . O . . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . O . . O .
$$ | . . . X . . . . . ,
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . . 1 . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X , . . . . . ,
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

and

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ +--------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . X O . . . .
$$ | . . . X . O . . . O
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . . 1 . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X , . . . . . ,
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

The game often went something like that:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ +--------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . X O . . . .
$$ | . . . X . O . . . O
$$ | . . . 9 . . . . . .
$$ | . . 7 X . . . . . .
$$ | . . 2 1 5 . . . . .
$$ | . 8 3 4 . . . . . .
$$ | . . 6 . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X , . . . . . ,
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Or the admittedly less severe but still possibly playable:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ +--------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . O . . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . O . . O .
$$ | . . . X . . . . . ,
$$ | . . . 9 . . . . . .
$$ | . . 7 X . . . . . .
$$ | . . 2 1 5 . . . . .
$$ | . 8 3 4 . . . . . .
$$ | . . 6 . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X , . . . . . ,
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

The idea was to mess up Black's side a little while getting outside influence in sente. Sort-of similar to Black's plan in the below diagram.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +--------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . O . . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . O 6 2 O .
$$ | . . . X . 3 4 1 . ,
$$ | . . . . . . 5 7 . .
$$ | . . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . , , . . . . . ,
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

But I have not seen such plays in ages, and so never really thought much about the viability. When i was playing this myself I was too weak to really evaluate, and later my ideas became a little more complex (or even convoluted, depending on who you ask.)

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!