Pippen wrote:
Let me try a Tewari-Algorithm: ...:
1. Original position of stones
2. Re-shuffle move order of 1.
3. If a move in 2. looks misplaced (despite good plays from opponent) then this move in 1. was not a good one.
Dear Pippen,
This is NOT Tewari !!!
I assume that you refer to specification (1) of John's "definition".
This kind of Tewari is NOT simply changing the order of moves only, as you apparently understood.
It is always necessary that you have another position as reference from which you already know whether it is good (= already Jôseki in the original context) or bad (= better for one side). This reference position includes several of the stones placed as in your "new" sequence, but not all, as a matter of course.
After you have identified the "sur-plus" stones of your "new" sequence, you will play these (in an order as "realistic" as possible) to finally create the final position of your "new" sequence. For each exchange of moves you will eveluate whether it was better for one side, or "neutral". Combining the single results will give you your evaluation overall.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Therefore, you have to ask first, whether the sequence you want to evaluate, is really finished.
If the answer is "Yes", you have to ask yourself second, for your "reference sequence", whether the postion of Black 1, 3, and 5, vs. White 2, 4, and 6, is "Jôseki" (in the sense that neither side has the edge). As a matter of course, you could use the position until White 4 as a master, too, is your answer was "No".
Third step (provided that your answer was "Yes") is to evaluate the pros and cons of Black 7. I.e. asking whether you would like playing this stone elsewhere on the board.
Fourth step is to evaluate the pros and cons of White 8 in the same manner.
Last step is judging the combination of your single results.
_________________
The really most difficult Go problem ever:
https://igohatsuyoron120.de/index.htmIgo Hatsuyōron #120 (really solved by KataGo)