It is a hard time for me to play out mutual damage because I don't know if I can gain more in some situations. Sometimes it may be obvious. But sometimes it is not.
If it is the latter, maybe the only way we can find out the answer is to read out some likely good variations of mutual damage which is time-consuming. Any ideas?
Mef: As I said...one can only count the variations one can read out...
aLegendWai: Ok. Got it!
(Sebastian:) "Costly atari" doesn't really fit the example given, since the alternative is also an atari, and both come at a cost. Or is this an accepted term for this specific move?
I am a bit confused by the two related pages:
We should probably consolidate them into one parent page and one discussion page. If "mutual damage" is an accepted term and "costly atari", isn,t then we should use the former.
Bill: Yes, at the point of the costly atari, Black's other play is also an atari. However, it is correct, with no cost.
As for go terminology, there is no special term for this. It is an atari, and it is costly. ;-)
(Sebastian:) Apparently I don't know what "costly" means. Does it mean
The relation to the mutual damage page is accidental. It just happens that the example I used is also one of mutual damage.
(Sebastian:) I see, thanks!