RobertJasiek: What I really miss in the book is a third term for a liberty type: Fighting Liberties. While Approach Liberties are those necessary to remove a particular string (or group, whatever that might be), Fighting Liberties are those that are defined for a particular type of a semeais and a particular considered semeai to allow for a fast determination of its outcome.
tderz: Robert, I have not yet read the book from cover to cover, rather tried to look at to me most interesting pages first. As I understood and recall it, the author makes a very clear distinction between "fighting" liberties which he simply calls liberties - and dame.
Do you mean this type of content phpwiki:?path=EyesCollection&page=EyeLiberties?
Or this one?: phpwiki:?path=EyesCollection&page=TableOfEyespaces which should have been edited since 2 years.
Steve Bailey created a table for classifying semeais: Liberty Counting Tables
RobertJasiek: What a "dame" is can be seen in some formal rulesets like the Japanese 2003 Rules. Hunter does not consistently use the word dame for what was traditionally called "liberty" and is now called "physical libertey". Hunter uses "liberty" for three different things: 1) physical liberty, 2) approach liberty, 3) fighting liberty. In other words, his usage is very confusing. - Steve's table is very useful but as incomplete as Hunter's book. If one studies subtypes carefully, then one notices that some aspects change from subtype to subtype.
Bill: Cher Robert, it sounds like you have a book, or at least an article or two on this subject yourself.
RobertJasiek: In fact, I am trying to understand the contents by writing the outline of a new book. The latter is still just a byproduct but that helps me to understand capturing races fast and efficiently. Also I am doing this because I want to understand semeais with kos or other excitements much more generally than covered in Hunter's book. Besides, one of my long term aims is an extensive series of books about life and death; semeais are part of that, so I may as well continue my study there.
So far I have rewritten and enhanced the general contents of chapter 1 by classifying semeais more deeply than in 6 top level types. It is straightforward if one uses approach liberties and fighting liberties as main criteria. For convienience, I include sekis under the term "semeais" because sekis are a form of settled semeais.
tderz Robert, that sounds super and really exciting !!
I want to be one of the first buyers of your book when it's ready.
Could you already give away the titles of your finer classifications of your new scheme?
When I read Hunter's book, I was very intrigued by the transitions of some semeai types into others which can occur easily. Without my book at hand (and my notes in it) I cannot exactly describe the various situations. Will you do something on that as well?
RobertJasiek: As you know, I am a perfectionist. I will not publish such a book already when it is just some improvement of an existing book - rather I would create a series of books that includes a pretty much complete treatment of all basic semeais, including such with several kos. All this needs careful research and I am working on other projects as well (among them joseki books, rules books, business games). So unfortunately we have to think in terms of years rather than weeks when it comes to publication of books by me on semeais.
I do not reveal my book's structure yet because I need to protect my commercial interests. However, I can say something about contents: all basic cases of approach liberties, fighting liberties, kos, eyes, etc. will be treated in general. So far this seems feasible for semeais between two groups. I do not yet have an idea how many types there would be for three or more involved groups and whether a complete classification for them is possible within a reasonable time.
Needless to say, my book would study transitions between types as well. Anyway, if I can find time to write those books, they would have more contents than you can dream of now. Promised. I refer to "basic" types only because presumably spaces in between or next to groups involved in a semeai might become arbitrarily complex themselves. I may try to solve all (or at least most) basic types, but not the entire game of Go.
tderz: I hope your book will appear (sooner than later). The way you describe it, you may be lost in an endless quest - and never publish it. Your wish to be perfect may cost you many opportunities to publish a good book which satisfies many. My personal experience is exactly similar. I lose many tournament games because I thought too long for the best moves. "Won" games (better positions) lost in time. Or There occurs an average, normal 3dan mistake or blunder and the time for recovery is totally gone. I do not wish you similar for your book projects...
RobertJasiek: A compromise between time, quality, and completeness will not sacrifice completeness of basic aspects. E.g., if I study basic approach liberties for some types, then I prefer to study them for all types that I include in the book. I might decide to limit the number of kos involved to, e.g., 3.