How do ya like this fuseki idea

Pippen · #1

Here is a sequence in the beginning of a pro game that shows that a split stone can be treated as a bait trap and left alone. (http://www.go4go.net/go/games/sgfview/41956)

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . 4 . . . . . 1 . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . 7 . , 2 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . 6 . . . . . , X . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . 8 . X . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Also, I'd be interested to see if this is an example where tewari doesn't work, because it seems if you reorder moves black and white play decent moves and the white's split move ends up being very bad which he wasn't in the original game:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . 2 . . . . . 1 . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . 7 . , 8 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . 4 . . . . . , X . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . 6 . X . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

skydyr · #2

Pippen wrote:

The idea for black is to see the split stone as a probe move and move on fastly (and later the stone might be used again). Is this good or does Black play overly aggressive? One of the most obvious problem is the pincer at "a" at which I'd jump out at "b" for I think going into the corner would be bad for Black because it would strengthen White there unnecessarily. What do you think?

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

It does seem like black is playing very lightly. If white responds very simply by closing the corner, would black make an extension or abandon his stone? If he abandons it for a move on the right side, it seems like white could break the game up into fairly small territories with a couple approaches at O3 and O17 if black pincers, and playing a standard san-ren-sei might be difficult with the black stones floating around the left side without a base. If they each get captured on a large scale, why didn't black just play san-ren-sei to start? If black protects, I imagine white would play R14 or a wedge to break up the right and then try and split F3 or so off.

I do wonder if :w6:

is a bit too local, though, and white should go for mutual damage on the right to similarly limit black's potential. White could probably mirror his way through a fair amount of the fuseki while keeping the game even, as tengen doesn't seem as big with the game broken into smaller but stable groups. Of course, I am nowhere near the level necessary to definitively conclude that :w6:

is right, wrong, or possible.

Regarding going into the corner: with the top side wide open, I agree that it wouldn't be great for black. Unless black can force life inside in sente, a white approach at O17 or so becomes quite large. White's thickness could also damage :b5:

more.

DrStraw · #3

I don't like abandoning :b5:

like that. If W caps it then B is in trouble. Also, I think :b9:

is questionable after W's large knight's move in that corner. Playing :b9:

at the lower side star point looks better.

lordish · #4

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

I studied this game recently, it might give you a better understanding about this kind of openings.http://www.go4go.net/go/games/sgfview/41367

Bill Spight · #5

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

As Takagawa pointed out, leaving :b5:

without a base can be OK when it prevents White from forming an ideal position on the left side. In such a case it can be treated lightly. This idea is similar to ignoring a pincer because you have prevented an enclosure. But less risky.

OC, :w6:

is open to question because :b5:

has lowered the temperature on the left side. :b9:

is also open to question. Why approach a corner when White has already made the reply to that approach?

Edit: skydyr's idea of playing a wedge on the right side with :w6:

would obviously create an equal position.

moyoaji · #6

An interesting idea. There is nothing wrong with treating a splitting stone lightly. Professionals do this all the time. However, I don't think I've ever seen it accompanied by a double approach like this. I'll start by saying that, in general, I don't like double approach fuseki for black because it will leave one or the other approaching stone stranded. That being said, I think there are other problems.

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

First, I don't like :b7:

here because it sort of forces white to hurt :b5:

. In general, we don't want to force our opponents to hurt our stones. This is why we don't generally atari in cross-cuts. Because the natural reply to :b7:

is to pull back to :w8:

I feel like :b7:

works against :b5:

.

Finally, let's look at this with tewari:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$c Black double approaches $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 4 . . . . . , . . . . . 1 . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 2 . . . . . , . . . . . 3 . . . | $$ | . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

The large knight's move at 8 is somewhat uncommon nowadays, but it is still seen and there's no reason why white couldn't play it in response to :b7:

.

So, where should black play :b9:

?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$c Black double approaches $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . c . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 9 , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

There seems to be several problems with this move. The first is that black cannot make a two space extension from it so it seems like 'a' or 'b' could be better invasion points. In fact, the move at 'a' is the most common reply to the large knight enclosure. (Although I believe it is usually played when black has the lower left corner)

Next, it is ignoring the development potential that both players have. With white's large knight extension on the top it seems like both players want to develop that part of the board. A move on the star point at 'c' would be nice. It also can be sente because the immediate 3-3 invasion of the corner leaves black with nice territory while white's influence would be hampered by the two black stones.

So overall I don't like the fuseki that much.

Bill Spight · #7

Let me second moyoaji's excellent tewari analysis.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$c Black 7 approaches from the bottom side $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 4 . . . . . , . . . . . 1 . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 5 , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 2 . . . . . , . . . . . 3 . . . | $$ | . . . . . 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

He expressed doubts about :b7:

, so let's consider the position after :w8:

.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$c Black 7 plays a wedge $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 4 . . . . . , . . . . . 1 . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 7 , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 2 . . . . . , . . . . . 3 . . . | $$ | . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Permuting the order of play, we first note that :b7:

is a wedge, after the temperature of the left side has already dropped. Then we note that it is misplaced, as "a" is the spot to leave a two space extension on either side.

