![[Welcome to Sensei's Library!]](../../images/stone-hello.png)
StartingPoints
ReferenceSection
About
Paths OverviewOfFusekiP...
Referenced by EvenGame
|
Chinese classical opening
Keywords: Opening, Culture & History
![[Diagram]](../../diagrams/5/01a7c16caa2e41c148d7e806a0281318.png) | Set opening |
Through the centuries, and until the 1930s anyway, even games in China started with this type of formation of 4-4 points, as the prescribed starting position.
This is in fact a very dynamic beginning point of the game. The properties of the 4-4 point will make it hard for either player to pursue successfully a purely territorial plan: between able players fighting is guaranteed.
There is no particular reason why this opening shouldn't appear in contemporary games, after Black plays cross hoshi. The fact is that is then more often played at a 3-3 point or 3-4 point. Perhaps it is currently felt by pros that White should do something of that kind, even allowing for komi, to counter Black's pace.
Charles Matthews
- But I think the reason that it does not appear is that Black does not willingly play cross hoshi against a white star point. This seems to be avoided (judged inadequate?) by Black at the professional level. Dave
- Charles I suppose it's always possible: that
to get here is thought not-so-good, on the grounds that at, say, the 3-3 point is too-good-to-allow. That seems oddly narrow to be a fixed pro judgement. The business of diagonal openings seems to be to do with wanting to fight, rather than get into framework contests. There hardly seem to be enough examples, to come to any conclusions.
- Dave Yes, I have never seen a comment on this but the huge preponderance of alternative plays for
seems to indicate some shared assessment (bias?) among pros.
This is a copy of the living page
"Chinese classical opening" at
Sensei's Library.
2004 the Authors, published under the OpenContent License V1.0.
|