Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?

Bill Spight · **#21**

Fujisawa noted that Black retains sente, and produced the following diagram.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$ Good for Black $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . X . . . O . . . O X X . . . | $$ | . . X , . . . . . , . . . O O , X . . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O O . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O , . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X . . | $$ | . . X , O O . . . , . . . . . , X . . | $$ | . . . X X O . . . O . . . X . X . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

It is evident that Black is ahead, and still has sente. Black has a winning position. If the result of the joseki were even, then repeating it four times should leave an even result.

Altering the joseki by having White make the hanging connection instead of the solid connection does not alter the conclusion.

Kirby · **#22**

It's an interesting analysis. I'm not against the idea that the joseki might be favorable toward black, but this seems somewhat contrived, since direction and the global position matters. In the example given all of white's side stones are facing solid black stones.

Direction matters, because I feel white might not be as bad in a position like this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$ $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3 5 . . . | $$ | . . 9 , 0 . . . . 8 . . . 6 2 , 1 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

(Maybe we can argue that :b9:

is not the best choice, but the same could perhaps be said of white continuing to follow the same pattern in Fujisawa's example)

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

Now white has sente. Of course, this example is contrived, too. But since the direction and selection of joseki matters, it seems difficult to prove whether a position is even in this way.

It may very well be true that black has advantage for the joseki in question - it is nice to get sente and solid profit like this...

skydyr · **#23**

Kirby wrote:

It's an interesting analysis. I'm not against the idea that the joseki might be favorable toward black, but this seems somewhat contrived, since direction and the global position matters. In the example given all of white's side stones are facing solid black stones.

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

Now white has sente. Of course, this example is contrived, too. But since the direction and selection of joseki matters, it seems difficult to prove whether a position is even in this way.

It may very well be true that black has advantage for the joseki in question - it is nice to get sente and solid profit like this...

More than anything else, I think this particular example may show that if you play mukai komoku, you should not respond to the high approaches in this manner. Of course, I think I recall that Go Seigen has commented on this position as being advantageous to black, so take your pick.

Bill Spight · **#24**

Kirby wrote:

It's an interesting analysis. I'm not against the idea that the joseki might be favorable toward black, but this seems somewhat contrived, since direction and the global position matters. In the example given all of white's side stones are facing solid black stones.

Direction matters, because I feel white might not be as bad in a position like this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$ $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3 5 . . . | $$ | . . 9 , 0 . . . . 8 . . . 6 2 , 1 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

(Maybe we can argue that :b9:

is not the best choice, but the same could perhaps be said of white continuing to follow the same pattern in Fujisawa's example)

That was, in part, Fujisawa's point.

Go Seigen addressed this kind of position in his 21st Century Go series. Here is an SGF file with some of what he had to say.

Edit: Note that the nirensei seems to be of significance in Go Seigen's assessment. Note also how important it is for Black to keep sente in this joseki early in the game.

Kirby · **#25**

Thanks, Bill.

What's interesting to me from the SGF is the comparison of this:

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

to this:

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

Presumably, the first diagram is good for black - I think I can see this, because the marked stones are flexible, and black has potential for moyo on the left. White has some solid territory, but black has a nice global position. In the second diagram, white again has solid territory, and black appears more oriented toward the center. It is hard for me to wrap my head around the idea that black is behind, but if I have to guess, maybe black's center development is limited with white's move on the left... :scratch:

What do you think of the following type of development:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$ $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 8 0 . 6 . 7 . . . . . . . 2 . . . | $$ | . . 9 1 . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 5 . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 3 . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$ $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . 2 O O . O . X . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . X X 1 3 . . . , . . . . . , 8 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 0 . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

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

I'm trying to contrast this with Go Seigen's idea to see under what circumstances it might make sense to play out the joseki.

In this last diagram, black's right stones are somewhat center oriented, and black has the beginning of a framework on the left. Would this be good for black? In this position, :w4:

and

are somewhat annoying for black's development toward the center, but at least the stones seem to be more consistent than when white splits black on the left.

Bill Spight · **#26**

Kirby wrote:

Thanks, Bill.

What's interesting to me from the SGF is the comparison of this:

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

to this:

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

Presumably, the first diagram is good for black - I think I can see this, because the marked stones are flexible, and black has potential for moyo on the left. White has some solid territory, but black has a nice global position. In the second diagram, white again has solid territory, and black appears more oriented toward the center. It is hard for me to wrap my head around the idea that black is behind, but if I have to guess, maybe black's center development is limited with white's move on the left... :scratch:

In the second diagram I don't think it's that Black is behind as that White has limited his development. Black's moyo on the right is small, and if he extends it on the top or bottom, White can reduce it on the other side.

Quote:

What do you think of the following type of development:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$ $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 8 0 . 6 . 7 . . . . . . . 2 . . . | $$ | . . 9 1 . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 5 . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 3 . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$ $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . 2 O O . O . X . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . X X 1 3 . . . , . . . . . , 8 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 0 . . | $$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

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

I'm trying to contrast this with Go Seigen's idea to see under what circumstances it might make sense to play out the joseki.

I start with the tenuki as the default, and then think about whether it makes sense not to tenuki.

Quote:

In this last diagram, black's right stones are somewhat center oriented, and black has the beginning of a framework on the left. Would this be good for black? In this position, :w4:

and

are somewhat annoying for black's development toward the center, but at least the stones seem to be more consistent than when white splits black on the left.

Black has two frameworks. I like that.

Edit: I just noticed the tenuki for :b5:

in the next to last diagram. That's questionable, eh?

Kirby · **#27**

Bill Spight wrote:

I start with the tenuki as the default, and then think about whether it makes sense not to tenuki.

