Most of the editorials are well-written in a very formal way. I guess I'm not good at reading formal stuff. Luckily, I have my own solution for this, reading contest announcement comments or looking at jiangly submissions. Not gonna lie, his codes are super neat and thankfully he participates in most of the contests both officially and unofficially.
No
No
I also face this exact problem, I am able to solve questions of decent difficulty during practice, but I can never understand the editorial even if I easily solved the question myself.
Same here, but it's not totally useless for me. Even if I can't understand the editorial fully, sometimes I see the key observation and it's enough.
I don’t understand the editorials even for problems I’ve already solved. I just figure out the problems myself and look potentially for algorithms or strategies the editorial mentions.
Most editorials are not good, but it is expectable because being able to explains an idea well is a real skill.
When I don't understand the editorial, I will check the comment to see if any other people have clearer explanation, or read others solution as well. I also learn a lot from jiangly solution
Author's editorials (including mine tbh) are often not very good because when someone is talking about his own problem, after spending so much time inventing and preparing it, a lot of details seem trivial to him.
Btw if a comment helped you, you should thank the author. Writing a clear explanation takes a lot of time and effort. Receiving kind messages helps a lot to stay motivated.
No. The editorials are written by masters and are meant to be comprehended only by masters. That's why in real job interviews, they focus not only on the solution but also the ability to explain.