Named points
- a : Japanese: 小目 Komoku Korean:
Sohmok[01] - 3-4. A very popular starting point.
- b : J: 星 Hoshi, K: 화점/花點 or 성점/星點 Hwajeom or
HuaJum - 4-4. Starpoint. Like komoku, a very popular starting point.
- c : J: 三々 Sansan, K:
Samsam - 3-3
- d : J: 目ハズシ mokuhazushi K:
Waemok - 3-5
- e : J: 高目 Takamoku K:
Gohmok - 4-5
- f : J: Oomokuhazushi - The 3-6 point opening was developed in the late 1920s. It has only been played at all often by the Korean player Yang Keon.
- g : J: Ootakamoku The 4-6 point was developed about 1934 bySekiyama Riichi, during the ShinFuseki period. This move has been played recently by Yamashita Keigo.
- h : J: Gonogo - The 5-5 point has occasionally been used as the first play in the corner. The idea was experimented with during the Shin Fuseki period.
- i : J: 天元 Tengen K: 천원/天元 Cheonweon The "10-10 point", the only point on the board that is definitely not in any corner. It is rarely played first.
- (Strict:) Starpoint = Hoshi = one of the nine marked points on the board
- Tengen = the marked point in the center of the board
- Hoshi without qualification is used for one of the four 4-4 points[02]
- Starpoint without qualification is used for one of the four 4-10 points
- Sansan even means 3-3
- Gonogo 5-5
- 40 other intersections - two of each of the following five in every corner - have their own, non-systematic names:
footnotes
[01] I've also seen "Somok".
[02] This is not Japlish, John F.: "The Japanese do talk about hoshi no jouseki, referring to the corner only. (Conversely the phrases hoshishita and hoshiwaki refer only to the side hoshi.) Hoshi is star rather than star point, and in go it has another important meaning. It is the sign for a win in a table. Stars are not pointy in Japan - they are small white circles because that's how they used to be drawn in old astronomy maps (ditto in China)."
[03] Both the 2-2 point and 1-2 point have a very special role. Why don't they have a name of their own? Or do they?
[04]Scartol: Am I the only one who wonders why the 4-3 point is not in this diagram or the simplified one on the main page?
I chose not to, but I'm not too sure it's the right choice, so if you have arguments to include 4-3 (and 5-3) besides 3-4 and 3-5, please share them. This is why I did not include them. 4-3 is equivalent to 3-4, 5-3 is equivalent to 3-5 (except for etiquette). While (I think) these equivalences are completely obvious to everybody, I could not easily explain them precisely. If they are in the diagram they need to be explained. So, to avoid this (IMHO unnecessary) complication I left them out.