In practice, I probably often do this, too. I did this in my current Malkovich game, for example. Though, more than thinking of whether the joseki is even or not, I usually tenuki because I want to play somewhere else more than continuing the joseki.

Quote:

In the second diagram I don't think it's that Black is behind as that White has limited his development. Black's moyo on the right is small, and if he extends it on the top or bottom, White can reduce it on the other side.

Quote:

Black has two frameworks. I like that.

Okay, thanks. This seems consistent with my current understanding (although the meaning of black not being behind but having a "hard time overcoming the komi" is somewhat cryptic to me :-)

).

Thanks for the explanations.

Kirby · **#28**

Bill Spight wrote:

Edit: I just noticed the tenuki for :b5:

in the next to last diagram. That's questionable, eh?

I think it's a weakness that white might use to start a fight later. Basically, I wanted your thoughts as to whether black is still behind with the position on the right if he achieves center potential. In Go Seigen's diagram, like you said, white limited black's development. I wanted to create a position where this wasn't so much the case.

Bill Spight · **#29**

Kirby wrote:

Bill Spight wrote:

I start with the tenuki as the default, and then think about whether it makes sense not to tenuki.

In practice, I probably often do this, too. I did this in my current Malkovich game, for example. Though, more than thinking of whether the joseki is even or not, I usually tenuki because I want to play somewhere else more than continuing the joseki.

Quote:

In the second diagram I don't think it's that Black is behind as that White has limited his development. Black's moyo on the right is small, and if he extends it on the top or bottom, White can reduce it on the other side.

Quote:

Black has two frameworks. I like that.

Okay, thanks. This seems consistent with my current understanding (although the meaning of black not being behind but having a "hard time overcoming the komi" is somewhat cryptic to me :-)

).

Thanks for the explanations.

I have changed my mind about the two frameworks. I overlooked the tenuki in the top left corner.

As for not being behind but having a hard time overcoming komi, I would usually say that after only 18 plays White got the last move of the fuseki, and is so solid in the two right hand corners that the temperature has dropped a good bit. So if the board is about even, Black will have a hard time gaining 7 points. (I am trying to explain what Go Seigen said. My assessment is not so keen.

)

Kirby · **#30**

Bill Spight wrote:

I have changed my mind about the two frameworks. I overlooked the tenuki in the top left corner.

As for not being behind but having a hard time overcoming komi, I would usually say that after only 18 plays White got the last move of the fuseki, and is so solid in the two right hand corners that the temperature has dropped a good bit. So if the board is about even, Black will have a hard time gaining 7 points. (I am trying to explain what Go Seigen said. My assessment is not so keen.

)

Okay, that makes sense, I suppose. Regarding the tenuki, dailyjoseki.com lists tenuki as the most common pro response to the joseki in the top right: http://dailyjoseki.com/browse/bwpwxibxg ... owxmbwnwyd

Kirby · **#31**

I found some commentary on one of the 2013 Samsung Cup games between Lee Sedol and Tang Weixing.

In particular, this opening position was discussed:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$c $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 8 , . . . . . , . . . . . 1 . . . | $$ | . . 6 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 0 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , 3 . . | $$ | . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$cm11 $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . d X 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 7 . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . c 1 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 2 , . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . | $$ | . . . O . 6 . . . . . . . . 8 . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

The article indicated that this progression is somewhat popular, but there are pros with different opinions. Notably, apparently, Go Seigen pointed out that there are reductions from the center around A and B, and also endgame around C and D, so taking these into consideration, black on the left is not great.

In contrast, it says that Lee Sedol had reason for playing this way:
* Black played one less stone than white on the left, so he thought that it didn't have bad efficiency for black
* The shape had thickness

White has 30 points of solid territory and sente, on the other hand.

In the game, Lee Sedol lost, though, I suppose from this commentary, we can see that there are pros with varying opinions on the value of opening positions.

This is somewhat reassuring to me, since I am sometimes confused about what's best.

Bill Spight · **#32**

Kirby wrote:

I found some commentary on one of the 2013 Samsung Cup games between Lee Sedol and Tang Weixing.

In particular, this opening position was discussed:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$c $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 8 , . . . . . , . . . . . 1 . . . | $$ | . . 6 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 0 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , 3 . . | $$ | . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$cm11 $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . d X 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 7 . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . c 1 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 2 , . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . | $$ | . . . O . 6 . . . . . . . . 8 . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

The article indicated that this progression is somewhat popular, but there are pros with different opinions. Notably, apparently, Go Seigen pointed out that there are reductions from the center around A and B, and also endgame around C and D, so taking these into consideration, black on the left is not great.

In contrast, it says that Lee Sedol had reason for playing this way:
* Black played one less stone than white on the left, so he thought that it didn't have bad efficiency for black
* The shape had thickness

White has 30 points of solid territory and sente, on the other hand.

In the game, Lee Sedol lost, though, I suppose from this commentary, we can see that there are pros with varying opinions on the value of opening positions.

This is somewhat reassuring to me, since I am sometimes confused about what's best.

I agree with Lee Sedol about efficiency. And I am not sure that Go Seigen disagrees about that point.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code: [go]$$cm11 $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . | $$ | . . O , 8 . . . . , . . . . . X . . . | $$ | . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . 9 . . . . . , . . . . . , 4 . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 1 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . 2 , . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . | $$ | . . . O . 6 . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Besides, if Black plays :b13:

instead, then White has :w14:

. After that, can Black do better than to revert to the left side?

Slightly OT, since Lee Sedol's play was popular, would Ootakamoku's site say that :b13:

in this diagram is WRONG?

Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?

Who is online