Life In 19x19

I thought I'd make a thread to collect and analyse examples of professional players not following proverbs, making broken shapes and other things we typically think of as "bad". By looking at such positions I think it can help to understand the reasoning behind the proverb and when it does and doesn't apply.

First up, "extend from a crosscut". This seems to be quite a widely known proverb, and is particularly useful for ddks who have a habit of playing atari after every crosscut. The basic idea is that you want to help your stones get more liberties in such a crosscut fight, but after they extend from atari they have more liberties and you don't, but have some cutting points to worry about. However, this phrasing is overly simplistic, Sensei's Library suggests "When there are no other stones nearby, extending from the crosscut gives the advantage". My feeling from watching professional games is that atari may actually be more common than extend in pro-game crosscut situations (and indeed theres a similar conclusion from Bill/Dave on a decade old SL page. I wonder if a more accurate (but somewhat cop-out) proverb would be "When crosscut is a bad move then extend; when crosscut is a good move atari is often a good move but you've got to read to find which one". Anyway, onto a pro example:

[2017-05-05] 19th Chinese City League A, round 4
Lee Donghoon 8p (Black) vs. Ke Jie 9p (White), W+R

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . X . X O . O X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . X . X O . X O X . |
$$ | . . . . . O X . . . O X . X O O O X . |
$$ | . . . O . O X . . , . . X X X X X O . |
$$ | . . O . . O . . . . . . . . . . . O . |
$$ | . . X X . . . . . 4 1 . . . O X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . 3 2 . # . . O X X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . # . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . O . . O # # O . O . |
$$ | . . . X . . O . O X O . . # O O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . O X . . . . . # # # O . O . |
$$ | . . X . O . . X O O . O O # # O O X O |
$$ | . . . . . . . . O X O . O O # O X X X |
$$ | . . . . . . X . O X . X X O O X X O O |
$$ | . X X X . . X . . . X X O O O X . O . |
$$ | X O O , X X O O O X . X X O X X X . . |
$$ | . X . O O O X X X . X . X O O X . X X |
$$ | O O . . . . O X O X . . . . O X O X O |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

Black (Lee Donghoon) has just crosscut with 4. White is trying to capture the marked black clump of stones, so in fact happy to sacrifice both of the stones in the crosscut (in a crosscut it's important to identify which stones are important). So white starts with one atari, then plays another, and finally pushes through at 9 allowing black to capture the 1st stone and kill the clump in exchange.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wm5
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . X . X O . O X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . X . X O . X O X . |
$$ | . . . . . O X . . . O X . X O O O X . |
$$ | . . . O . O X . . , . . X X X X X O . |
$$ | . . O . . O . . . 4 8 . . . . . . O . |
$$ | . . X X . . . . 3 X . 6 7 . O X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . O X 1 X 9 . O X X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . 2 5 . X . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . a O . . O X X O . O . |
$$ | . . . X . c O . O X O . . X O O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . O X . . b . . X X X O . O . |
$$ | . . X . O . . X O O . O O X X O O X O |
$$ | . . . . . . . . O X O . O O X O X X X |
$$ | . . . . . . X . O X . X X O O X X O O |
$$ | . X X X . . X . . . X X O O O X . O . |
$$ | X O O , X X O O O X . X X O X X X . . |
$$ | . X . O O O X X X . X . X O O X . X X |
$$ | O O . . . . O X O X . . . . O X O X O |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

The atari of 7 is a nice detail in this sequence: the capture would work without it but it's a good exchange to get at that time before sacrificing 1: if you don't play it then you would get the result below and now if white played at a black would either answer at b, or tenuki, and certainly not play at c!

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

Black didn't actually need to sacrifice his stones, for example he could save them like so, but then white gets stronger in the centre and is probably safely ahead. I think he probably wanted to get sente to cut at c in the 2nd diagram, making the a/b sente exchange first (using aji of dead clump), but when that failed to capture the cut-off white stones black resigned.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ +---------------------------------------+
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . X . X O . O X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . X . X O . X O X . |
$$ | . . . . . O X . . . O X . X O O O X . |
$$ | . . . O . O X . . , . . X X X X X O . |
$$ | . . O . . O . . . X . . . . . . . O . |
$$ | . . X X . . . . O X O . 1 . O X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . O X O X . . O X X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . 2 X O . X . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . O . . O X X O . O . |
$$ | . . . X . . O . O X O . . X O O O . . |
$$ | . . . . . O X . . . . . X X X O . O . |
$$ | . . X . O . . X O O . O O X X O O X O |
$$ | . . . . . . . . O X O . O O X O X X X |
$$ | . . . . . . X . O X . X X O O X X O O |
$$ | . X X X . . X . . . X X O O O X . O . |
$$ | X O O , X X O O O X . X X O X X X . . |
$$ | . X . O O O X X X . X . X O O X . X X |
$$ | O O . . . . O X O X . . . . O X O X O |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O . |
$$ +---------------------------------------+[/go]

