While the real benefit out of studying tsumego is to sharpen your reading skill rather than imagining the problem to be a realistic scenario that could be reverse engineered, it can be more motivating if the latter were true. For instance, maybe for this problem:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$ -------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . O . . . .
$$ | . . X X O . . . .
$$ | . O X O . O . . .
$$ | X . X O . . . . .
$$ | . X O . . . . . .
$$ | . O O . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . O . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Maybe what happened is that Black made a 3-3 invasion of White's corner:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bc
$$ -------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . B . . . . . .
$$ | . . . O . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . O . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

And the following sequence occurs:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$ -------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . 1 . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . .
$$ | . . 2 O . . . . .
$$ | 8 . 6 3 . . . . .
$$ | . 4 O . . . . . .
$$ | . 5 7 . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Later, elsewhere on the board a ko fight arises and B plays as a threat, to which W responds.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Bc
$$ -------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . O . . . .
$$ | . . X 1 2 . . . .
$$ | . 4 X O . b . . .
$$ | X . X O . . . . .
$$ | . X O . . . . . .
$$ | . O O . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . a . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Later on, W realizes that she is behind and eyes the corner to see if there is a way to kill it, playing . Thinking of the problem in this light, one could ask themselves...

• How does Black refute and live? (original problem statement)
• If W hadn't played , could she kill this corner?
• The difference between this position and the first diagram is that W had stones in a and b. Do they make a difference?

Anyways, this is just my little way of making tsumego solving a more immersive experience. How would you answer these questions? Any other interesting examples would be great, below is another problem that looks reverse-engineerable:

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wc
$$ -------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . O . . . . .
$$ | . . X O X . X . .
$$ | . X O X . . . . .
$$ | . O O X . X . . .
$$ | . . . O X . . . .
$$ | . . O . O . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

Shouldn't be at B15?

I am not good with this stuff, perhaps I am wrong.

I have certainly seen this done in books. A problem is presented. Afterwords, based on the premise "if there is a difficulty, the mistake may be earlier", the formation is shown a move before the situation of the previous problem (the move that created the opportunity of the previous problem was wrong; what move should have been made instead).

I think:

_________________
I think I am so I think I am.

_________________
I think I am so I think I am.