So I came accross this trick play:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 1 . . . . . .
$$ | . . . O . . . . .
$$ | . . . , . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

What are your thoughts? How to respond?

Some ideas:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 1 4 6 8 . . .
$$ | . . 2 O 3 . 7 . .
$$ | . . . , 5 . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . 9 . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

White ends up very low

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 1 2 . . . . .
$$ | . . 3 O . . . . .
$$ | . . 5 4 . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . 6 . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

White's wall feels thin, black gets a large corner and sente to neutralize the wall.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 1 . . . . . .
$$ | . d 3 O . . . . a
$$ | . 2 4 5 7 . . . .
$$ | . . B 6 9 . . . .
$$ | . . 8 0 c . . . .
$$ | . . . . . b . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

at a, b, c or tenuki, depending on the position?

The stone at makes d sente for black as well, but when do you play it?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

Still plenty of aji in the stone. and are bad style/shape

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 1 . . . . . .
$$ | . d 3 O . . . . a
$$ | . 2 4 5 7 . . . .
$$ | . . B 6 9 . . . .
$$ | . . 8 0 c . . . .
$$ | . . . . . b . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Isn't 'd' double sente, or at the very least, will turn into sente very early for white? I would probably play it straight away as black. If white ignores, he has a much weaker group on his hands. It does sacrifice a bit of aji though, but not a lot.

I wish I had time to post more thoughts, but I have to run to class now.

_________________
We don't know who we are; we don't know where we are.
Each of us woke up one moment and here we were in the darkness.
We're nameless things with no memory; no knowledge of what went before,
No understanding of what is now, no knowledge of what will be.

Very interesting position

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B starting position
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 1 b . . . . .
$$ | . . a O . . . . .
$$ | . c d . . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

A
Just above looked submissive to me, hence I would try to induce it by cutting first,
to make it look like a good move.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

However ...

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

if B then also exchanges to this here,
then I am back to square one in this 'fight for shape'.
Here I would like to ponder further on (which I cannot do right now (work ))

Very difficult (because evaluation of shapes) and I just gave my initial thoughts.
All other diagrams I evaluate prima facie inferior anyway.

Going back to the starting position, we see that you offered options A to D until now.

D
Many dan players would (appeal to authority) - agree with me that option D appears to be one of the worst shapes in general.
In vicinity of the edge, the corner and in need for sente, there might be exceptions (which might 'proof the rule' - still, I am not convinced.

B Your diagram for B has some appeal to me. However, B could reduce immediately a W wall to nothing. Only possible if there would be already a W stone in a decent distance.

C In contrast, option C looks so good for B, as you could imagine another B stone at one of the options you gave (B11 = C).
For full-board evaluation I had to discount the tally then, i.e. that B would have played twice more in this position (the 'hamete' + the last gote).
This is a difficult mental operation, as I do not know WHAT could have been played elsewhere. If I assume two corner stones or 1 shimari for White, then I still might prefer this option for White.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B B11 = C
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 1 . . . . . .
$$ | . d 3 O . . . . a
$$ | . 2 4 5 7 . . . .
$$ | . . B 6 9 . . . .
$$ | . . 8 0 B . . . .
$$ | . . . . . b . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

_________________
Greetings,
Tommie

3dan EGF (AGA no 13477) || Tommie on KGS: 'June'|| DGS: 'Zhi Laohu' 纸老虎 = 'paper tiger' || Senseis : http://senseis.xmp.net/?tderz ||
ENFP (MBTI) - 'Find your own style within the Fundamentals of Go! '

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X O O O . . .
$$ | . . O O X . X . .
$$ | . . . , X . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . X . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . O O X . . . .
$$ | . . O X . X . . .
$$ | . . O X . . . . .
$$ | . O X . . . . . .
$$ | . O X . . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

let's compare one of your diag and compare with simple well known joseky.
in my opinion they are not much different.
you must remember that black played one more stone on the corner to get that advantage.
in my opinion they yield similar result.

personally i like below diag the most

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . X O . . . . .
$$ | . O O X X . . . .
$$ | . . X O X . . . .
$$ | . . O O . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

_________________
"The more we think we know about
The greater the unknown"
Words by neil peart, music by geddy lee and alex lifeson