I thought I'd make a thread to collect and analyse examples of professional players not following proverbs, making broken shapes and other things we typically think of as "bad". By looking at such positions I think it can help to understand the reasoning behind the proverb and when it does and doesn't apply.

Good idea and very interesting example - but I'm not sure this is the best proverb to use (and even less so the tiresome empty triangle ).

First it is routinely (in Japanese) labelled as a proverb for beginners who feel confused by the crosscut - which was made typically to engender that confusion. Since it was not intended as a proverb for stronger players, it can hardly be said that pros are not following it. When taught to weaker players it is also usually given with the rider that you extend on the side away from the opponent's strength, and there is, too, sometimes the rider that you don't have to extend at once but can atari and then extend. It's really the two ataris that are the cardinal sin.

But it's true that the proverb his unfortunately gained traction among some players beyond the beginner's stage. Richard Hunter's excellent book on crosscuts would be ideal for them. Yoda's sujiba theory is also relevant here.

If you don't mind me adding to your air-traffic control problems in keeping everything on the radar, the sort of proverb-breaking examples I'd like to see, where pros really are defying the odds, are things like making six groups and getting them all to live ("If you make six groups one will surely die.").

Yes, I think atari is normally the best move after a crosscut, because it is normally best to sacrifice a stone. Whereas the proverb is useful to kyu players who want to save everything.

Do you make these diagrams by hand, or is there a better way via sgf? some time later: Ah, I found the sensei's library tool.

Uberdude wrote:When crosscut is a bad move then extend; when crosscut is a good move atari is often a good move but you've got to read to find which one

This sounds quite nice, but I don't accept this as it stands. Perhaps there is something meaningful there, but it doesn't seem valid to me.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ +--------------------+
$$ |. . . . . . . . . .
$$ |. . 6 x . . . . . .
$$ |. 5 2 1 . O . . . .
$$ |. a 3 X 7 . . . . .
$$ |. . . 4 b . . . . .
$$ |. . . . . . . . . .
$$ |. . . . . . . . . .
$$ |. . . . . . . . . .[/go]

In this position, 1 and 3 form a standard "trick" move, where 7 is the key non-standard move, when x is standard. I've heard pros say 4 is correct, to extend from the crosscut. And then a can live in the corner, or B can gain influence.

But sometimes I'm not satisfied with this result. It seems to me a proper way to refute this line is to immediately sacrifice the less important stone:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

8 can instead be used to capture 5, and B gets the two stones.

Both sides should tenuki after 9. If W ataris, B may tenuki or extend, or even atari.

A recent game Hei Jiajia 7p (Black) vs. Yu Zhiying 5p (White)

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Moves 79 to 88
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . O X X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | O O O X . . X . . . O . . O . X . . . |
$$ | O . O X . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . O X O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . X X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . O X . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O . O O X X . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O X . . . . . . . . X 0 . . |
$$ | . . . , O X . X . , . . . . 7 4 6 . . |
$$ | . . O . O X . . . . . . . . 5 3 2 . . |
$$ | . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . O 1 8 . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 . . |
$$ | . . X . . . X . . . . . O . X . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . O O O . O O . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O . O X . . O X X . O . O . O . |
$$ | . . O X X X O O O X O X . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . X X X X . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Earlier in the game, the stone closer to the centre is more important, but here it is better for W to live on the side since all W wants is to live in B's area, so the double atari is a good way to use up all the aji of the cutting stone in order to live.

Master vs Tan Xiao

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W Moves 16 to 25
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O , . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . 8 . 9 X . . . |
$$ | . . . O X . . . . . . 4 7 . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , 5 X 3 . O , X . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . O . 1 2 . O X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . x 6 . 0 . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

in this case since W has enough stones locally, if B's outside cutting stone is more important, there is no way to atari to settle like in diagram 2. (whereas if the 3rd line stone was more important, atari like in diagram 3 is the only option. But the 3rd line stone is too hard to save when it is inside W's 2 stone wall.) Hence B extends.

