![]() StartingPoints Referenced by
|
Cut the side you don't want
Keywords: Tactics, Proverb
Because the enemy must normally capture the cutting stones, one should cut the side one doesn't want. Example 1
If Black wants the corner, he should cut at a.
White captures the cutting stone, and Black gets what he wants.
Andre Engels: The logic behind this rule is in my opinion the following: After you cut, your opponent can still choose either side. If he captures the cutting stone, he takes the side where you cut; if he covers the other cutting point, he takes the side where you did not cut. Capturing the cutting stone gives the opponent a much better shape (ponnuki), and is therefore preferred by him. If you would cut at the direction where you want to play, he can take both advantages (getting the ponnuki and getting the best side), if you cut at the direction where you do not want to play, he will have to choose. [1] Example 2Charles I can remember discussing this kind of point in general with Tim Hunt. Usually there are four variations like A, A', B, B' where it is easy to see that you prefer A to A' and B to B'. On the other hand your opponent will have the choice of giving you a result out of A or B', or out of B or A'. Somehow the decision is between a worse form of a better result, or a better form of a worse result? But actually this is probably just a basic game theory pattern being applied here.
On that occasion I think we were discussing this kind of position, in which it is good for Black to cut at
White really can't play
Example 3
Charles This is quite a typical kind of position on the side, with
Now after
It would be a bad idea to follow Example 1 in this case, by cutting with
In this position I think you can say that Black wants this outcome, where White decides to capture DiscussionDougRidgway: This proverb doesn't make sense to me. If either cut will work, and the opponent can only protect against one of them, then regardless of which side I want, it's the opponent who gets to choose which side I will get. Wouldn't it be better to cut on the side that the opponent will end up giving me anyway? That way, the opponent doesn't get to capture a stone, which is better for them than for me. Eg., in the original example, if White wants the outside, then isn't
better for Black than the original? Or alternatively, tewari-style, Andre Engels: Yes it is, and that is exactly what the proverb is about: If White is going to take the outside anyway, then apparently the outside is more important than the inside, so it is the side that you want. And if you want the outside, the proverb tells you to cut on the inside - which is exactly what you are doing here.
the Charles You have to look at the line where White resists Black's chosen plan:
Here White should be in trouble, because the corner is just about to die. White denies Black the corner, indeed; but the cost is too high even if the ladder for Black to capture DougRidgway I agree, so White won't do that, and will let Black have the corner if Black cuts on the outside. But would White take the corner if Black cuts on the inside?
It's easier for White to live now, and the outside stone isn't dead yet, so maybe White would do this. If so, then maybe the original cut on the outside is correct, as a sacrifice to convince White to give Black the corner. Otherwise, if Black gets the corner in any case, it seems to me that the original cut on the outside is a OneTwoThree mistake.
Charles This is (perhaps obsolescent) joseki, but only if Black has a good ladder at a to capture:
If it's joseki, then it's OK, so let's look at joseki. (I hope I'm not boring anyone by continuing to chew this over. Someone will have to edit this eventually.)
The original position can arise from 3-5 point 3-3 approach when Black attaches at Andre Engels: I am a bit at a loss at what you're saying. What do you mean by 'these joseki' when you say that Gobase can only find one of these joseki actually being played? Anyway, my own joseki database (consisting of MasterGo's database plus games downloaded from the Internet plus games typed in by me from magazines, totalling slightly over 20,000), I find the following variations:
Here's another example, a position which occurred in one of my games. Suppose White decides to cut: a or b? I think Black will connect on the bottom, regardless of which side White starts on: it's easier to live, and there's more White territory to threaten. So White should cut at a, as this is the side that Black will give up. White a, Black b, White c is what I would expect. Does this make sense? Charles Given your hypothesis about Black's intention, yes, it makes sense. Dieter: If you capture the cutting stone, it will be easier to live regardless of the surroundings. There are of course occasions on which Black will not capture the cutting stone, because giving White what she wants more than offsets the advantage of capturing the cutting stone. In your example however, that is not the case. I will capture the cutting stone without even thinking. Let me reformulate André's correct explanation: If Black cuts the side he doesn't want, White is faced with either capture the cutting stone AND give Black what he wants or not capture the cutting stone AND give Black what he doesn' want. If Black cuts the side he wants, White can either capture the cutting stone AND give Black what he doesn't want or not capture the cutting stone AND give Black what he wants. The latter is something like either work and get no money or not work and get money, hardly a difficult choice. [2] Charles This sort of lacuna in joseki books, where they don't explain or indicate the most fundamental points, is very typical: too much of the wrong type of data for some users. This is a copy of the living page "Cut the side you don't want" at Sensei's Library. ![]() |