I see this jump recommended a lot, but it never feels like a better move when I see it. Can someone explain?
How did B get to this situation? Locally W has 6 stones, B 4.
Example: W R3, B attaches R4, W extends Q3, B follows Q4, W hanes P4, B hanes P5, W extends O4; B plays tenuki, W cuts Q5, B ataris R5, W extends Q6.
Why did B tenuki? Was it worth it? What does the board look like? Whatās happening on the top right corner? If an engine suggests R7 jump, it has to do with the whole board, global evaluation. When you say āa better move,ā compared to R6 push? Again, whatās happening globally? How can we evaluate if B should tenuki again, without seeing the whole board?
here it is
Thereās a proverb ādont push from behindā. So the jump obviously avoids breaking this proverb. Whether this explanation is just dumb and wrong idkā¦
Iām far from being an expert but I think AI will often give up a corner for influence towards the centre. And in the game we can see that pushing (from behind) earned black 15 points while white built a magnificent wall that ended up being worth about 200 points!
So I think it depends what you mean by ābetterā it could be that the jump gives up the three stones (not ābetterā for them!) but earns many more points elsewhere (ābetterā for winning the game). Also it still leaves the potential not to give up the stones.
But all in all it might be that the actual answer is simple that jumping ahead is usually better than pushing from behind as explained by @taatelikakku
Thereās a proverb ādont push from behindā ā this is a very unfortunate mis-transmission, but itās so pervasive now, itās kind of hopeless. If you ask pros trained in China, Japan, Korea, theyād tell you theyād never heard such a thing when they were coming up.
A bad move happens to push from behind ā donāt play it.
A good move happens to push from behind ā of course, play it!
One other thing to keep in mind that Kataās winrates are for when itās playing itself, so the actual score difference of the push vs the jump is a whopping 2 points. Which white promptly loses back to black because white didnāt actually take advantage of that inaccuracy (with the hane, R7 after R6). So besides being a very small difference score-wise, your opponents might not even notice these small inaccuracies or take advantage of them, making it feel even smaller. Unless both players are much stronger, a 2 point advantage, or even a 10 point one, isnāt that much.
I think switching the analysis view from win % to score (which is something I just realised you could do. Maybe itās a newish feature) would make it much more helpful: It make it clear that you only really ālostā the game with the sequence from move 64 to 86 (where you lost ~6 to 25 points every move, though to be fair white also lost a lot by not perfectly following through). You donāt see that in the winrate really, because at that point it was already >90% for white.
The second one looks better. Iām not that smart though.
I gotta admit I laughed out loud when I rewatched that just now.
Yeah, seeing that White can hane at (1) (because the Q7 atari followed by P6 R8 S7 S8 S6 works for White) really changes your perception of the position.