How do you punish the 4-4 approach to the 3-5 opening?

When I started playing go I played the 3-5 all the time and it still is my favorite opening.
When I started go a few years ago, I played a game where my opponent approached at the 4-4 against the 3-5, I answered something like the 3-3 and later lost the game. I then took it to have it reveiwed and I had it reveiwed by someone that trained under or with Takeshi Sakai. Takeshi Sakai use to administer a go server that was hosted in japan a few years ago and some of the people that studied with or under him would often play on it, it was here that I was lucky to have my game reveiwed.

The focus of his reveiw was on the 4-4 approach and on how to properly punish it and that it was a mistake to begin with.
He said with out hesitation black should immediately play the 3-5 on the other side no thought about it just play it unless it is closer to mid game and if there are other white stones along the sides or in the area to be support, and then he went about a few variations saying that black can easily get away with both sides, the corner and a side, or some other odd variations and that unless black did something increasingly stupid the result is in most cases are in favor of black.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . 1 . . . .
$$ | . . . O . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

I asked about answering at a contact play of either A or B.
I was told that A turns into Avalanche and B dosent punish it lets white off.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Corner
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . a O . . . . .
$$ | . . X b . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Now some what recently I got into a heated debate with someone about how to answer it. Trying to be polite and open minded about it I was quite rudely told that I should go read some joseki books, look at josekipedia, or some countless other things.
So out of curiosity I looked through some and most or all state that to punish play B from above.

So I want to ask what are you people in favor of, what are your thoughts on it in this position do you have any variations of why or why not ect ect..

_________________
Only a child can ask questions that the wise can not answer.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 2 . 1 . . . .
$$ | . . . O . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Just keep it simple. This way Black is already in pieces.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bc
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . O . X b . . .
$$ | . . . O 2 3 . . .
$$ | . . X 4 1 . . . .
$$ | . . a 5 . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

is not intimidating at all. This is kind of like a hamete shown in Lee Changho's book on hamete:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . B . . . .
$$ | . . . 1 . . . . .
$$ | . . X . 2 . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

The difference, of course, is that Black already has the marked stone and White dives in with before Black tries to shut it off with . The best way to handle this for White is shown in the book to be:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 5 . X . . . .
$$ | . . . O 1 2 . . .
$$ | . . X 3 X . . . .
$$ | . . . 4 . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Which looks rather familiar.

Well in most of my games at my level people rarely play white at 3 in your variation.
And I personaly dont ever play at 4 in this situation, I always got something like...


And as I said in most of my games at my level people rarely play white at 3 in your variation so I would get.

In cases I do play a cap.


In your variation I could never understand why black would play 4 in the given situation because the points you noted, I always considered it to be mistake play. Could someone explain the reason someone would play it?

**Edit added Hide tags to clean up clutter and added last statement and question.**

_________________
Only a child can ask questions that the wise can not answer.

This can't be good for Black. I would simply go out as White:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . 1 . . . .
$$ | . . . O . . . . .
$$ | . . X . 2 . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Now, if Black goes to 3-3, White is simple to play:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

This is horrible for Black, as his lost all purpose.

If Black extends on a side, I think that White should block the corner
to that side:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . 4 1 . . 3 .
$$ | . . . O . . . . .
$$ | . . X . 2 . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

That way, the upper group is still not safe, so attacking it or the
lone black stone is still miai for White.

In response to the 4-4, I would tend to answer like this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . 4 . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . 1 3 . . . .
$$ | . . X 2 . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

This would meet my expectations for a shoulder hit: White gets some
stones in, Black keeps the points.

Note that blocking with is not good:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . 5 6 . . .
$$ | . . 3 1 4 . . . .
$$ | . . X 2 . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Black would get too thick on the outside; White cannot resist.

_________________
A good system naturally covers all corner cases without further effort.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . 1 . . . .
$$ | . . . O . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Even without intense analysis, this is one of the fundamental "bad shapes" for black. See Sensei's, search for "elephant's eye".

At times it can be acceptable, but they involve neighboring stones. If the board/area is empty, you should have red flags blaring.

_________________
1k KGS

You posted way too many variations for me to look over, consider something like this then:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 3 . 2 6 . . .
$$ | . . . 1 5 . 4 . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . a 7 . . . . .
$$ | . . c b . . . . .
$$ | . . d . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

It's not even the that matters, it all boils down to the plain and simple fact that Black has to handle 2 groups while you only have to handle 1. Any variation that exploits this will be advantageous. 's purpose is to prevent Black from making a base at the corner to ensure the groups are separated.

Of course, even if Black does take the corner, because of the bad connection relationship between C15 and E15, one of his two groups may still end up injured as seen in Harlequin's variation:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

Though if I was playing Black, I'd probably try to negotiate like this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$c
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 3 . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . 1 . . . .
$$ | . . 4 O . . 5 . .
$$ | . . X . 2 . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Regardless the idea behind that is still the same - ensuring separation.

Hmmm... Well I have had increasingly good luck by playing in such a way, if its considered a bad move to a high player then, I probably use it against people around my level because I know that they do not know how to deal with it properly and thus use that to my advantage. But even then when I do play against someone that plays correctly or quite decently I never get a result that I am not happy with.
So do I continue using this move or do I unlearn this bad habit?

_________________
Only a child can ask questions that the wise can not answer.

Unless you don't intend on improving, the answer should be obvious.