unjoseki
Mark-T
I've seen this a few times:
O to play 1
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 4 a . . . . . . .
. . 3 # . . . . . . .
. . 1 2 . O . # . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
I cut at a with 5, attempting to punish Black,
but it hasn't worked out so welll... what is
best play for both sides?
Also, I have faced this:
O to play 1
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . 3 # . . . . . . .
. . 1 2 . O . # . .
. . 4 . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
How to continue?
I hate people who don't play joseki.
Mark
Ted S.
> In the usual corner invasion, as White,
> I've seen this a few times:
>
> O to play 1
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . 4 a . . . . . . .
> . . 3 # . . . . . . .
> . . 1 2 . O . # . .
> . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . .
>
> I cut at a with 5, attempting to punish Black,
> but it hasn't worked out so welll... what is
> best play for both sides?
This one I can answer. I've been told that 5 should be below 1,
followed by cutting at A
--
Ted S.
fedya at hughes dot net
KGS 6k
Now blogging at http://justacineast.blogspot.com
busi...@no_spam_bigfoot.com
Please think about your approach to Go. If you say that you "hate
people who don't play joseki," then I think that you're playing Go
according to formula, and that's completely unrealisitic. In fact, I
heard the story of someone who had deeply studied joseki as a
high-ranking amateur and was told, when he became a student
professional, to start by forgetting the joseki he had memorized.
Your opponent is right in testing your knowledge of the joseki by
trying an unusual move, and I believe that your only defense is to get
stronger at Go.
Resenting the moves of an opponent who may have deeper insight into
the game is a losing way imho. I am grateful to such opponents because
they challenge my understanding; in a sense they are providing free
lessons and, possibly, they are showing original thinking about the
game.
Best,
Dave
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009 02:45:31 -0800 (PST), Mark-T
Joel Olson
news:89a59919-0295-44d7...@s9g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Kogo says simply that the first variation is a mistake, leaving
cutting points in #'s shape.
For the second, it recommends:
>
> . . b . . . . . . . .
> . . a . . . . . . .
> . . 0 # . . . . . . .
> . . 0 # . O . # . .
> . 1# 2 . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . .
>
and 3 at a or b.
ro...@telus.net
<MarkTa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>In the usual corner invasion, as White,
>I've seen this a few times:
>
>O to play 1
>
>. . . . . . . . . . . .
>. . 4 a . . . . . . .
>. . 3 # . . . . . . .
>. . 1 2 . O . # . .
>. . . . . . . . . . .
>. . . . . . . . . . .
>
>I cut at a with 5, attempting to punish Black,
>but it hasn't worked out so welll... what is
>best play for both sides?
4 is a blunder (it should be at a), but the cut at a is out of order.
First you should descend below 1. If 2 made sense, # can't let O
connect, so he descends too. Then the cut at a will capture either 4
or the three stones including 2. # is helpless in this position:
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . # O . . . . . . .
. . O # . . . . . . .
. . O # . O . # . . .
. . O # . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
By cutting at a prematurely, you let # hane below 1 and connect with
8, below. That changes the situation drastically. 9 is forced, and
O's position will either collapse or be pressed down onto the second
line:
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . A . . . . . . . .
. 9 4 5 . . . . . . .
. . 3 # . . . . . . .
. . 1 2 . O . # . . .
. 7 6 8 . C . . . . .
. B . . . . . . . . .
# can play A and has the hane at B and attachment at C in reserve, so
after O pushes along the second line to live, 5 will probably be
captured in a net.
>Also, I have faced this:
>
>O to play 1
>
>. . . . . . . . . . .
>. . . . . . . . . .
>. . 3 # . . . . . . .
>. . 1 2 . O . # . .
>. . 4 . . . . . . . .
>. . . . . . . . . . .
>
>How to continue?
Just counter-hane, and when # connects (allowing you to capture his
hane would be horrendous), just extend:
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . 7 . . . . . . .
. . 3 # . . . . . .
. . 1 2 . O . # . .
. 5 4 6 . . . . . . .
. A . . . . . . . . .
Playing 7 at A to live would be ridiculous. Pushing out with 7 you
are presumably getting what you wanted when you played 1.