5 is a fighting spirit, as W didn't want to play x, the only move to connect, but it doesn't end well.

John Fairbairn wrote:Good idea and very interesting example - but I'm not sure this is the best proverb to use (and even less so the tiresome empty triangle ).

First it is routinely (in Japanese) labelled as a proverb for beginners who feel confused by the crosscut - which was made typically to engender that confusion. Since it was not intended as a proverb for stronger players, it can hardly be said that pros are not following it. When taught to weaker players it is also usually given with the rider that you extend on the side away from the opponent's strength, and there is, too, sometimes the rider that you don't have to extend at once but can atari and then extend. It's really the two ataris that are the cardinal sin.

But it's true that the proverb his unfortunately gained traction among some players beyond the beginner's stage. Richard Hunter's excellent book on crosscuts would be ideal for them. Yoda's sujiba theory is also relevant here.

Yes I was aware saying "Gosh! look at pros breaking this proverb" is a bit of a straw-man argument as it's not such a strong proverb but as you say it has gained more traction. I've heard good things about Richard Hunter's book but not read it yet myself; maybe I can find much of the content in the online British Go Journal archive.

John Fairbairn wrote: If you don't mind me adding to your air-traffic control problems in keeping everything on the radar, the sort of proverb-breaking examples I'd like to see, where pros really are defying the odds, are things like making six groups and getting them all to live ("If you make six groups one will surely die.").

Sure, I'll keep an eye out for that in my wanderings of pro games.

dhu163 wrote:Do you make these diagrams by hand, or is there a better way via sgf? some time later: Ah, I found the sensei's library tool.

Even easier than that: on go4go there is a 'Diagram Code' link below the board which makes a diagram for the current move (when using go4go not eidogo viewer). The Web Go Board Chrome plugin for viewing sgfs in browser has the same feature.

I don't think finding counterexamples to proverbs is much help to getting stronger, but perhaps it is a interesting exercise.

I've taken a look at sensei's page on proverbs, seeing which are not so valid at the pro level.


Strange things happen at the 1-2 point. Not a counter-example, just a lovely double 1-2 point to live and hence kill over half the board by Chen Yaoye against Xie He recently


Capture the cutting stones:

Instead of taking the ponnuki, Master goes further than pros in not directly capturing

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Moves 27 to 27
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . X . . O . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . X , . . . . . X . O . |
$$ | . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . X O . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . O . . . . . . X O O . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . . X O X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . 1 . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . O X . . . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |[/go]

The empty triangle is bad: I'm sure there are many counterexamples, whether being a way to cut severely, saving cutting stones, increasing liberties in a tight shape, or the only move to stay connected.

Don't cut a one point jump: This is a good proverb for DDK, but there remain counter-examples.

Gu Li Lee Sedol jubango game 2. Actually this move didn't turn out great, but the wedge cut is still powerful when B is strong around. I've faced this issue in my own games (London open 2016 vs stephen hu), and I've seen leelabot kill a large dragon this way.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Moves 65 to 65
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . O . O O O . |
$$ | . . . O . . O . . , . . . . X X X O . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X . |
$$ | . . X X . . X . . . . . . . . . O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . X . X . . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O , O 1 O . O , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . X . X . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . X O . . . . . . . . X . . |
$$ | . . . . . . O X . X . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . O X . X . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X X X . . O O X . . O . O , X X . |
$$ | . . . O X O . . . O X X O . . O O X . |
$$ | . . X X O . . . . O . . . . . . . O . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Even a moron connects against a peep: This is one of the least valid of the proverbs at a pro level. Sometimes it is only a moron connects against a peep. You connect if you have to, but often you end up with eyeless inflexible shape. Or if the peep stone is a vital helping stone in another fight, then you need to fight back.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W
$$ . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . 4 . 1 . . . .
$$ . . . . . 3 2 d . .
$$ . . . X a O b . . .
$$ . . . c . . . . . .[/go]

when B is attacking W, W jumps into the centre, this is a standard haengma to make W heavy and make it hard for W to make eyes. 2 is a bit of a probe, asking if W will play a or b, and also helps B if W ends up getting c. But sometimes, instead of connecting at 3, d is the best move to make B's 2 heavy, and increase W's eyeshape.

