[Rotating Rabbit]

A quick analogy: In mathematics, the best way for a beginner to learn is to figure out stuff for himself/herself. The only way to truly understand something is to derive it unaided.

As a child (<10), I spent ages trying to figure out all sorts of things with integer numbers, patterns of primes (heh)/ factorisation, powers, modulos, and figuring out some stuff for myself.

Now having just done a masters in maths, i can say the only thing i'm actually good at is number theory, the tree branching out from what i got stuck into as a kid. Sure i'm competant at all areas of maths that ive been taught over the years. For example, I can do all sorts of stuff on calculus, and it would seem that I understand it, but i know that deep down, if I were presented with a new & monster difficult problem that required true intuition and insight, I would probably not get out. Where as if it were in number theory, I would stand a good chance.

I think its the same with 2+2. If I read the solution (or likely best move) to a turn-decision say, from soneone like diablo, I may read it and think about it offline and then think 'yeah, I understand that', but I will only understand it up to a point.

Once you've seen the solution to a problem in anything, maths, poker, whatever, you've forever destroyed the benefit of trying to figure it out yourself.

Sure if its a packaged move, and you can apply it 20 times a day on your 8-table 2/4nl game this is great, but 50/100 is clearly another ball game.