Life In 19x19

peti29 wrote: Well, if he goes L15, I go L16 and then he's still disconnected - unless I miss something.

Hm... what about the sequence from move 171: K15 - L15 - L16 - J15? After that J16 and K17 should be miai(?).

Uberdude wrote:Sorry but this is wrong. Attach is a special purpose joseki and is played by weak players many many times when it is bad. Guo Juan 5p's advice is to banish this move from your repertoire until you are 5 dan as only then can you identify the rare occurrences it is good. Perhaps its popularity comes from its recommendation as a handicap joseki in that it's good enough if you start with loads of stones and is fairly simple.

Yes, but if I'm too weak to understand why it's wrong then my opponent is most probably too weak to take advantage of it, right?
To me it feels very convenient with san ren sei. What would you recommend as an alternative black response to white's approach? I'm curious as I most often play the san ren sei as black.

Also, I have problems regarding josekis. They provide an equal outcome - but the outcome is only equal when one has pro strength. Often one side gets solid territory for example, the other gets influence he has no skills to turn into profit.

For example, this one is so good for white I don't even consider it a joseki.


schawipp: you're right! I missed that.

Uberdude wrote:Guo Juan 5p's advice is to banish this move from your repertoire until you are 5 dan as only then can you identify the rare occurrences it is good.

What is her reasoning for her advice, why does she say 4d- could not evaluate the move? Nowadays, there are evaluation methods applicable by everybody; not just by 5d+.

peti29 wrote:

Uberdude wrote:Sorry but this is wrong. Attach is a special purpose joseki and is played by weak players many many times when it is bad. Guo Juan 5p's advice is to banish this move from your repertoire until you are 5 dan as only then can you identify the rare occurrences it is good. Perhaps its popularity comes from its recommendation as a handicap joseki in that it's good enough if you start with loads of stones and is fairly simple.

Yes, but if I'm too weak to understand why it's wrong then my opponent is most probably too weak to take advantage of it, right?

I don't think you are too weak to understand why it's wrong if it is explained well (but I can't be bothered to make loads of diagrams now, and perhaps it's already explained somewhere on the forum already). And often a mistake like that can be self-punishing in that you lose other choices of how to play later: your opponent doesn't actively have to do anything. But yes at 6k you will both be making bigger mistakes and it's hardly game-deciding. But if, like me, you strive to play better moves even given your own current inadequacies I'd recommend trying something else.

peti29 wrote: To me it feels very convenient with san ren sei.

Yeah the middle hoshi makes it not so bad. but the right side isn't as big as it looks and by attaching you strengthen white's top side group so lose possibilities there. A question: what will you play if after attach, hane, extend white jumps to the 3-3 point?

peti29 wrote: What would you recommend as an alternative black response to white's approach? I'm curious as I most often play the san ren sei as black.

One point jump, a pincer (e.g one space low or two space high), lower side hoshi, or Takemiya's kosumi to 5-5 if you feel adventurous.

peti29 wrote: What would you recommend as an alternative black response to white's approach? I'm curious as I most often play the san ren sei as black.

There is one free sample chapter here :
http://smartgo.com/pdf/sanrensei.pdf

RobertJasiek wrote:

Uberdude wrote:Guo Juan 5p's advice is to banish this move from your repertoire until you are 5 dan as only then can you identify the rare occurrences it is good.

What is her reasoning for her advice, why does she say 4d- could not evaluate the move? Nowadays, there are evaluation methods applicable by everybody; not just by 5d+.

I don't know, and I don't follow her advice as I, as a 4d, have kept this move in my repertoire (but play it far less than most kyu players). Perhaps 5d was just chosen as stronger than the players in the room, or maybe she was exaggerating for effect. Anyway, if a 6k has 2 choices: keep playing this move as they do, or never play it, I think the latter will make them play better go. Of course there is a third choice. Anyway, my point, and I think hers, is not that you should never play this move until you are 5d, but that if you do giant claxons should blare in your head beforehand and you'd better have a darn good reason why the move is justified.

P.S. She probably didn't say banish, that wording is mine.

To clarify regarding the attachment, the short reason it's often not good is because it fixes the shape and both sides become strong. Sure, black gets his moyo extension, but white has a strong group that is difficult to attack while black could have played in such a manner as to emphasize the moyo potential AND leave more aji in white's position to exploit later. The time to play it is when the strength that white gets doesn't matter because white is already strong, and will be left somewhat overconcentrated. At least, this is my understanding of the position.

