Is there a concept of Balanced Attack in the Japanese literature?

You need to define what you mean by balanced attack.

A specific example follows. It suggests a good way to play against the Chinese Fuseki, but also suggests a general approach to the category of Fuseki that depends on building thickness by attacking a weak group, I think of these as "Execution" strategies, sort of analogous to certain styles of sports plays where the opponent tries to use a specific well rehearsed strength to create and exploit a specific weakness. I call the following a balanced attack because its success depends on multiple groups that aren't all that strong, analogous to the sports where it is pretty well understood, that a balanced attack doesn't have isolated weaknesses, and doesn't depend on a singular success, IE no star player or extremely weak player, and there are multiple ways to score. Maybe sabaki or shinogi, though sabaki gets understood as sacrifice, and shinogi gets understood as deft handling.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 . 7 5 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1 . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

This is a bit of an aside, but what makes you think this is a good way to play against Chinese fuseki? I can find only one example in a database where this was tried at all.

I have a book that suggests the right side.

What book? If this was a reasonable, I would expect to having seen it tried at some point in professional games. The result does not look good for white to me.

Which game was it that tried this?

The only example I've seen of white playing on that side of the Chinese (from a two star formation).

If I modify the search to allow anything on the left side, I get four examples. The only other interesting one I thought was from 2007.

Both of those seem to have a single group.

The right part of the example I gave is from Cho Chikun vs. O Rissei, though I am not sure the diagram wasn't edited as a variation.

Maybe this which is a significantly different position.

Thank you. I didn't want to post too much copyrighted information from the book, and that helps seeing how it actually played out. White actually lost his sansan corner, but the capture of the R9-R12 group compensated.

As a bit of an aside...from what I have gathered from conversations with people who have access to Japanese go literature, given the sheer quantity of material in general, the answer to "Is there a... ...in Japanese go literature" is almost invariably yes (=

For god's sake! SmoothOper - Stop thinking on theory level! Go is not a philosophy! (and I really know what I'm saying because I have a philosophy master degree).
Jesus Christ... Give me a strength... You just created another topic about theory that does not exist, because all you are asking for depends on experience, which means practice, which means a lot of reading and positional judgment.

_________________
Tsumego/Tesuji apps for iPad, iPhone & Android devices:http://www.lifein19x19.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=7511

Forgive me, if I treat your post as hostile, but yes or no, does your masters degree in philosohpy(Which by the way isn't even a PhD) make you any kind of authority on anything but reading logical drivel written by the true masters of thought or the Chinese Fuseki for that matter?

You ask for theory about thing you should practice through playing games. You just don't understand that your questions are asked wrong. In this topic you just simply ask: "is there a book about theory of some sort of playing reached by practice?". In go books there is simple statement for example about "balanced attack" then a practice example and voila, next topic. There is no deep theory behind all this stuff you ask. There is just a hard work.

I mentioned philosophy because (and it's just my presuposition based on your posts) you think that go theory has some great depths. No. It hasn't. The practice of go, the game itself - has depth (in a specific meaning, I'm thinking here about process of learning, and a potential to improve somebody's skills), but not a theory itself. Theory will not solve any problems you have with your playing skills.

And yes, my degree is not PhD. Is it a problem for you? Have you any experience with european philosophy, cognitive science, philosophy of mind? Feel free to ask me prv about this stuff if you want to talk about it.

[edit: I added few words go because it was not clear about what depth I'm writing here, and it looked contradictory to my other thoughts about go, theory and practice, East vs West approach etc. ]

Have you thought about a different hobby, maybe one that makes a little better sense and doesn't suggest such a hard nosed approach to you?

SmoothOper, please play nice. Lobotommy's posts are worth reading and thinking about.


When you say "balanced strategy" are you saying, invade the same side twice, so that you don't have all your eggs in one basket? I would worry about starting a splitting attack against yourself, which seems to me to have happened in your given diagram.

_________________
Revisiting Go - Study Journal
My Programming Blog - About the evolution of my go bot.

I meant "Balanced Attack" specifically, but the idea is to do anything to avoid being that weak group that gets picked on.

I tried it in a game the other night. It seemed to work pretty well, at my level I don't think my opponent knew what hit him, though my plan didn't go exactly as expected. he made the two point extension instead of the low kick, so to keep with my plan, I chose the high shoulder hit. In retrospect that was pretty bad, even though I ended up killing his two heavy stones. In the future I will consider just moving out with the one point jump, which will be just as effective as a leaning attack on blacks two point extension.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

As for lobotomomy, I feel his thoughts are simply incoherent "noodling", trying to get me to give him concrete advice, since he has since revised his argument to include positional judgement from mere reading and tactics, and I feel if that is what he is doing he ought to be a little more respectful, so as not to give us "trolls" a bad name.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

The position on the right side features two eyeless white groups struggling against two strong black groups and a somewhat weak black group which is still stronger than each of the white groups and already has a base. In other words, White is under attack and tries to settle / sacrifice skillfully here, while Black is attacking.

If you would start asking questions and listen to the answers instead of asking a question only as introduction to your lecture, this might benefit you. Showmanship works tremendously well almost everywhere in our modern world, but in Go it never will earn you respect. Nobody starts as a master and every go player in the world is aware of that and most will show respect to someone eager to learn. If you are only interested in teaching, you better get strong before you start.