"Joseki choice" is one of the harder parts of the game for novices - probably up there with the endgame, though for diametrically opposite reasons. All you have to do (!) is to be able to imagine the outcome of the standard lines, impose them on the board position, and then assess the result (i.e. make a judgement). The factors in the judgement are best learned in examples, e.g. Yang Yi-lun's type of teaching.

So to simplify that a little, people tend to look what is in the adjacent corner areas (strong and weaker groups, high and lower stones, for example). It is harder to achieve anything against strong groups and low, well-fortified stones. Then this kind of reasoning can be used in a more approximate way, such as "if I'm building a group here, I'd prefer it to be on the right side rather than on the lower side".

In that way you can get clues as to direction, and they can be valuable even if (a) your opponent doesn't know the joseki you do, or (b) it is a special context and joseki don't necessarily give a right answer, or (c) there are too many variations (e.g. the normal low approach to a 4-4 point, where there are about 10 main ways to play, but you still have to choose a side), or (d) the variations include running fights, so they don't really end, or (e) sente is very important, so tenuki is an option.

Hi S2W,

I'm on an iPhone 4S sometimes (right now), which is difficult enough.
I can't imagine typing on an iPod !!! Wow.

Your fuzzy question is OK ( I used to ask them a lot;
I've since learned. )

In this limited thread space, you'll usually see two types of replies:
- fuzzy ones (words, words, words — e.g. posts 15—19, 21);
- very short, specific ones, with only a few shallow variations.

Both are merely a start, like the first 1/2 step in a 1,000-mike journey.

tenuki.

Heuristics often are traps in Go. You want to start to learn about
the double approach ? Play it everywhere, then have the games reviewed.
You'll die many horrible deaths. You'll also get some
good results from the double approach.

Words alone don't cut it. Let's see specific variations!

You can be the first kid on your block to use it.



Indeed it is a strategic option in its own right. It may be best to view a double approach (there are others) as a counter-pincer. Responding to a pincer with a counter-pincer is a common option in just about every joseki.

In the actual game the result after the 3-3 response was predictable. It is then obvious that Black has to do something about the huge White framework, and what do to about it is not obvious. It is like the old joke where the patient tells the doctor, "Doc, it hurts when I do this," and the doctor replies, "Then don't do that." Why make problems for yourself?

The double approach avoids that problem and besides, there is plenty of room for the double approach stone to make a base.

As Charles Matthews indicates, this is a question of judgement. You develop judgement by exercising it. Experience is your teacher. There is an unavoidable aspect of go of jumping into the river to learn how to swim. One reason, IMO, for not studying joseki too early on in your go career is that if you merely follow joseki you are not exercising your judgement. (There is judgement, too, in the choice of joseki, as Charles indicates.) In any event, sooner or later in every game you will have to rely upon yourself. The sooner the better, IMO.

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Thanks for clearing that up Bill.

Ed/Bill/Charles I've taken your advice about trying it out and played two double approaches on dgs - in 30 days or so we should see how they work out .

I also did a search of some pro games to see if I could find when the double approach was played in a similar context and the likely continuation. For my own edification here's what I found/worked out as a possible continuation:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Moves 10 to 14
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . O . , . . . 4 . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . 2 . 1 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Admittedly I didn't find any pro games with a stone quite so close on the rhs - but there were a few with weak groups on the equivalent of the upper rhs and the response was still to attach to the stone (then again maybe there is a stronger response here). This allows black the opportunity to approach the upper right group and settle their stones with something like (this last move may be wrong - I'm winging it a bit).

It seems the advantage here over just playing straight out is that white has to respond twice to giving black the extra time to attack. White gets a large potential but there is still aji in the first black stone and the territory is perhaps not that big/solid anyway because black can still come back to the corner or play the monkey jump from the other side.

How did I do?

Ps. For next time: "Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds" - loads of blood, lots of terrible play, will I emerge victorious?

Pps. I also played the infamous center shimari on wbaduk - and won! That was a weird game. Unfortunately no kifu as usual.

It's an interesting topic: one of the remaining areas where "good amateur go" probably still has plenty to learn from "pro tacit knowledge". Just looking round this site, there seem plenty of examples.

You can learn the technique, but the application of the technique brings up issues. (I understood more about this matter when bothered by the "middlegame joseki" concept that was quite prominent in early go literature in English.)

There are actually two approaches, and it is as well to be aware of the difference.

The first is pragmatic: don't sweat the small stuff, and realise that joseki choice decisions often only make a difference of a couple of points. Middlegame decisions are often worth ten times that much. Endgame decisions may also only be worth a point or so, but there are many more of them.

The second is perfectionist. Is there a simple play that seems "perfect"? It should make your stones appear as well-organised as possible, while casting doubt on the organisation of your opponent's stones. Are you being minimalist (playing a vital point in a vital area), rather than fooling around? If you are giving up sente, are you getting enough for it? If these criteria are not met, then you really need to try harder, going for a more complex variation, but not for its own sake. I think this is the way to get stronger, in fact.

