I do not disagree with Nagano regarding that. I understood his used of "reading all the way" to be narrower than it should, based on the context. In disagreeing what what Chew Terr presented as the gist of CSamurai's post, there were two possibilties:
A) Reading all the way really means reading all the way. Every. Single. Possibility. I disagree that this is necessary, it seems silly to think that it would be, and I don't think anyone reads out every branch of the tsumego they do.
B) Reading all the way means visualizing (what people take to mean "reading" commonly) before checking the answer or playing anything out.
Maybe I misunderstood. I dismissed A because I don't think it would have been a charitable reading at all. Plus, B was context relevant. CSamurai never said that he just started skipping over variations based on his ability to spot vital points, he said:
I start identifying eyespace, and looking at a few likely variations for my first and second ideas.
Where "first" and "second" ideas do not seem to be the only ones which he plays out:
I click the first spot, and if that's wrong, I click the second spot, then the third, then the fourth, that comes to mind. Then I try to figure out why the first second third, etc were wrong. Then I try to spot what makes the fourth stand out in the configuration. Then I move on.
By any indication CSamurai is being relatively thoroughgoing with his approach. He simply is not visualizing it all the way. The patterns he's learned merely drive what moves he checks first, which unless I am horribly mistaken, is how even those who sit on their hands and visualize it all proceed.
In any case, you still seem to disagree with me.
but I kind of doubt that it will be more effective than visualization.
Why? Is it that difficult to imagine that different people learn by different associative methods? Mental representations are not uniform. Some people do arithmetic visually, others do it through an internal verbal representation, some count on their fingers. Some dream in black and white. Some people can play music by ear, others have to learn by kinesthetic practice.
I'd bet that the guy that's studied by practicing visualization will beat out the guy that hasn't.
Why? I realize you lack evidence, but what's the important difference between the two modes of computation (one relying on visual representations, the other on kinesthetic*)
*- The representation for the second type might still be visual, they may just be better able to process visual representations by associating images with actions in the learning process.
-----------------------------
You posted again before I could respond:
Your personal experience is not a good ground for generalizing about other people in this context.
That's about all I can say, except to try to open your mind enough to imagine that what you experience through visualization, someone else approximately experiences when they play something out. It shouldn't be too hard, try to think of a skill you've learned where you didn't primarily approach it by visualizing the activity.
It strikes me as odd, considering how you defended MW in another thread by cautioning others about making assumptions regarding where someone else is coming from, that you are being somewhat dismissive here.