Lee Sedol (B) vs Choi Cheol-han (W) final game 5 of 2013 Myeongin.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Moves 39 to 39
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . O . . . . . O X . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . X . X . O . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . O . . x . . O X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . O O X X . . |
$$ | . . O . . . . . O . X . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . X . X . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . O . . O . X . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . O . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . X X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X X O O . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . X . O . . . . . O . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

B needs to defend against the cut at x as well as the peep, so this is a great idea to do both

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . O . . . . . .
$$ . . . . b 1 . . . . .
$$ . . X . O a . O . X .
$$ . . . . . . c . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . .
$$----[/go]

This is a common shape where it is hard to choose which cut to defend after B peeps. If b, then c is a problem. If a then the b cut is bad aji.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

This is a common peep, and pros normally connect at a to leave the 3-3 invasion open. But leelabot generally recommends getting a high efficiency immediately (i.e. crude)

some more standard examples

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

This has been a joseki since 2013. W connecting to the peep is not really a move as the outside is so big, and the shoulder hit stone is light and should be sacrificed.


Ke Jie (W) vs Li Zhe(B), recent semifinal game 2 of the 1st ENN cup.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

2 is a classic sacrifice tesuji

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

This is similar to something I put in my study journal. 1 is a shape point, but perhaps 2 is a nice counter tesuji.

Never ignore a shoulder hit.
Play attachments for defence.

Alphago has overturned some ideas here.

Play at the centre of 3 stones.

Actually I think this is often too slack and hence rare compared to defending by a one point jump on either side (directly left or right of the shape point)

Mi Yuting (B) vs DeepZengo

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

answer the cap with a knight's move.

perhaps pros answer with a one space jump just as often.

Two hanes gain a liberty.

Yes but only with a line of 3 stones or more.

There was the funny confusion in the 2014 Nongshim cup, where in the fast time limits, Kim, who was behind, managed to trick his opponent into starting a ko, when actually W could have killed unconditionally. He made some ko threats, pretending it was a ko at move 193. And Lian Xiao probably saw Kim's two hanes and thought they would give him an extra liberty. See move 205




That's the end of the tactics proverbs. I think Alphago has a lot to say on the strategy proverbs, but the strategy proverbs are broadly right, up to how you define terms like thickness.

The second proverb I had in mind with a counter example is "Don't peep a bamboo joint". According to SL the basic meaning is don't peep an existing bamboo joint, but that seems rather dumb and unnecessary to say: it's not a peep if you aren't threatening to cut something!

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$W Peep a bamboo joint
$$ . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . X . X . . .
$$ . . . X . X . . .
$$ . . . . 1 . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . .[/go]

The meaning I've understood is more like: don't peep a one point jump if they can answer it well with a bamboo joint (and particularly be wary of ending up peeping both sides). The reasoning is their bamboo joint will be a more efficient connection that just the solid connection, though there is the usually small upside that your peep stone still has all its liberties. A good example of me falling for this is my game with Jesse Savo from the Maidenhead tournament this year. In response to I peeped at hoping he would solidly connect at a allowing me to surround at b, but instead he made 2 peeps of his own at my adjacent one point jumps to connect with a bamboo joint in sente and then ran out at . This is a case of a move you hoped to be sente ending up gote (though his bamboo joint peeps did also have a cost in the 2 moves I got on the left side).

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc Andrew Simons 4d (black) vs Jesse Savo 4d, Maidenhead 2017
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . X O O . . X . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . O , X . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . O X . O O X . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . 4 X . . . . . . O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . 3 O . X . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . X . a 2 . 1 . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . 5 O . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . 6 . X . . . b 7 X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , X . . |
$$ | . . . . O X . O . . . . . . X . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

The following pro game caught my eye because Mi Yuting ended up peeping on both sides of 2 bamboo joints in quick succession! To be honest I don't really understand the 2nd one at 7, but the 1st one makes sense as trying to make white heavy (and forestall white's shape tesuji at a) and helping the wall group below. After white 8 black feels the need to reinforce at 9, so maybe 7 can be seen as an inducing move and afterwards white needs to add a move to prevent black b. Black 7 does end up looking rather forlorn, but it does reduce white's eyeshape and much later Mi did end up using it to attack the white group.

[2017-04-27] 19th Chinese City League A, round 2
Mi Yuting 9p (Black) vs. Niu Yutian 7p (White) B+R

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

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

Uberdude wrote:The second proverb I had in mind with a counter example is "Don't peep a bamboo joint". According to SL the basic meaning is don't peep an existing bamboo joint, but that seems rather dumb and unnecessary to say: it's not a peep if you aren't threatening to cut something!

