The standard joseki has W6 at either a or b, and W8 at c. I am wondering if there is any way for black to take advantage of this deviation. I thought about playing B7 at a, but if white responds at d, I don't have a good follow-up. For W8, it seems that there is an opportunity for me to invade at e, but I may be forced to live small if I invade there. Also, white can extend to the left to affect my left corner stone. So I ended up playing B9 as shown.
Is there anything that can be improved on this sequence? Thanks.
Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?
Posted: Sat Dec 28, 2013 8:59 pm
by Kirby
It's already a bad move, so if you just play normally, it will probably turn out fine for you.
If you want to keep it simple, just hane underneath. It's good for territory, and his stones aren't doing much.
If white doesn't play then you can connect under, which means white has 0 eyes and no points there. don't worry about the threat of a monkey jump from , you can still make life just fine on the side. Splitting white up like this is more than worth it. Now he has a weak group with no eyes on the right and a lone stone in need of a friend on the left. If he ignores his right side group coming out at 'a' puts him behind enemy lines. This move looks slow, but it is absolutely solid, white then has to run, there is no counter-attack possible. If white helps the group on the right then your move at 'b' looks even more promising - possibly play it one farther to the right to add even more pressure.
And the beauty is, you don't even have to play this right away. If white ignores your then this move just stands out even more strongly. What can he do then? He can't even try to make a base on the left.
I would assume this is the reason this is not joseki. It is too easy to cut white apart.
Be warned, however, that this marked White move below is played by pros. Common responses are 'a', 'b', and Kirby's recommended move at 'c'. Tenuki is also possible. I think this is considered a joseki move, but I'm not totally sure. Note that the peep is much less appealing because white is actually left with okay shape now that his stone is a 1 space jump and it doesn't create a needless empty triangle.
Kirby is correct about the simple second-line hane ( in Post #2) --
in the joseki, if B plays Kirby's hane, B gets gote.
But in your recent game's variation, B can play Kirby's hane in sente,
so B is already taking advantage of .
GoStudent, Kirby's reply is simple and good. The following is more messy:
If B wants to fight, Variation C is a possibility.
This is another reason the joseki move is not the 5th line tiger's mouth --
it also allows the clamp (in addition to allowing Kirby's second-line hane.)
Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?
Posted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 1:01 am
by Kirby
I kind of like Ed's Variation C a bit better than my post (though I still think black is better in both).
Posted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 1:04 am
by EdLee
Kirby, I actually saw your question before you ninja'd it.
I have the same question as you about B's N3 clamp before B's R6 one-space jump. I don't know.
The hidden section in post #4 is pro analysis. .
I don't know how to compare the N3 clamp before the R6 joseki 1-space jump.
Your second-line hane is simple and good (pro opinion).
Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?
Posted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 1:08 am
by Kirby
Thanks, Ed. I ninja'd the post, because after a little bit of thought, I feel like making white commit to playing the star point on bottom is better, as in your variation C:
That's because white has two groups to worry about, and black is pretty solid on the right.
In contrast, if you don't make the exchange first, white doesn't have to play the bottom star point, so it seems to give white more options.
OTOH, this all assumes that white will play the bottom star point if you play this way. White maybe can try something else. I don't know what's best, but maybe he tries to fix up his shape somehow:
I realize you didn't mean it seriously, but the idea of 30 points comes with the implication that you made a ponnuki through capture, so that you only invested 3 stones net, while this is just a diamond shape and required a net investment of four stones, so black has received more in exchange.
Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?
Posted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 3:22 pm
by Bill Spight
I think that we are developing a consensus that the non-joseki move is self-punishing.
So Black can simply continue with a normal play at or . Now White has to worry about the weak connection.
Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?
Posted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 4:30 pm
by Kirby
skydyr wrote:
I realize you didn't mean it seriously, but the idea of 30 points comes with the implication that you made a ponnuki through capture, so that you only invested 3 stones net, while this is just a diamond shape and required a net investment of four stones, so black has received more in exchange.
Yup, I agree. If I could opt to move one of the stones in the ponnuki, it would be the top one.
Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?
Posted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 11:07 pm
by gostudent
Bill Spight wrote:I think that we are developing a consensus that the non-joseki move is self-punishing.
So Black can simply continue with a normal play at or . Now White has to worry about the weak connection.
Thank you for all your responses! I'll consider the clamp in similar situations if the board position calls for me to start a fight.
Btw, the main reason that I started this thread is exactly the diagram above: the option to play at 4-4 against the external attachment 5-3 is no longer appealing because of the deviation... so I am wondering how can I take advantage of this deviation.
P.S. What does "ninja" a post mean?
Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?
Posted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 11:29 pm
by Kirby
gostudent wrote:
Btw, the main reason that I started this thread is exactly the diagram above: the option to play at 4-4 against the external attachment 5-3 is no longer appealing because of the deviation... so I am wondering how can I take advantage of this deviation.
But if you want to punish the off-joseki move, why not do so instead of tenuki?
P.S. What does "ninja" a post mean?
nin·ja /ˈninjə/ verb
1. To edit one's post after others have seen it.
2. Other such trickery.
Re: Can this deviation from joseki be penalized?
Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:47 am
by Boidhre
gostudent wrote:
P.S. What does "ninja" a post mean?
As kirby said, it's a bit complicated. Sometimes it's an innocent "someone replied whilst I was editing and I was in a rush and didn't notice" kind of deal, other times it's someone trying to change what they said because they're losing an argument. In the middle is people altering a post because it was offensive to someone, though normally this wouldn't be called a ninja edit if the edit was marked. The key in all of these is altering the post without putting something like "Edit:" in there to indicate new content.
It varies from site to site what is acceptable. I've been on ones where anything more than spelling/grammar correction was forbidden and would be punished and I've been on ones where you could append several new paragraphs so long as you marked that you had done it. By and large though the sentiment is that you own your words, adding clarification or further information is generally acceptable, changing what you said is rarely so unless it was an obvious typo. Here people don't seem to mind so long as you're doing it for honest reasons.
more solidly at the marked stone in response to this because it leaves less aji and so that peep at 'a' looks even more harsh!
then you can connect under, which means white has 0 eyes and no points there. don't worry about the threat of a monkey jump from 
then this move just stands out even more strongly. What can he do then? He can't even try to make a base on the left.
.
peeps first, and 
extends as above, then W will not simply descend -- W will hane:
keima, not the kosumi in Variation A:
--
.
, above, even fixes it that well, because I think the OP's off-joseki move is really funky.
does not work because