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

This is my first instinct

Yes, I agree these are similar. But the 3-3 invasion under 4-4 is not really a general purpose joseki, but mostly played in specific circumstances where the resulting outside black wall is not totally effective. White gets completely locked into the corner. If we compare with another simple and reasonable joseki:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . 7 1 3 . 9 . . .
$$ | . 5 2 X 4 . . . .
$$ | . 6 8 . . . . . .
$$ | . . W 0 . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . X . . . . .[/go]

Here, black also plays one more stone, and white also gets territory in exchange for influence, But now the stone is outside and influences the rest of the game. Normally, this is just better for white than the above two diagrams.

This is why white normally approaches on the outside (at in the diagram) instead of invading 3-3 directly.

Now black will cut, of course.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bm9
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | 8 6 X X X . . . .
$$ | 7 3 O O X O 2 . .
$$ | 0 4 5 O O 1 . . .
$$ | . . X . 9 . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bm19
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | O O X X X . . . .
$$ | 2 1 O O X O O . .
$$ | O O X O O X . . .
$$ | . 5 X 3 X . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

@

And white collapses.

So let's complicate things then:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 1 5 6 8 a . .
$$ | . c 2 O 3 7 b . .
$$ | . . . d 4 . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

There are so many possibilies for black now; a-d all look interesting. Will white be OK?

_________________
My name is Gijs, from Utrecht, NL.

When in doubt, play the most aggressive move

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm9 With ladder
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X X X . . . .
$$ | . 3 O O X O 2 . .
$$ | . 5 . O O 1 6 . .
$$ | . . X . . 4 . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm9 Without ladder
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . 7 X X X . . . .
$$ | . 5 O O X O . . .
$$ | . 6 . O O 1 3 . .
$$ | . 8 X . . 2 . . .
$$ | . . . . 4 . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Second one smells bad though I think one of your variations is better without the ladder, though I've seen worse. That single captured stone has some useful aji still.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm9 No eye for white
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X X X . . . .
$$ | . 3 O O X O 2 . .
$$ | . . . O O 1 6 . .
$$ | . . X 7 5 4 . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm9 Sacrifice
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X X X . . . .
$$ | . 3 O O X O 2 . .
$$ | . . . O O 1 . . .
$$ | . . X 6 5 4 . . .
$$ | . . . 7 8 . . . .
$$ | . . . 9 . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

But I like the exchange for black, sacrificing to get and

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bcm9 Without ladder
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X X X . . . .
$$ | . . O O X O . . .
$$ | . . . O O 1 3 . .
$$ | . . X . . 2 . . .
$$ | . . . . 4 . . . .
$$ | . . . 5 . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

I would want to look at this instead

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

This move, maybe? If black tries to connect underneath, he'll get screwed by the cuts. So he needs another move, but I can't see another good move.

My instinct would be to push up, like this:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bm5
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . 3 . O . . . . .
$$ | . . . O . 2 . . .
$$ | . . X 1 . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

If white jumps out, the connection under works again.

So white should try to cut?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bm5
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X 4 . . . . .
$$ | . . . O . 3 . . .
$$ | . 2 . O . . . . .
$$ | . . X 1 . 5 . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Now there is still some aji in the corner

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bm5
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . 2 4 O . 5 . . .
$$ | . 3 . O . . . . .
$$ | . . X 1 . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

And this is really a complete disaster.

Black a looks devastating, e.g:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bm9
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X X O O 1 4 .
$$ | . 7 O O X X 2 6 .
$$ | . . . . O 3 5 . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bm9
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . 5 . . . .
$$ | . 4 X X O O 1 . .
$$ | . 8 O O X X 3 . .
$$ | . 7 . . O 2 . . .
$$ | . . X 6 . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 9 . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Interesting!

Sorry that i'm too lazy to look into how to create diagrams , but I would like to say that your first post is a great result for White in my opinion. (where you say White ended up too low)

If someone gets my following sentences, please illustrate a diagram for me (if they think it's worthwile )

Lets imagine Black 1 at 5, White in response slide with 8 (which is a dubious move, but we can't say it's a bad one). Black then proceeds to exchange 3 with 6, which is clearly damaging. He then exchanges 1 for 2!!!

