I usually regret taking games against guest accounts on KGS because they always bring out my worst game. In this case, I should have perused the game records of this guest player (black) to see that he was at least 4-5 stones stronger than me.
The joseki in the upper left was played first, then I proceeded to botch the lower left, extending first before sliding. At least I think I learned my lesson from that... felt inadequate because of , but I couldn't think of another route. The marked stone makes a pincer tough, no?
Wanting to take sente, I played , thinking I could come back to a later. But things just went down-hill from here.
1) Am I incorrect in thinking that white is already in bad shape?
2) If I just play a now, is it not so bad (in the game I started an attack on with b and c)?
3) Is there a better response to ?
4) Should I have done something different in the upper left to make the possibility of less attractive?
5) What's up with ?
tapir (2k-1k KGS): In my humble opinion, there is nothing wrong with . (I wonder more about and about the next moves.) But I like to see what happened later. As you showed b, c as your attacking plays... I fear this is the wrong direction as you don't profit but weaken your , stones.
Fwiffo (9k KGS): Hah! I didn't share the rest of the game because it was too embarrassing, but here is the SGF. Oh well, there goes my pride. It was not my best effort. The and groups join in on the attack (with the eventual plan of invading the lower side). and the group is actually the one that gets in more trouble. Even though I feel like I've gotten back in the swing of things over the past couple weeks, it's easy to see how rusty I still am from being away from go for so long. I mostly spend the rest of the game making all sorts of non-connections and not making territory.
tapir: Black expected you to answer with and somehow induced here.
Fwiffo: So is fine then, given that white has lots of space to set up camp somewhere in the bottom side? Is this evolving into too many questions for a BQM?
tapir: It is a BIG question mark, isn't it?
Dieter: In my opinion is an overplay. White is low on both left and right side after , so Black should just continue and build on the lower side to have an overall superior position. White can take advantage of to attack it, by leaning against the top for example, then invade the lower side, for example with d (aggressively) or e (peacefully).
White's low position is due to approaching the lower left at the wrong side, because the upper left is low and solid. You should have approached it from the bottom or not approach it at all and approach the lower right instead.
Fwiffo: OK, so at least I had the right idea by going after . I guess my wrong approach in the lower left just shows how weak my fuseki fundamentals are. I thought that was a good way to work with my stones in the upper left and that it was the "open side", but I guess the other direction isn't "closed" unless there's a black stone somewhere in the middle of the lower side...
tapir: This looks much better than the actual game. By leaning white gets strong and even flattens black framework, while in the game white made stronger and had trouble with two weak groups.
Fwiffo: This answer is deeply satisfying for me; one of those "ah ha!" moments, like when you see your first snap-back. I've read about proverbs like make a feint to the East while attacking in the West and seen examples of leaning attacks, and dual-purpose moves, but to see how it applies to one of my own games makes all the difference. I can really use this.
Herman: In my opinion, is a submissive move. After -, white's stone has served its purpose, forcing black to respond on the second line. Instead of , I would thus respond by immediately approaching from the other side as well, with at d in the first diagram.
I agree with being somewhat submissive, but now playing goes against the idea of that. White would play a double kakari to a strengthened position. Next makes miai of the circled points, to attack either stone. Instead I would play at a to prepare an attack on the corner at . If Black defends again, the submission of will be put on the spot. a is better than the game because it maintains balance between high and low, so it is multipurpose for building and preparing attack. --Dieter
Bill: is an ancient joseki. A modern alternative is b. :) Since Black has a strong position in the bottom left corner and is low, and it inhibits the development of , it is not so bad. My choice for would be c.
Herman: In response to this , I would probably play . That leaves black with a choice of which side to block, a or b. If black blocks at a, white b makes look like bad shape. If black blocks at b, I would play at c, and then the circled move becomes ineffective because of the aji at a
Herman: Agree, with the low strong stones on both sides, that'll force black into a difficult fight :)
Fwiffo: So you'd prefer that over the leaning attack? I still feel like the top white group is too unsettled from not taking a (of course, I may just feel that way only because that group took it in the teeth in the actual game). I imagine immediately at b; I'm not able to really visualize the continuation from there, but it makes me uncomfortable. Black would still be weak here, but my instinct would be to choose a line of attack that more directly strengthens the top white group.
Bill: If Black pushes through at b then the leaning attack becomes a possibility. Besides, you normally want to make a leaning attack as sente, so you can return to the main assault. What is the point of building up strength, only to have your opponent head in the opposite direction? (Not that you never do that, but in this case it would be aji keshi, I think.)
As for the real game, yes, not taking a could be a problem, and I think I would have simply played a two space extension on the side rather than making the approach to the bottom right corner. But after has more to worry about than White's stones in the top right. Also, your attack developed well, at first. Those stones only came to grief later. :)
Fwiffo: OK, that all makes sense. My trouble came about because I don't remember how to make connections. Also, looking at the very first diagram, I can't believe how low my position is everywhere. Nine stones on the third line and just two(!) on the fourth. This is the opposite of my usual style; I've never been a territorial player. And I'm so inconsistent later; I spend the rest of the game sprinkling stones uselessly around the middle of the board like confetti instead of using my low stones to build up territory.
tapir: Bill mentioned it above, and I like it as well :) Later approaching at a looks promising.
Fwiffo: This came up before in the lower left, but what is the principle that should come to mind that makes a better than, say, b? Is it just that the bottom edge has the widest open space on the board? I've started re-reading In the Beginning, and I've ordered Opening Theory Made Easy, so maybe I'll some of these answers there... It's also entirely probable I knew this information in the past and have forgotten it...