That sounds like an SL proverb to me. That is, a proverb cooked up by some kyu player and repeated by other kyu players. No disrespect for SL intended, but it is a site by amateurs for amateurs. There is a lot of good stuff there, but the level of its material is limited.

dhu163 wrote: Don't cut a one point jump: This is a good proverb for DDK, but there remain counter-examples.

I never heard of the "don't cut a one point jump" proverb. Do you have a source from it being an actual proverb?

http://senseis.xmp.net/?GoProverbs

is my source,

in particular http://senseis.xmp.net/?DontTryToCutTheOnePointJump

That sounds like an SL proverb to me. That is, a proverb cooked up by some kyu player and repeated by other kyu players. No disrespect for SL intended, but it is a site by amateurs for amateurs. There is a lot of good stuff there, but the level of its material is limited.

Bill: I know you and I share some irritations with SL, and lack of sourcing is one of them. But I don't think the proverb was dreamt up there. It seems more like a poor rendering of the Japanese 竹節の両ﾉｿﾞｷするべからず - in other words the 'double' element has got lost, and the translator has also missed the difference between ｿﾞｷする and ｿﾞｷく (i.e. don't make a double-peep shape as opposed to don't peep). As you know, the 竹節の両ﾉｿﾞｷ is one of the classic examples of bad shape - it's a tewari proverb really.

There may also be some conflation with "Even an idiot does not connect against a peep," but again what often gets lost in that is that there is a tendency to differentiate in Japanese between tsugu, which covers various styles of connection and is the term used in the proverb, and tsunagu, which usually implies simple joining up in a straight line, and which is the knee-jerk reaction of most amateurs to a peep.

Reminds me also of Bob Terry's rant against peep because of what he considered prurient overtones. That was daft enough in itself but he compounded it by proposing poke instead!

Reading this thread brought to mind the caution regarding memorizing joseki sequences. The same caution obviously applies to proverbs. Memorizing proverbs leaves one open to failing to consider the whole board situation. I recall a situation in a game between Cho Chikun and Kato Masao in the 1980's, I think. These are certainly top level pros and in the game one of them peeped at a one space jump and the other player did not connect. I can't remember the specific citation, unfortunately, but it reminds me of the pleasure obtained when your partner in the game plays what looks like a forcing move but the opponent finds an unexpected response different from what was expected.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B
$$ . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . O . . . .
$$ . . . . . . 1 2 . .
$$ . . . X . O . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . .[/go]

If 1 is a peep/poke, is 2 a slap?

More seriously, peep does seem quite strange terminology for this sort of move. But poke is already used elsewhere in "poking at the shape" (i.e. playing a move that causes shape problems but is awkward to defend against without being overconcentrated), though perhaps 1 can be considered a poke in this context too.

I'm not sure what is wrong with SL, I think I found it very useful at kyu level, and have used it now and again since (e.g. to see how they present go theory, some go problems, proverbs, endgame theory). I don't see much wrong in the context of this ambiguous proverb either. The SL meaning does hold value for beginners.

John Fairbairn wrote:But I don't think the proverb was dreamt up {at SL}. It seems more like a poor rendering of the Japanese 竹節の両ﾉｿﾞｷするべからず - in other words the 'double' element has got lost, and the translator has also missed the difference between ｿﾞｷする and ｿﾞｷく (i.e. don't make a double-peep shape as opposed to don't peep). As you know, the 竹節の両ﾉｿﾞｷ is one of the classic examples of bad shape - it's a tewari proverb really.

Thanks, John. That sounds like what happened.

Reminds me also of Bob Terry's rant against peep because of what he considered prurient overtones. That was daft enough in itself but he compounded it by proposing poke instead!

I know, if peep is bad, poke is worse.

There is also this supposed Master game where a strong (even if not Master) player doesn't answer a big peep. If it is master, move 2 is already suspect (Master always does 4-4 as W).



The source is relatively reputable, as a long running Taiwanese go channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnIsVngFD1U, but still it is only youtube, so I don't know. He says it is a Master game in the same way he says the standard 60 set are master games (he has been doing reviews, though nowhere near the quality of Redmond's). I put in Chen yao ye as I heard they played a game not in those 60, that was cut off due to internet connectivity issues.