What's wrong with this pincer?

CarlJung · #1

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

What's wrong with d, the two space high pincer in this case? The numbers below from moyogo shows that it is not a popular move. What makes a and b so much better? When would the two space high pincer be good?

a 49%
b 32%
c 10%
d 5%

Phelan · #2

Maybe White's low stable group on the lower right, plus white's 4-4 stone on the side of the pincer? I can't really explain it, but it seems that a pincer would not work so well with both of those in place.

Solomon · #3

Well looking at the global situation, we see that White's bottom right group is pretty solid and White also has a 4-4 on the left side. The first observation gives a good reason why 'a' would be the most played move because it's a defensive move that makes it more difficult for White to utilize her solid bottom group to make profit on the right side. The second observation explains why the 2-space high pincer may not be such a great candidate:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$c $$ -------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . c . . . . a . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . i . O . . b . . | $$ | . . . W . . . . 4 , 1 . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . 3 . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . X . . X . . O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ --------------------------------------[/go]

And a running fight occurs. :w4:

works especially well with the 4-4 because it attacks :b1:

and supports the 4-4 at the same time. There is the a-c joseki, but it's naive to expect White to play like that in such a global situation. So why is 'i' more popular than the two-space high?

Perhaps because its low placement allows Black to settle more easily (a stone on the 3rd line is, in general, easier to settle and live than a stone on the 4th line, which has more access to the center). Of course, White could try to play similarly and get a running fight:

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

The crucial difference is that White's running group doesn't have as many options for making base (compare the availability of L18 in the last two diagrams).

Note: These are just my own observations and not from what I've picked up in pro commentary/analysis, so I could be very wrong here (especially since I'm writing this at 5am)...but hopefully it makes sense.

I should also mention that Yilun Yang's "Whole Board Thinking in Joseki" Vol. 1 and 2 are essential when it comes to answering questions like these.

Bill Spight · #4

Unpopular does not mean bad. (Besides, MoyoGo statistics are based on both professional and amateur games, right?)

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

BTW, to the counter pincer I would not just run, but would try something like this.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$c What's wrong with this pincer? $$ -------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . O . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . X . . X . . O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ --------------------------------------[/go]

I like this pincer, myself. But I expect that its stats are quite low. What's wrong with it?

Chew Terr · #5

Also, that far away, isn't it easier for white to tenuki?

TMark · #6

Maybe there is nothing wrong with the pincer, but from GoGoD's database White doesn't approach the upper right, but normally approaches the lower left. I found 11 games where White played in the lower left and had a winning percentage of 63%.

Best wishes.

John Fairbairn · #7

As a quite separate point from T Mark's (since I took the question to refer to the top right-hand corner and not the whole fuseki), the usual reason given for the pincer being bad (when it is) is that White invades at the three-three point in a situation (as here) where Black has to block on the inferior side, the Q line). The pincer stone ends up badly placed, trying to surround an open-skirted territory when it was meant to be used to build thickness.

When Black is strong on the right and and would be able to block on the other side, however, and so build a wall, the by far commonest response for White is not to jump out as given here but to try and mess around with the right side by playing a second approach move there. Jumping out is, nevertheless, a possibility, most probably when it can be said that by chasing it Black would be driving White into his own moyo, which is another way of messing with a strong Black right side.

Of course, as Ben Disraeli 9-dan is rumoured to have said, "there are lies, damn lies and databases", but the figures quoted above do seem seem rather skew whiff to me. I'm guessing that what has been quoted is the number of occurrences found divided by the number of games found times 100, but the low approach to a star-point stone often occurs more than once in a game. At any rate, in GoGoD, the former figure comes out at 52% (in the same vicinity as the 49% quoted above). What I believe is the more accurate figure is 32%. Either way, this low knight's move defence is by far the most popular response, followed (almost only half as common) by the ikken tobi defence, not shown above. The low one-space pincer is just a bit less popular than that, but in figures adulterated by too many amateur games I suspect it comes up artificially high - at least it seems the most misplayed move I see among amateurs.

Bill: yes, your low non-pincer is almost off the radar at 1.6%.

CarlJung · #8

Araban wrote:

Well looking at the global situation, we see that White's bottom right group is pretty solid and White also has a 4-4 on the left side. The first observation gives a good reason why 'a' would be the most played move because it's a defensive move that makes it more difficult for White to utilize her solid bottom group to make profit on the right side. The second observation explains why the 2-space high pincer may not be such a great candidate:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$c $$ -------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . c . . . . a . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . i . O . . b . . | $$ | . . . W . . . . 4 , 1 . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . 3 . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . X . . X . . O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ --------------------------------------[/go]

Very interesting. It never occurred to me to consider the stable lower right, I only wanted to prevent something that plays along with his upper left. Half board thinking

Secondly, I never saw the counter pincer. It looks too sweet in relation to the left 4-4 and must be prevented!

What's wrong with this pincer?

Who is online