>I hate people who don't play joseki.
You should thank them for showing you the gaps in your understanding.
-- Roy L
-
Take care what you say lest you be the suspect of a
"hate crime" should anything happen to your opponent(s).
business7@NO_SPAM_bigfoot.com wrote:
> Please think about your approach to Go. If you say that you "hate
> people who don't play joseki," then I think that you're playing Go
> according to formula, and that's completely unrealisitic. In fact, I
> heard the story of someone who had deeply studied joseki as a
> high-ranking amateur and was told, when he became a student
> professional, to start by forgetting the joseki he had memorized.
>
> Your opponent is right in testing your knowledge of the joseki by
> trying an unusual move, and I believe that your only defense is to get
> stronger at Go.
>
> Resenting the moves of an opponent who may have deeper insight into
> the game is a losing way imho. I am grateful to such opponents because
> they challenge my understanding; in a sense they are providing free
> lessons and, possibly, they are showing original thinking about the
> game.
One redeeming feature of boardgames is socialization. Though
at times some players might not appear fully socialized most would
conclude that experience with gaming was more beneficial than not.
It's also a comment on the nature of a society which tolerates figures
of speech involving the term "hate" and where nobody took the time
to explore aspects of "hate" with the person claiming to emote "hate."
There's also a difference between "hate" toward a person versus "hate"
for some actions by a person. People are not necessarily what they do.
Nevertheless I'm not proposing any laws against "hate speech"
because I don't find that it's a Constitutional Role of government to
usurp non-enumerated powers that have been left to the people.
Among the many problems I find with this discussion thread is
the small size of the diagrams, the notion that one should follow an
understandable pattern of play, and the artificial division into joseki
and fuseki. With deeper comprehension of any game one learns
new technical skills. Playing outside the book also challenges your
opponents to respond appropriately to test whether they have really
acquired the essential sensibilities of fundamental principles.
- regards
- jb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cops Clock Driver At 137 mph In '93 Honda Civic
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D96ESQUO1&show_article=1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
busi...@no_spam_bigfoot.com
By the way (and this comment is not about the position in this
thread), a few times people have getten angry at me for "not playing
joseki." Unfortunately for them, it was a valid joseki variation that
they didn't know about, and they got into a lot of trouble trying to
punish my "mistake."
So, if one doesn't recognize a move that doesn't mean it's not joseki.
Again, best,
Dave
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009 16:12:12 -0800, business7@NO_SPAM_bigfoot.com
wrote:
>Hi Mark,
>
>You say that you "hate people who don't play joseki"
Ben Finney
> In the usual corner invasion, as White,
> I've seen this a few times:
>
> O to play 1
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . 4 a . . . . . . .
> . . 3 # . . . . . . .
> . . 1 2 . O . # . .
> . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . .
Leading to:
----------------------
| . . . . . . . . . .
| . . # a . . . . . .
| . . O # . . . . . .
| . . O # . O . # . .
| . . . . . . . . . .
| . . . . . . . . . .
> I cut at a with 5, attempting to punish Black, but it hasn't worked
> out so welll...
The cutting point at ‘a’ is a weakness, and is the reason why Black 4
was a mistake. But White needs a little more preparation before taking
advantage of that weakness:
----------------------
| . . . . . . . . . .
| . . # 7 . . . . . .
| . . O # . . . . . .
| . . O # . O . # . .
| . . 5 6 . . . . . .
| . . . . . . . . . .
resulting in:
----------------------
| . . . . . . . . . .
| . b # O a . . . . .
| . . O # . . . . . .
| . . O # . O . # . .
| . . O # . . . . . .
| . . . . . . . . . .
White will be happy with either of ‘a’ or ‘b’ here, leaving Black with
an uncomfortable decision.
> I hate people who don't play joseki.
Heh. It's only joseki if *you can show* that there is no move that is
locally superior. If you can't punish deviations from the supposedly
“superior” moves, you shouldn't think of joseki as superior :-)
--
\ “Cross country skiing is great if you live in a small country.” |
`\ —Steven Wright |
_o__) |
Ben Finney