He then proceeds to jump with 7, and White in return play the thick move of 4 removing all the aji in the corner. Black then takes gote with a protecting jump.

There is two important factors here:

Like Magicwand said in his post:

1. It was Blacks corner from the beginning, he should get the better result locally.
2. White gets sente.

So in this local corner, Black plays 2! more moves than White, and locally I think the position is even (White after all has 10 points of points, and Black still has some defect in his shape like White's peep at 5-5.

(Is my point understandable? I do know how to create an sgf file, I can do that otherwise =) )

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Like this?
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 5 . 4 2 . . .
$$ | . . 6 O 3 . . . .
$$ | . . . , 1 . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

FWIW, I looked into my database and came up with very few results (which is understandable if it's a trick play). But every time Black played white had another stone in the vicinity.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W this was the only time I found this sort of play
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 4 . . . . . .
$$ | . . . 1 . . . . .
$$ | . . . , . . . . .
$$ | . . 2 . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 3 . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

I then consulted sensais library and kogo's, but they had neither the trick play nor this response to a 34 point low pincer. Would have been too easy

_________________
While I was teaching the game to a friend of mine, my mother from the other room:
"Cutting? Killing? Poking out eyes? What the hell are you playing?"

I think Fredrik is talking about this position?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 1 4 6 8 . . .
$$ | . . 2 O 3 . 7 . .
$$ | . . . , 5 . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . 9 . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

I think black only played 1 extra move here. So that makes it comparable to invading 3-3 under a 4-4 stone. I agree with others that said usually invading 3-3 is not good early in the game.

So one solution would be to call B1 here premature, and simply tenuki. Where is black's severe follow up? If he plays the 3-3 point then it's similar to black opening 3-3, and doing a 1 point extension from it. And then white makes a forcing exchange. No big deal.

Later if black doesn't add another move, the above diagram is fine. But also the knight's move cut that ends up with sharing the corner is ok too, and to me feels more appropriate to play in normal early opening situations.

I may be misunderstanding Fredrik, but I think his point was: (i) If I play first in a corner, I expect to get a better result there, (ii) if I take gote in a corner sequence, I expect to get a better result there, so (iii) if I play first and take gote, I should get a much better result. -i- and -ii- each allow my opponent to play elsewhere, so the strong local position is deceptive. That's also true of the standard 3-3 invasion, but the wall B gets in the position we're discussing isn't as thick. No?

Tenuki is a viable and interesting idea. It would certainly avoid a bad result locally, as I agree with your logic that black would not have a very severe move locally. However, at the same time it would not produce a good result, which white should be able to make because of blacks obscure move.

Additionally, I will try to explain my meaning in my previous post:

I think that you possibly misunderstand what I mean with "two" moves. Black had already invested one move when white invaded, thus black should get a better result locally. White ending up with sente, while playing 5 stones to blacks six, means that black spent "two" moves on this result. Do you understand what I'm trying to emphasize?

Edit: jts posted while I was writing this. He explains my reasoning well.

Further, I think this result is much better than a normal 3-3. Mainly because:

1: Black has played several damaging moves (see my previous post)
2: I think it's an understatement to say "Black is less thick than from a normal 3-3 invasion". I think the difference in thickness is huge.
3: White's corner is bigger than it would be from a 3-3 invasion.

I would rather emphasize your point by saying black spent one more move and lost sente.

Simplified example: Take an empty corner. Black invests one move by playing in the empty corner, thus black should get a better result locally. White ends up with sente (in this simplified example he achieves this by tenuki! )

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . 1 . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Can we say black invested two moves? No. Instead it's better to say black has played 1 more move and lost sente.

Another way of emphasizing it is to use the wording "a whole extra move", implying he played a whole move and lost sente completely (ie not even having a large follow up etc).

Hehe, seems we are getting a bit off-topic now but:

We do agree that black playing in the empty corner is investing one move, right?

And then black gets gote, by playing 9 in the variation we discussed, investing another move. For me, this adds up to two moves, perhaps I'm the one being illogical .

Anyway, let's not discuss this and kill the thread. I do not mind if we have different opinions, at least it seems that my point could be understood from my posts; If black has the corner stone, and also gets gote he should get a much better local result than white.