![[Welcome to Sensei's Library!]](images/stone-hello.png "Sensei's Library")
I have tried to follow a few guidelines while assembling the Kanazawa Tesuji Series or Gokyo Shumyo. After the debates I would like to end up with
The more we can keep up with this before WME, the better. I'll let the debates run for a few days, then WME. Cheers.
TOC is a good way to keep an overview.
If you just want to keep one correct solution,
(perhaps I do unjustce and misinterprete you here)
you (might) miss the essence of the problems.
A solution to our disagreement here could be that
that what you dislike, e.g. TOC, layout, markings, letters
is kept at a path called "problem solving path" or so.
One could keep 5 plain diagrams
then we are both happy. tderz
This discussion actually applies to all problems and exercises on SL.
On top of what Dieter has said, I would want to add the following:
What do you guys think?
Bill: I also think that it's a good idea to have a /Failures page. Doing so keeps the /Solution page clean and simple.
I also think that some problems could use a /Comments page. TDerz makes the point that there is more to understanding a problem than just knowing the solution and a failure diagram or two. I might add that problem books are often short on space, and may leave a lot unsaid for that reason. We do not have that limitation on SL. But by the time you are talking about two mistakes by the same player, I think that you are even pushing the limits of a /Failures page, and are exploring different, though related, questions. Also, even on a fairly small scale, such explorations can challenge dan players. They are more like BQMs. I think it would be well to put such discussion on something like a /Comments page or /Related Questions page, and treat those pages like we do BQMs.
On solution pages, I would personally prefer a structure where the correct solution (the 'main line') is immediately at the top of the page. That is basically what people are looking for when they click on 'Solution'.
If there are variations, add a TOC first, then the variations. This way, when people have questions about the main line they can look into the TOC to see if their question is adressed anywhere (if variations have clear titles)
Proposal:
We might also consider renaming all the "Kanazawa Problem ##" pages to "Gokyo Shumyo Problem ##". Gokyo Shumyo is the name of the problem set throughout Japan and in a number of other countries (China, a notable exception). The Kanazawa title is connected to the cities of Ghent and Kanazawa only.
For a couple of problems in SL, I have experimented with giving the failure diagrams before the solution diagrams. Part of the reason is that I often feel that the solution and the failure come in a package, in that the reasoning behind the solution is best explained through the failure diagrams. Some problem books choose to present the solutions for some of their problems this way. When the solution and failure diagrams are separated, the flow of the arguments may get disrupted.
In a similar vein, the main line for a couple of problems are not displayed as the first diagram.
However, I understand that some readers do not like to see the main line not being the first diagram in the solution. How many are actually strongly for or against such a scheme?
If the "obvious" move leads to failure, then I agree it is more academic to give these first. I would not object to better pedagogic presentation at the expense of uniformity, but keeping things unifrom is fine with me too. If all moves are equally obvious, then giving the main line first is only natural. Here, the "obvious move" was the solution.
I also encourage posting thoughts, questions, alternatives, as long as one isn't too disappointed that the WME decided to discard them. I take no ownership in the problems I post, but a deep interest to have a fine result, yes. Thanks to all who so vividly contribute!
"Here, the "obvious move" was the solution."
It is the most obvious move only with the hindsight of an ex-post-facto analysis, namely knowing the result.
E.g. with this problem, I often start with the wrong 1-3-point peep (leading only to ko), despite that I should know better,
because it is also an obvious starting point.
If there were truly "obvious" moves, these problems were not selected for the Gokyo Shumyo, because there were no problems at all, just obvious answers.
What does this teach us?
That there are usually no best approaches, rather that it is a subjective choice between (good, obvious?) alternatives.
What the majority here should wish, is that eventually no contributed information is lost - independently of its arrangement.
I own many problem books of English, Japanese, Chinese and Korean origin. Several start with the solutions, some with the wrong variation paths (Chin. 1988 ed of Igo Hatsuryon). Some only give the solutions (Chinese ed. of Kanzufu & Gokyo Shumyo). Some Korean problem books are without solutions at all. Hence, the authorities do not agree on the best approach.
It is really our choice.
I don't mind much, only there should be a good overview (pro TOC if many diagrams).
Let me then say "natural" instead of obvious.
Hane to kill is natural. If it turns out to be the solution, the problem can serve as an application of natural ideas. If the solution is less natural, the failure starting with the natural move may be best.
But what's natural/obvious, that's indeed subjective and depends on experience.
Bill: Well, I often prefer to see the failures before the solution. Separating the failures from the solution in subpages (with links between them) lets me do so, and also gives those who prefer to look at the solution first the option of doing that. Power to the reader!
I'm strongly against having anything other than the correct solution at the top of the /Solutions page. I've seen problems where the failure was listed first, and it's invariably annoyed me when actually trying to solve the problem. If there are multiple variants to the solution, they should all be presented before the failures. I also like the idea of a separate /Failures page, which could be linked from the /Solutions page if you want.
Perhaps using an approach already used on the Joseki page, we could create a diagram at the top of the solution page containing only letters on the 'obvious' points. Clicking on such a letter could then jump to the diagrams starting with that move. This would allow someone to check if their answer is correct, and if it is not, return to the problem page to have another look. Even more power to the reader, one might say :-)