Pippen · #8

Let me try to defend my idea^^(because maybe it can lead to a fruitful discussion). The idea is to use 5 as a probe, aji-maker and bait trap. So I'd answer to moyoaji: It just SEEMS bad to play a move like 9 in your tewari-example, because it isn't beautiful and intuitive. But when you calculate hard then 5 resp. 9 gets its value from his pure potential and from his disturbance of white's left side that is split for now. Since this value is not as clearly seen as in other moves, people consider it bad.

So basically the question is: Is the value of 5 so much lesser than if black plays e.g. a sanrensei instead? (Well, since no pro ever has played that way I know that I am walking on air here^^).

Bantari · #9

I also dislike this pattern, but don't really have anything to add to what moyoaji and Bill already said.

The only think that jumps at me, is that if you really really really want to play like that, and this is what crumbles your cookie, then I think that 5 might be slightly better placed high rather than low, on D10 rather than C10. I did not like the whole pattern enough to think about it hard, so its just an idear to look into, if you're so inclined.

moyoaji · **#10**

Pippen wrote:

So basically the question is: Is the value of 5 so much lesser than if black plays e.g. a sanrensei instead? (Well, since no pro ever has played that way I know that I am walking on air here^^).

If the stone is used effectively, any move becomes good. That was the whole idea behind Hikaru's "special ability" in the series. He would play a move that looked poor, but after 50+ moves it would become a great move in hindsight. This works when your opponent does not actively counter your move (as Ochi did in their game, setting Hikaru further behind).

Remember that your fuseki ends with white having sente. So, let's continue the game and see where :b5:

takes black. The exchange in the top left is a great way to start. :b11:

is the most common answer. Without some sort of move black's approach move is going from being "light" to being "abandoned."

After that (or before if you feel that black should not respond to :w10:

) which of these moves a-g do you like best for white? I personally think any of them are fine.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Wcm10 How will black use and/or white neutralize the marked stone? $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 1 . X . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . d . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . Y , g . . . . , . . . . . f e . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . b . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . a . . . . . c . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

skydyr · **#11**

Pippen wrote:

Let me try to defend my idea^^(because maybe it can lead to a fruitful discussion). The idea is to use 5 as a probe, aji-maker and bait trap. So I'd answer to moyoaji: It just SEEMS bad to play a move like 9 in your tewari-example, because it isn't beautiful and intuitive. But when you calculate hard then 5 resp. 9 gets its value from his pure potential and from his disturbance of white's left side that is split for now. Since this value is not as clearly seen as in other moves, people consider it bad.

This is fine so long as white can't capture 9 on a large scale, or cause it to become heavy. With 3 potentially weak stones, however, I would be reluctant to say that white can't capture one of them on a decent scale.

Quote:

So basically the question is: Is the value of 5 so much lesser than if black plays e.g. a sanrensei instead? (Well, since no pro ever has played that way I know that I am walking on air here^^).

Well, you're playing fundamentally different games. One says I want a big moyo, the other says you don't get a big moyo. So you're asking in a broad sense which is better, a moyo game or a more territorial game? As a secondary question, is :b5:

the best way to play a territorial game?

Boidhre · **#12**

Looking at it a different way:

You want a probe and you want to mess with white's influence on the left side. So why not:

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

White has to declare their intentions, you can treat :b5:

lightly or make a stable group insides white's best chance for influence or in their corner depending on what you want. You might be wanting to avoid the 3 space pincer variation here maybe?

Bill Spight · **#13**

Pippen wrote:

So basically the question is: Is the value of 5 so much lesser than if black plays e.g. a sanrensei instead? (Well, since no pro ever has played that way I know that I am walking on air here^^).

It is not the value of :b5:

, it is the value of the whole left side configuration. If you take the board after :b9:

and move

to the right side for a san-ren-sei, then Black is plainly better. My estimate is 4-5 pts. better. If :b5:

were unconditionally alive, then it would be about as good, as the sanrensei, but :b5:

is not only not alive, it does not have a base, and its space in which to form a base is cramped.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$c White's left side is less than ideal $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 4 . . . . . 7 . . . . . 1 . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 5 , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 2 . . . . . 9 . . . . . 3 . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

OTOH, IMO this is fine for Black. Again, :b5:

is not in good shape, but White has played three stones net on the left side, unforced.

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

By comparison, White has three net stones on the left side in a sanrensei. This is fairly plainly better for White than the previous diagram.

Pippen · **#14**

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 1 . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . Y , . . . . . , . . . . . 2 . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

In my eyes, Black got what he wanted: An own framework (san-ren-sei) and three light stones that'll keep white guessing what Black plans. One of the kakari stones will got an easy (loose) connection to the san-ren-sei and the other can be treated lightly. Black looks better here, because 1. the framework and 2. more stones around the board while White did fall into the trap of playing one-dimensional, because of the marked stone. What do High-Dans like Bill think of this situation?

p.s. There are two games in mastergo where a pro plays that way (but just looking at the side, not the whole board). If somebody has the bigo-database (http://bigo.baduk.org/assistant_databases.html#Full) then he/she might look if any high dan ever played that way.

