PaperModL2

Chapter Fifteen. Sabaki

The sabaki concept is one of the most important developed in the Japanese tradition of professional go.

This example occurred in 13.3. White should have planned how to play before arriving in this position. (Left) Black has played an extra marked stone, to cover the possible cut in the attach-extend formation. After that the marked white stones are in White’s view disposable, non-key stones, and may be sacrificed. That’s because they no longer relate to a cut. White imagines a continuation (right) to weaken the black stone on the lower side. This is a sabaki idea.

In contrast, if White tries to hold onto the single stone when Black plays atari, Black 5 is strong. White’s result is worse than before.

15.1 A fundamental pattern

When Black has enclosed the corner this way, or with a stone at one of the ‘x’ points, White often comes in at the 4-3 point. If Black blocks outside (cf. 11.4) White 3 (counter-hane) is played as a possible disposable stone. (Right) This immediate capture by Black leads to a result that may well be bad overall. After 19 White will break out at A, or capture three stones.

In this pattern White’s play 3 often depends on several further sabaki ideas.

(Left) This way of playing for Black aims to capture more stones. However White retains flexibility after 6. (Right) Bad play by White.

Depending on circumstances, White should use the potential of the stones in the corner in ways like these. White must foresee all this from the start.

By playing atari at 4 Black may succeed in making White heavy; in any case White will not be able to use sacrifice tactics in the same way as just seen. Black tries to deny White the chance to play sabaki. Key points in this shape are A, B and C. White needs a plan based on one of them.

The clamp 1 is the way to live quickly for White. (Left) White is alive in the corner. (Right) If Black resists with 2, White once more breaks through the enclosure, in sente.

(Right) With the marked White stone already in place, White 1 and 3 are good shape. Now neither Black atari play at 4 as shown works well. The pattern of the marked stone and White 1 and 3 (called counter-hane) is worth remembering. It will be seen again in 15.2

Other ideas here are heavily dependent on context. The nose play (left) builds influence across the top side. (Right) The cut at 1 can be a way to build central influence.

(Left) Continuing a sequence from pro play, the three marked stones are used as a sacrifice to build in the centre. Black 12 is correct shape. (Right) Black 12 played here is usually bad shape, and White will gain extra plays on the outside, because Black now suffers from shortage of liberties.

In the case of the one-point enclosure (marked stone) White normally cuts first of all (left). The idea is to sacrifice two stones and also leave White 5 on the outside. This is suggested by the empty triangle it leaves for Black. (Right) When White jumps out at 13, this group can live with one further play in the corner, and has a definite eye there.

15.2 A large-scale example

This is a position from an amateur game. It is made interesting by Black’s capping plays (the marked stones). With them Black managed a very quick expansion of the framework on the lower side. White needs to find an immediate way to cope with its size. White A, Black B is too good for Black. White must find an invasion or reduction plan.

Black’s idea might be too loose in professional eyes, but it puts pressure on White to find good moves early in the game.

Given the topic of 15.1, it is natural to give some attention to this 4-3 invasion. White should also think about the 3-3 invasion (White 1 at 3). These are both normal measures to take. After White 5, the White right-hand corner has become quite large. The position isn’t so easy to evaluate after Black 6; but will this variation actually occur?

It is Black’s option here to make the invasion look like a 3-3 invasion, by playing 4 this way. Then White’s marked stones become weak. It should be easy for Black to build up the centre by attacking them.

We therefore recognise a problem with both of the common invasions: they offer Black a choice of options, one of which is easy to play.

The reduction plays at the points marked ‘x’ are at the depth suggested by 9.3. However they seem not to have a great effect on Black.

Following the thought also in 9.3, to bias a reduction play to the weaker side, one might come up with this suggestion. White 1 goes a little deeper, having in mind the play 3 to cut across the knight’s move. This does attack Black’s thinnest shape directly. It must however be said that White’s shape has defects too. Black will immediately push up into the centre.

This is the actual sequence from the game. Black is doing well. White 3 at 4 would be a heavy play, and likely to run into trouble as Black plays moves that threaten also the left-hand corner. However White 3 here still leaves problems in handling the group. From the point of view of direction, it is clear that the fight is taking place near Black’strength, rather than close to the thinner Black position to the right. White is fighting in the wrong place.

White chose the contact play 1, but the result wasn’t good. That might have been anticipated on the basis of 15.1: this pattern is likely to work really well for White, only in the presence of a White stone at W. This is a clue.

We are going to offer a ‘correct’ answer for White in the starting position. So far the plays tried out for White seem either to be ineffectual, or to offer Black excess choice. What is required is a key point play, which therefore has an effect on Black, but one making Black’s subsequent choice of direction of play less important than in the variations shown up to now. In the case of the invasions considered so far, Black has been able to get a good result by blocking on the correct side.