There is a great deal to be said for approaching on the open side, transferring your weight to the other foot, tenuki variations, and generally for forward momentum in the opening. These lead not into the shape-fixing style of joseki, which are quite restricting in some ways, but to positions where you get tested on understanding of frameworks, and sabaki in the broad sense.

In http://lifein19x19.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=8637&p=141736&hilit=wbaduk#p141736 I posted a method, which is a bit cumbersome but at least worked well for me to extract some wbaduk games from iphone (not sure, if it also works with an ipad, though).

Thanks schawipp - I've got a Mac at home but it's good to know there's a way - if I work out an equivalent method for osx I'll let you know.

Another two games - the first is a hot mess which I can only assume my opponent lost after being lulled into a false sense of security by repeated terrible play.

The second was a similar game but (I felt) much better handled by myself.

I'm on a bit of a winning streak at the moment. Despite game 3 I feel that I'm almost at that tipping point where 9k is comfortable and 8k inevitable (it may still take a while to get it though).

Game 3


Game 4


Ps. There's comments throughout the first file but no so many vatiations. I'll fix that with the next game.

I say bravo! You did some research and then followed that up with your own thinking.

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

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Game 5

Another igs match and a loss - on the plus side I liked how I fought and ran out my groups. I paid careful attention to life and death and nothing major died - plus I found some good attacks. On the minus side my inability to deal with the 34 low pincer left me tied in knots.

Try the O5 variation to keep out of trouble.

S4 is the shape point.

The proverb says one line further.

Not only do you have an issue with the dogleg: the case for E3 is better than for E4. But the case for F3 is even better here.

Thanks Charles - I'll try the o5 joseki (..after the next game... - in fact you probably want to skip the review and just cut and paste ...)

I realize I've gotten used to playing and expecting certain joseki in part out of force of habit and in part due to positive reinforcement from my opponent's bad play - the 34 high approach is probably the best example of this - I play it expecting my opponent to attach. It's also true of jumping in the corner (though I still like those concrete points better than jumping out).

First off my appologies to Charles and everyone else reviewing my games - I promise I do study up on them quite intently and have been making an effort to incorporate them in my play. This game though ... I studied up hard, prepared myself mentally, sat down to play and repeated the last game. Well close to it anyway - the mistakes and play are close enough that I'm not expecting any reviews. I'm mostly keen to keep it in the journal for reference.

A couple of extra points about the game:
1. I did change a diaper in the middle of it and convince a cheeky 4 year old to go back to bed (unfortunately that was all after I repeated my mistakes from the previous game).

2. I still can't count - I was convinced I had lost the game fairly badly but ended up ahead by a respectable amount. I think in part this was due to being well behind in the middle game.


Game 6



In other news I also played in the real world today - an 8 stone handicap against an AGA Dan. I lost but only by 9 points (admittedly he was playing someone else at the time).

The logic of go says you play L3 and then jump out, with an OK result.

White has "developed on both sides", which is considered a plus. But not with great shapes. And is small, should extend rightwards.

White is overconcentrated on the left, Black has been playing more freely: this result is not bad.

Play F15, and White (who is a crude fellow) can't afford to cut.

Goes at K14, even K13.

Game seems better, overall.

Thanks Charles - the game felt so similar I really wasn't expecting a review - thanks again.



I guess this is why I don't like playing against the pincer: If I don't find a way to exploit whites bad shape then I'm left with a tiny corner or possibly a weak group. So the trick is to learn how to harass white when the joseki is over (and keep sente coming out of the joseki). Time for some study.

In other news I found another one of my games on the site - how great is that! http://www.lifein19x19.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=171222#p171222

I continue to believe that 34 diagonally across from a 44 is a mistake - even if I havent been able to make it work with the low pincer - my feeling is that it leads to a similar position to playing 34 on the same side as the 44 but facing the wrong way - which lets b get a big triangular framework right off the bat. Anyway I obviously need to do dome work on my response to the pincer regardless so here's some ideas that I worked out with the help of smartgo kifu.

Not a game 1

Ed,

You say tenuki, I say tenuchi ...
a.
b.
c.

Hehe - I only just saw that thanks for pointing it out.

... Fill it up.

Sigh - I shouldn't have played tonight - I was tired, the kids were restless - bad juju all around. But if waiting for the perfect conditions were my criteria for playing I would never play. I was within one game of 8k - now I am within 3.

First game was a bit of a massacre - the baby tesuji at the end didn't help but really it was a direction of play mistake on my behalf (and poor play in the corner) that did me in (and boy once I started loosing did I really start loosing). The second game was better - but I was fighting at the end to make up the points - so I must have made some slow moves early on. Endgame was not great either. Need to review to see if it is worth sharing (I might just be tired and my mistakes obvious).

Edit:

Well the second game wasn't as bad, and quite close in the end 8.5 points with .5 Komi, so I thought I should include it after all.

Game 7

Two more games and two more losses. In the second I had to stop playing for a few minutes near the end and my ipod dropped out just after counting so I think I came off as pretty rude - apologies to JohnSm19. Both were two stone handicaps with me as white. I made some simple reading mistakes and didn't move my stones around enough.