RobertJasiek wrote:
Wha exactly is the chunk, what does it consist of, what reading is part of it and how is the problem solved if just referencing to the chunk? What is the difference to regular reading with reference to known positions and what, if any, is the time advantage?
Sadly, it depends ...
The experience of the player in question plays an important role, the individual way of thinking is another parameter.
I do not have read your book, so I would like to assume that "regular reading" describes a METHOD (for solving problems, but not restricted to tsume-go) that is based on the RESULTs of CHUNKING (/ SHAPE ANALYSIS = i.e your "known positions").
In my opinion, "chunking" / "shape analysis" is the answer to your un-defined terms "obvious" / "non-obvious".
+ + + + + +
Let me try to explain a bit deeper ...
Regarding the last problem in this thread, I was very fascinated by Bill's explanation using "halve eyes", a term that does not exist in "my" world / terminology. However, this is a good example of showing the benefit of letting a player develop their OWN "rules" (on the basis of working through a lot of exemplary cases).
Based on these elements of the problem ...
- Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bm9 Not yet connected
$$ -------------------------------
$$ . . . . O . X X . O . . P . . .
$$ . . . X O O . O O O O P X . . .
$$ . . X . X O O X O X . X . . . .
$$ . . . . X X X X X X . . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]
- Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bm9 Line of (potential) false eye
$$ -------------------------------
$$ . . . . O . X X . O . M O . . .
$$ . . . X O O . O O O O O Z . . .
$$ . . X . X O O X O X . X . . . .
$$ . . . . X X X X X X . . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]
... Bill "chunked" ...
- Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bm9 A half eye (1)
$$ -------------------------------
$$ . . . . O . X X . O C . O . . .
$$ . . . X O O . O O O O O X . . .
$$ . . X . X O O X O X . X . . . .
$$ . . . . X X X X X X . . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]
... "half an eye" that -- if I remember correct -- is used by Bill in other contexts as well, while ...
- Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bm9 A defect (d) in White's encirclement
$$ -------------------------------
$$ . . . . O . X X . O . d O . . .
$$ . . . X O O . O O O O O X . . .
$$ . . X . X O O X O X . X . . . .
$$ . . . . X X X X X X . . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]
... my chunk was a "defect" in White's encirclement (with "defect" also used in other contexts).
But what is the difference in thinking ?
Bill: "There is only half an eye at the right, because Black can exploit White's defect in her encirclement."
Cassandra: "There is a defect in White's encirclement that can be exploited by Black, so there is no sure eye for White."
In principle, the result is equivalent.
If we go a bit further, we realise that ...
- Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bm9 A half eye (2)
$$ -------------------------------
$$ . . . . O . X X . O C . . . . .
$$ . . . X O O . O O O O O X . . .
$$ . . X . X O O X O X . X . . . .
$$ . . . . X X X X X X . . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]
... -- for Bill -- the "open" position is the same case as the one shown before (apparently, he already knows what a throw-in serves for), while ...
- Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bm9 A hole (h) in White's encirclement
$$ -------------------------------
$$ . . . . O . X X . O . h . . . .
$$ . . . X O O . O O O O O X . . .
$$ . . X . X O O X O X . X . . . .
$$ . . . . X X X X X X . . X . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .[/go]
... it is a slightly different case in "my" world. "My" differentiation between "hole" and "defect" serves those players who have not yet reached Bill's state of knowledge and also might have difficulties with sacrificing stones (necessary for playing a throw-in).
Adapted to the individual mindset, Bill "sees" halve eyes, while I "see" defects / holes (and also "potential" eyes, with potential having a broader / other meaning than "half").
No one of us is forced to adopt / utilise a way of thinking that would be "unusual" for him, resulting in unnecessary thinking efforts. However, we come to an identical conclusion.
_________________
The really most difficult Go problem ever:
https://igohatsuyoron120.de/index.htmIgo Hatsuyōron #120 (really solved by KataGo)