Pippen · **#15**

Bill Spight wrote:

Pippen wrote:

It is not the value of :b5:

, it is the value of the whole left side configuration. If you take the board after :b9:

and move

to the right side for a san-ren-sei, then Black is plainly better. My estimate is 4-5 pts. better. If :b5:

were unconditionally alive, then it would be about as good, as the sanrensei, but :b5:

is not only not alive, it does not have a base, and its space in which to form a base is cramped.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$c White's left side is less than ideal $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 4 . . . . . 7 . . . . . 1 . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 5 , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 2 . . . . . 9 . . . . . 3 . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Well, the idea is this: If White wants to get 5 it has to invest at least two local moves. If White plays this way immediately then Black will get am early lead. If White waits, then nobody knows how the game evolves. Maybe 5 will play an important role. If not, Black can always treat 5 as a "wasted probe", losing just 2 points while keeping sente. 5 serves Black like a mosquito. It is too irrelevant to get after, but it can drive u crazy in certain circumstances. That - for me - is it's value.

ez4u · **#16**

My copy of GoGoD has 25 games that began as shown below since Kitani Minoru originally played it against Go Seigen in 1936. Although Kitani once played the large knight's move at 'g' (when Go Seigen turned round and played 5 in turn in another game that same year), he is the only person that has done so. Virtually all pros leave 5 and turn to the right side of the board (see 'a' through 'e'). However, I have to admire Shinohara Masami who immediately attached on top at 'f' in a game against Takagawa Kaku. Sixteen of the games were played in 1936-1941. It then disappeared until 1990 and has popped up occasionally since then.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$Bc Continuations $$+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + $$| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$| . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$| . . X f . . . . . , . . . . . e d . . | $$| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c . . | $$| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$| . . g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b . . | $$| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$| . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$| . . . . . . . . . . . . . a . . . . . | $$| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +[/go]

Statistics:
25 matches, Winner B: 40.0%, W: 60.0%
a: 6 times
b: 5 times
c: 5 times
d: 5 times
e: 2 times
f: 1 time
g: 1 time

Edit: Fixed some date errors.
P.S. It is perhaps worth mentioning that in the original '36-'41 period 15 out of the 16 examples were no-komi games. It makes more sense when Black can afford to look for a leisurely game.

Joaz Banbeck · **#17**

Pippen wrote:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 1 . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . Y , . . . . . , . . . . . 2 . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

...

Again, tewari analysis makes me uneasy about black's position:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$W $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 1 . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Black 2 looks misplaced.

Bill Spight · **#18**

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

Pippen wrote:

Well, the idea is this: If White wants to get 5 it has to invest at least two local moves. If White plays this way immediately then Black will get am early lead. If White waits, then nobody knows how the game evolves. Maybe 5 will play an important role. If not, Black can always treat 5 as a "wasted probe", losing just 2 points while keeping sente. 5 serves Black like a mosquito. It is too irrelevant to get after, but it can drive u crazy in certain circumstances. That - for me - is it's value.

You are focused on :b5:

. I don't think that anybody is objecting to :b5:

. (Although it is not exactly dynamic play.) It is the combination of :b5:

and the approaches, :b7:

and

that is problematic. At least, this early in the game.

Playing against this combination I would not worry about Black's plans, but would rather think that Black should worry about mine.

In this fuseki :b5:

is self-punishing. Black has induced White to weaken it. Now, maybe your opponents worry about it, but it is Black who should be worried.

wineandgolover · **#19**

Pippen wrote:

So basically the question is: Is the value of 5 so much lesser than if black plays e.g. a sanrensei instead? (Well, since no pro ever has played that way I know that I am walking on air here^^).

First, nice thread, Pip. It generates the sort of conversations that show L19 at its best. You've had some great responses.

Second, maybe your 5-7-9 aren't ideal, and maybe they cost a few points, but at our level a few early points pale into significance compared to the mistakes we make later. If this opening leads to the sort of game you like, then by all means, try it. If you lose, the opening won't be why. All IMHO, of course.

Go should be fun for amateurs. Let the best pros and manga fret over "the perfect move."

Pippen · **#20**

First of all I agree with wineandgolover. I play this split-fuseki-style, because I am not good when my opponent builds early frameworks. I tend to be too anxious in that case, resulting in overaggressive or overpassive play. Therefore I like to limit that and I wanna have "some stones everywhere" to feel "safer" (because with these stones it at least looks easier to invade/reduce -> makes me feel more comfortable -> better game performance than if you feel "something isn't going right"). So that style just "fits my personality" and so far it helped me. I also think that the higher (ranks) I'd come the more I'd realize the flaws of that strategy.

I am basically convinced you guys were right that my idea is - if we wanna talk Go analysis - suboptimal, but still this tewari method intrigues me.

Here's an example of what I mean:

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

The positon above is a good play from both sides, wouldn't u agree? Now I show you, how I can make Black look foolish, using tewari:

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

Now, 5 suddenly looks bad (at least to me!), because 5 could've occupied a corner. So it seems that tewari is not a reliable way to test a position for it seems to matter in which row moves were played. So how relible is tewari in your opinion?

How do ya like this fuseki idea

Who is online