2-2 against 3-3 invasion when having outside strength

This is a game I won playing white 11k against black 13k

Even though I always welcome any useful advise and commentary, I’m not so interested in a full review here, but mostly about some stronger player’s commentary on the 3-3 invasion of move 190, to which black responded on the 2-2!

I think I never saw this black move before, and it stroke me as quite interesting. If the surrounding area es empty, with no stones, white should simply ignore that stone and “take sente”, playing some 3-4 and continuing quite like a 3-3 opening joseki, I believe, which leads to a better result for white compared to black playing standard invasion joseki.

However, here I felt (maybe wrongly?) that given black’s surrounding strength in every direction, the 2-2 move effectively forces white to seek space outside, where there is none, and reduces it’s shape to a single eye, killing it. Is this thinking correct? Is 2-2 just a bad move that white could not handle properly?

Thank you very much for your advise about this topic!

2-2 is not a good move as a response. Sure enough, if Black had no weakness and was very strong on the outside he could kill with 2-2 but generally, even when you want to kill the invasion, 2-2 is not good because Black can threaten to capture it for 1 eye and the aji is just poor compared to the more common methods of killing the invasion. See https://online-go.com/demo/47771

If Black is strong enough around the area, yes Black should try to kill the invasion. In fact if black is very very strong around, it’s not even necessary for black to have a stone on 4-4 at all. But the 2-2 answer is not the best, Midna’s suggestion is better.

Here is my standard reference for how powerful nearby walls can be:

Note that Black starts by reducing eyespace from the outside. Also on the 2nd line instead of 3rd, because escaping to the center is not an option.