hyperpape wrote:... I find that any thing longer than a few steps, I can't see the ladder, but sort of mentally think "white-black-white-black..." I don't lean down or trace the board or any of that, but I have to think about it point by point after the first couple of moves....
with long ladders I begin by tracing the ladder with my eyes and only start to think "white-black-white-black..." near obstacles .. even though I practiced following Kgeyama's advice, i misread some ladders in my games, where I was to stubborn to re-re-check the ladder if my opponent continued it.
Like entropi, I have a difficult time reading "wide". I think this is just because I haven't done enough training. But sometimes I get in a loop, re-reading what I've already read, because I'm afraid I've missed a "trick" in one variation.
But then, I sometimes do miss such a "trick", anyway.
When the search tree seems wide, then I spend a lot of extra time spinning my wheels, exploring the same variation multiple times.
I think I just need to practice more to resolve this.
I'm in transition from the old "tic-tac" way of reading to actually seeing all the stones on the board as the ladder plays out. I definitely think that it is possible to read ladders effortlessly. Since I can't do that yet, I suppose I should follow Kageyama's advice and do more ladder problems. It can only help. Thanks, daal, for reminding me of this passage.
We don't know who we are; we don't know where we are.
Each of us woke up one moment and here we were in the darkness.
We're nameless things with no memory; no knowledge of what went before,
No understanding of what is now, no knowledge of what will be.
$$Wc Ladder visualization $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . X . X X O O . . . | $$ | . . O O X . . . . O X X . X O . O O . | $$ | . . O X . X . O . O O X X O O O X X . | $$ | . . O X . . . . . O X O O X X X X . . | $$ | . O X . . . . . . O X X O O . X O . . | $$ | . O X . . . . . O X X X O O . X . . . | $$ | . O X . . . . O . X . O X O . . X X . | $$ | . . X O . . O . . . . . X X B O O . . | $$ | . . . . X O X X O . . O O O . O X X . | $$ | . . . X . O X O . , . O X X O , O X . | $$ | . . X . O . X O . . . . O X . . O X . | $$ | . . . . . O O . . . . . O X . . O . . | $$ | . . O O O X X . . . . . O X . . . . . | $$ | . X X X X O X . X . . . O X . . . . . | $$ | . . . X O O . . . . . . O X O O O . . | $$ | . . . X O . . O . X . . O O X X O . . | $$ | . . X O . O . . . . . . X X . X X . . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------
[go]$$Wc Ladder visualization $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . . . . . . . . . X . X X O O . . . | $$ | . . O O X . . . . O X X . X O . O O . | $$ | . . O X . X . O . O O X X O O O X X . | $$ | . . O X . . . . . O X O O X X X X . . | $$ | . O X . . . . . . O X X O O . X O . . | $$ | . O X . . . . . O X X X O O . X . . . | $$ | . O X . . . . O . X . O X O . . X X . | $$ | . . X O . . O . . . . . X X B O O . . | $$ | . . . . X O X X O . . O O O . O X X . | $$ | . . . X . O X O . , . O X X O , O X . | $$ | . . X . O . X O . . . . O X . . O X . | $$ | . . . . . O O . . . . . O X . . O . . | $$ | . . O O O X X . . . . . O X . . . . . | $$ | . X X X X O X . X . . . O X . . . . . | $$ | . . . X O O . . . . . . O X O O O . . | $$ | . . . X O . . O . X . . O O X X O . . | $$ | . . X O . O . . . . . . X X . X X . . | $$ | . . X O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
$$Wc Ladder visualization II $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . X . X X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X . X . . X X X . . . . O O . . . . | $$ | . X X O X X O O O X X X O O X . O . . | $$ | . X O O . X O . . , O . O X X X . . . | $$ | . . X O . O O . . O . . . O . . X . . | $$ | X . X O . . . . . . . . O . B X O . . | $$ | . O O X O . . . . . . O X . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X O . . . . . O . X O . . . . . | $$ | . . O O O . . . . O . X O X X X X . . | $$ | . . . X O X . . O , . O O O X O . . . | $$ | . . X . X O O O . . . . . . O . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X O X . . . . . O . X . . . | $$ | . . . . X O X X O . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X X . O . O . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . | $$ | . O O O . . . . . , . . . . . X X O . | $$ | . . . . . O . . X . . . X X X O O O . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------
[go]$$Wc Ladder visualization II $$ --------------------------------------- $$ | . . X . X X . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . X . X . . X X X . . . . O O . . . . | $$ | . X X O X X O O O X X X O O X . O . . | $$ | . X O O . X O . . , O . O X X X . . . | $$ | . . X O . O O . . O . . . O . . X . . | $$ | X . X O . . . . . . . . O . B X O . . | $$ | . O O X O . . . . . . O X . . . . . . | $$ | . . . X O . . . . . O . X O . . . . . | $$ | . . O O O . . . . O . X O X X X X . . | $$ | . . . X O X . . O , . O O O X O . . . | $$ | . . X . X O O O . . . . . . O . . . . | $$ | . . . . . X O X . . . . . O . X . . . | $$ | . . . . X O X X O . . . . . . . . . . | $$ | . . X X . O . O . . . . . . . . X . . | $$ | . X O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . | $$ | . O O O . . . . . , . . . . . X X O . | $$ | . . . . . O . . X . . . X X X O O O . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . . . | $$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | $$ ---------------------------------------[/go]
The Adkins Principle: At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins
If I may summarize, we can interpret this to mean that re-reading is worse than failure, right? That is, if re-reading could give us a chance to not fail when we otherwise would fail by reading only once, one ought to take their chances with the failure, since it is worse to re-read.
I think he's saying it's good training for your reading and confidence. In a tournament game, if you're not positive, reread, but otherwise it's better to try reading other things. For example, if I read that a ladder doesn't work, it's more productive to look for nets than to keep reading the ladder over and over. I've fallen into that trap a lot, even to the point of quadruple-checking even simple snapbacky sorts of issues. Because I'm spending all of my time reading absurdities, those games look afterwards like I wasn't even reading at all. With practice, it seems like you'd be able to read more confidently, and only check things that are actually issues.
Similarly, another related issue I've had is that I don't trust my reading, so I play a slightly more passive response to moves. That's a habit I've really been trying to break, so I trust my reading, even if it's only for a half-point ko. I've lost games for that specific reason, but I think it's better to play based on reading than based on fear. That said, in a big tournament game, if I knew I was ahead, I would pass on the half-point ko if there was some risk involved, imagined or otherwise.
Someday I want to be strong enough to earn KGS[-].
If I see what looks like a tesuji, but read it out and realise it doesn't work, I read it out another 25 times in the hope I can make it work through sheer willpower.
Koroviev wrote:If I see what looks like a tesuji, but read it out and realise it doesn't work, I read it out another 25 times in the hope I can make it work through sheer willpower.
