Citation reference:

https://www.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.p ... 16#p265816hakuseki wrote:

One thing I am really enjoying is the lack of mistakes in the problems (actually, I have seen a couple typos, but it was very clear that these were simply typos and not conceptual errors). This is really different from my experience with go problems, where I've come to expect 3% or more of problems to contain errors in their solutions. I asked a friend about this, and he thinks that this is because tsumeshogi creators sign their problems. Indeed, the book I'm reading contains problems by many different authors, but the author's names are written above the problems. My friend suggests the authors would lose prestige if their problems were composed incorrectly.

I do feel a bit inspired to do more tsumego when I switch back to focusing on Go, but I'd like to put a bit of effort into choosing a problem collection without errors.

Suppose the problems are above beginner level, for which creating flawless problems is easy enough. Go problems depend on variations, decisions and possibly evaluation. A problem collection without errors (other than typos) requires, for each problem, study of

**all **relevant variations,

**always correct** decisions and

**always correct** evaluations (if problems consider evaluation at all). Achieving this requires great carefulness and much time. Increasingly so for more difficult problems.

The greatest problem with almost all problem collections by far is not their frequency of mistakes in their stated "solutions" but the extraordinarily small fraction of stated relevant variations, correct decisions and correct evaluations of variations.

Almost all problem books sell the illusion that the stated variation(s) would be sufficient.

Some problem books focus on teaching problems having only one correct variation (or one correct first move); for such, the decision-making is implied by seeing the one correct solution; however, these problem books do not teach the reality that problems, like real game positions, can have none, one or several correct solutions.

For collections that do not always have exactly one correct solution of each problem or that also require evaluation, I only know these books with a serious attempt to study all relevant variations, always correct decisions and (if applicable) always correct evaluations. Their currently known percentages of problems with mistakes in the answers are stated.

- Tactical Reading (3%)

- First Life and Death (0%)

- Capturing Races 2 - Tactical Problems (0%)

- Endgame Problems 1 (0%)

As you notice, I have written all of them and invented most of their problems. (Besides, some of my theory books approach 0% according to my current knowledge.) Why have I achieved what other authors do not seem to have achieved? I specifically write those books to fulfil the requirements of all relevant variations, always correct decisions and always correct evaluations. I achieve this my investing the necessary effort and time for writing and proofreading, having a mathematical education of avoiding all mistakes and avoiding problems more difficult than I can solve within reasonable time. (I have invented some too difficult problems but withhold them until I can solve them.)

If problems are new or do not have known authors, the book author and / or editor (and sometimes partly the publisher) are responsible for the contents and put their reputation at stake. Some collections of classic problems or standard shapes might not know inventors but still the authors of the collections are responsible.