Life In 19x19

ok so wait i have been thinking about this. correct me if this new interpretation is wrong.

tsumego is about reading, but it is not so much about brute force reading which is what i once believed -- being able to read out responses to all variations. that is important but, just because you did that successfully does not mean you are done with the problem and ready to move onto the next one, but you also then must look and study the shapes that made your moves possible and try to identify those shapes, proactively rather than passively\unconsciously (because not many shapes have sunk in this way)

cherryhill wrote:...but you also then must look and study the shapes that made your moves possible and try to identify those shapes

If you want to make sure your move works you must do a kind of brute force for all the opponents moves.
Once I have the/a solution (and I find the problem/shape interesting to work on) then it is a good exercise to verify that there are no other move.

When you actively want to understand the "nature" of the shape that made the move work, you can change the position a bit: add or remove a liberty and/or put a hane in place and see what this change.

Probably this is more efficent for local shapes than for wholeboard problems. It is very helpful for understanding the L+1 shapes or the carpenter's square.

If you want to messure the absulute reading speed maybe reading out a ladder would be best for, because you cannot gain speed by skipping variations or guessing the vital point.

Brute-force is necessary only if a) one does not know any applicable short-hands or b) no short-hand applies (rare). In particular, to achieve an optimal(!) result (such as 'unconditional life for the defender' in a local life+death problem about exactly one group) , a player must, at his turn during the reading, find AT LEAST ONE fitting move; the still unread alternatives can be pruned (unless also side conditions, such as 'maximal territory' and 'minimal number of remaining ko threats', must be fulfilled). To continue the example for the attacker, at his turn, he must find at least one move preventing the player's unconditional life. If, however, unconditional life is not the solution, then EVERY move must be read (unless other short-hands can be applied) to verify this.

RobertJasiek wrote:Brute-force is necessary only if a) one does not know any applicable short-hands or b) no short-hand applies (rare). In particular, to achieve an optimal(!) result (such as 'unconditional life for the defender' in a local life+death problem about exactly one group) , a player must, at his turn during the reading, find AT LEAST ONE fitting move; the still unread alternatives can be pruned (unless also side conditions, such as 'maximal territory' and 'minimal number of remaining ko threats', must be fulfilled). To continue the example for the attacker, at his turn, he must find at least one move preventing the player's unconditional life. If, however, unconditional life is not the solution, then EVERY move must be read (unless other short-hands can be applied) to verify this.

Additionally, as one gets better, it is sometimes necessary not just to live, but to pick the best way to live out of multiple options.