With through , White helps Black secure the corner.
Does White gain anything in compensation? It seems not. Black can play a and White will have to protect at b eventually.
This is the usual joseki.
With , the corner seems protected now. By not exchanging a for b and c for d before (as in the previous diagram), does White leave some aji in the corner? What, exactly is the aji? Can White live or create a ko directly? Or is some additional preparation needed?
Charles I'd say that White's giving up the chance to peep at p here was quite serious as a loss.
I've also seen this sequence in books, though I may be confusing it with a similar 3-4 point pattern.
In any case, the push at followed by the attachment at , permitting is bad for black as the stone becomes a wasted move. But, is the exchange of for and for bad for white, eliminating corner aji?
This sequence is discussed in Ishida's Joseki Dictionary. Again, the push at followed by is bad.
If Black wishes to play , he should do so immediately. Permitting is a loss for Black. When this sequence is discussed, however, the exchange of for , for is considered good for White. Why? Was there no significant corner aji anyway?
SnotNose So the sequence in either Fig. 3 or Fig. 4 is okay for white? Or, is white still better off not helping black secure the corner and leaving the aji of p in Fig. 3? That is...
In Fig. 5, Black plays inconsistently with followed by . White does not make the a/b and c/d exchanges so as to leave the aji of the peep of p for later. Note the difference between Fig. 5 and Fig 4. When the joseki is played out from a 3-4 point beginning, White plays differently.
SnotNose I have noticed that there is a lot of confusion about the correct order of play in these types of joseki, which one might lump together under the general title 34Or44LowApproachOnceSpaceLowPincerJumpPress? or some such.
Dieter: came in a club game, wand we discussed this variation. If White replies at instead, she becomes heavy and the cut is bothersome. However, we found it difficult to evaluate this position.
If we analyse it from a global point of view, we could argue that declared the top to be important. Hence, the - exchange probably hurts Black more than the - exchange hurts White.