Until you mentioned it in your last paragraph, I was going to jump in and rave about the "Think Like a Super-GM". In terms of highlighting the differences in various levels of thinking process, there's really nothing like it. Though my game needs a lot of work, I gained a lot of confidence from seeing that I was getting problems that some stronger players missed (including *quite* strong players). And as you point out, much of the difference relates to calculating out concrete variations. The really strong players seem to take much of the explanation for granted and then, crunch crunch crunch.
Until you mentioned it in your last paragraph, I was going to jump in and rave about the "Think Like a Super-GM". In terms of highlighting the differences in various levels of thinking process, there's really nothing like it. Though my game needs a lot of work, I gained a lot of confidence from seeing that I was getting problems that some stronger players missed (including *quite* strong players). And as you point out, much of the difference relates to calculating out concrete variations. The really strong players seem to take much of the explanation for granted and then, crunch crunch crunch.
Great post, as usual Dalton. If I could chime in with one more related book rec, Move First Think Later tackles this issue in depth.
Yeah, Hendriks' book is another great one!