The choice between invasion and reduction here comes down in favour of invasion. This decision ought to be a matter of whittling away ineffective plays, for example reductions that are too shallow from the point of view of counting (13.7), and promoting consideration of invasions that conform to ideas in 13.2 to 13.6. There is probably a real difficulty, for players below strong amateur status, in playing methodically in such a position.

Let’s examine this choice of White 1. We consider this idea to be the best conceptual play. One aim is the sequence shown, related to 15.1 (White can slide to the 10-2 point, also). On the other hand, White 1 sets up a play at 2, too. Black will not be able to prevent White making sabaki.

Black 6 here is no good for Black when the marked white stone is already in position. We can see this as White using the miai idea from 13.3. White 1 is the key point: it relates well to this counter-hane tactic on the side, and also to a cross-cut tactic in the corner. It isn’t so bad to offer Black options that are true miai, rather than a clear choice. {{Dia 887}}

If Black simple-mindedly takes one white stone with 6 and 8, White will be able to push out into the centre like this. The exchange of the marked stones is a minus for White, but Black’s large loss to the left is obvious.

In this case the diagonal attachment 2 isn’t good shape for Black. White 3 and 5 leave Black no very good way to defend against both A and B.

It is therefore natural for Black to approach from the other side, as in this diagram. Now White has a chance to exploit Black’s rather thin position in the centre. However cutting through directly isn’t the way.

White cross-cuts with 3 and 5. This leaves White’s stones well placed, and Black’s stones in the centre looking too distant from the action. There are quite a number of variations. But perhaps the reader will get the feeling that things are starting to go well for White.

It wouldn’t be reasonable for White to hope to nullify the entire framework, but taking a large corner would improve White’s position greatly.

This is Black’s best way to play now. White must play 9 to connect to the outside, and then Black 10 takes territory cleanly. However White’s corner has become substantial: nearly 20 points.

Black 10 here is a significant mistake (it goes against theory in 13.2, and shape from 7.4 ). White has an endgame trick: White A, Black B, White C.

💡 The meaning of sabaki

It may be easier to recognise sabaki than to define it. It is an aim, not a kind of shape. Its main characteristic is that with a sabaki sequence you can play where your opponent is already strong, and achieve a useful result. The most common technique is the deliberate creation of disposable stones; and the aim is an end result (‘disposal’) in the form of a light shape, live group, or weakening of some of the opponent’s stones. Naturally this requires skill, too, as well as good intentions.

When you learn to capture you are a soldier on the go board. When you learn to count you become a businessman. Knowledge of shape and tesuji makes you an engineer, aware of structural matters in the building of groups. But mastery of sabaki qualifies you as an alchemist, able to transform the fundamental nature of positions.

💡 Overview

Go players, or at least the more thoughtful amongst them, often express a yearning for a better, more comprehensive understanding of the game. In some cases this amounts to a genuine intellectual hunger for explanations. The authors of go books can take the attitude that asking for the moon is all very well but a trifle unrealistic: go is a complex matter, mastery of it tends to exclude all other considerations in life at least for a while, and there is no royal road.

Amateur players, like both authors of this book, can take a more pleasurable attitude towards go-playing skill than is possible for professional players, who indeed depend on it for a living. For example good shape and technique are assumed of both sides in a professional game. Simply making correct shape isn’t typically enough to win, proper plays alone aren’t sufficiently telling. A player such as Otake Hideo who puts a high value on shape has to back it up with deep resources of fighting power. In fact his long career at the top bears witness to the validity of his approach, a comment that must be qualified by pointing to the successes of other players who for example rely more on positional judgement or reading. But for amateurs concentrating on good shape and vital points, letting the opponent make shape mistakes or push the game fruitlessly into patterns with no corresponding advantage, can be a major step forward into the realm of good play.

So shape as a topic belongs in a realm of major aspects of go, required for progress to higher levels, but not sufficient in itself to become strong. Other such pillars of the game are direction of play, judgement, reading, the evaluation of exchanges, opening theory. Strength fans out as many skills. It may seem to many players that power in all-out fighting is the master of them all. When games boil up into decisive conflicts that may be true, if there is nothing else to choose between the players’ positions.

In practice a fight may come down to a difference of one liberty, or to a fraction of eye shape, or a final desperate chance to cut. But there is nothing random in this. One doesn’t have to master shape, simply to apprehend its basic principles, to see that these matters are for for good management and not to be left to luck.

Chapter Fifteen. Sabaki#

15.1 A fundamental pattern#

15.2 A large-scale example#

💡 The meaning of sabaki#

💡 Overview#

Chapter Fifteen. Sabaki

15.1 A fundamental pattern

15.2 A large-scale example

💡 The meaning of sabaki

💡 Overview