Uberdude wrote: I don't know, and I don't follow her advice as I, as a 4d, have kept this move in my repertoire (but play it far less than most kyu players). Perhaps 5d was just chosen as stronger than the players in the room, or maybe she was exaggerating for effect. Anyway, if a 6k has 2 choices: keep playing this move as they do, or never play it, I think the latter will make them play better go. Of course there is a third choice. Anyway, my point, and I think hers, is not that you should never play this move until you are 5d, but that if you do giant claxons should blare in your head beforehand and you'd better have a darn good reason why the move is justified.

P.S. She probably didn't say banish, that wording is mine.

It absolutely sounds like the sort of thing she would say when she's trying to get a group of kyu players to try new strategies. "Hmm, this move? maybe when you are 5 dan"

As a practical matter, if kyu players avoid tsuke-nobi they will almost always play better. It is not unheard of at in pro play in sanrensei, but it is on the order of 1%.

As for being joseki, Ishida's remark back in the 1970s that there are no 4-4 joseki is still almost true. As Jiang and Rui say in The World's New Joseki, the 4-4 joseki in the books were developed in handicap play, and may not be appropriate for even games. And, IMO, as far as modern 4-4 joseki go, the smoke has hardly cleared. Lines are still being tested out.

Edit: I mean that they will play better in even games. In handicap games tsuke-nobi is still good.

A few comments on the opening.

Searching my database on the position below (to include various alternatives on the left side of the board), results in the following list of professional games:
Kitani Minoru - Go Seigen, 1936-04-08
Sugiuchi Masao - Cho Chikun, 1986-03-26
Takano Hideki - Hiraoka Satoshi, 1991-08-04
Seo Pong-su - Han Ch'eol-kyun, 1992-10-26
Kobayashi Satoru - Cho Chikun, 1996-01-31
Cho Hun-hyeon - Yi Ch'ang-ho, 1997-09-24
Dang Xiyun - Qin Shi, 2007-10-16

The underlined player made the atttachment (i.e. in the first game White made a san-ren-sei and attached on Black's approach stone). YMMV

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bc Search Pattern
$$- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +
$$. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$. . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
$$. . . . . , . . . 1 . X . . . |
$$. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$. . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$. . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +[/go]

peti29 wrote:I remember Nick Sibicky mentioning in his videos that is a losing move, so I approached immediately.

I have read that in a couple of places too, but not that immediate kakari on the "good" side was the right thing - it was described as bad because of the natural direction it gives Black a few moves later in the opening, and it almost punishes itself.

Do I have that right? Or is the order unimportant, and is approaching straight away good too?

joellercoaster wrote:

peti29 wrote:that is a losing move, so I approached immediately.

I have read that in a couple of places too, ...
Do I have that right?

At DDK levels, sometimes even at 1-1 is not a losing move.

The other moves, the ones that really decide the game
at these levels, are much more urgent to study, IMO.

When we are these levels, we routinely play very slow, very small moves —
moves that are literally about the same as 1-1. Passes. -1 point in gote, etc.

I think it's a little crazy to worry about at these levels.
But if you enjoy studying it, more power to you.

Sorry but this is wrong. Attach is a special purpose joseki and is played by weak players many many times when it is bad. Guo Juan 5p's advice is to banish this move from your repertoire until you are 5 dan as only then can you identify the rare occurrences it is good. Perhaps its popularity comes from its recommendation as a handicap joseki in that it's good enough if you start with loads of stones and is fairly simple.

I'm sorry but i don't follow. I checked the lecture in-seong once made about san-ren-sei and there he sad the attach is "ok" and "possible". Maybe not as recommened and often played as other moves, but still not "bad". You may not want to give a detailed explanation with a lot of diagrams about this, then can you instead link to a audio-lecture of guo juan, where she talks about this in more detail?

Also the new joseki-dictionary by Takao Shinji still includes the attach as an answer to the approach keima and says it is usually played if black can expect to build a large moyo on the side - which is in fact the reason i would play this move with san-ren-sei and not (for example) with ni-ren-sei. The local position on the side is identical to a position in a handicap-game and i don't believe that white gains so much more from this exchange than black.

What the inseong says is right. It's inseong who know when to play this move.
What Guo Juan says is also right. Below inseong many players fall into the habit of playing this move, while most of the time another move is better. She forcefully opens up the game for these players.
Even so, her advice or the inseong is relevant to very strong players because they assume such choices to be significant to the result and the overall level of play. For (my judgment) players below 5d it is not true that an advantageous opening - through smart choices - is correlated to the end result. They make the difference in the middle or end game, save the occasional deciding blunder in the opening.

I have a lot of respect for Guo Juan and have followed lectures with her in the past. I think she and her fellow pro level teachers, teach on a level though that is fundamentally too high for their average student. Their selection of topics is intrinsically targetting (high) dan players. This is also the level their kyu students aspire. Perhaps they find each other at a commercial equilibrium.