Guess The Move vs Annotated Games

Hello,

My question is, what do you think is more beneficial for improvement, using guess the move software, such as Lucas Chess, to guess the moves of various grandmaster games by players such as capablanca. After you guess each move the computer rates the move and compares it to the master’s move, if the move was different.

Or to play over annotated game collections of various grandmasters over the board.

Having completed a lot of games in both methods I’m not sure which is more beneficial to your improvement as a player. When you play over annotated games and try to guess the moves, there is no way to compare the quality of your moves objectively. For instance, if both c4 and b3 are roughly equally good then if you play b3 but the master played c4 you could end up thinking your idea was not good. Moreover, if the move you’re thinking of was a blunder, you might never find out since you just guess the move then see why the master made a different move. The main benefit of annotated game collections is the annotations. But it seems like often the annotations just give you the answer, instead of getting you to think about why the master made that move.

Now compare this to playing guess the move on software such as Lucas Chess or Chesstempo. Here your moves are scored based on the engine accuracy, if you play a move differently from the master. So you’ll know if your move was good, or if the plan you came up with was good even if it was different than the masters. The other potential upside is that when you make a move and you see the master’s move, you have to think to come up with the reason the master made that move, rather than it being told to you. This could potentially make the ideas of the position stick in your head more.

TL;DR: What is better, playing over annotated game collections, or Playing guess the move on chesstempo/Lucas Chess.

Bump

None of the above but if I had to choose I'd prefer to use annotated games. If the annotations are good you normally have more context because you have the full games and what happened in the player head while with the other method you just do a tactic with a computer.

I never tried any of those methods so you should take my advices at your own peril.

Not sure whether it's "better" or not...but I would rather play over annotated games. Guess The Moves stuff does at least get you looking at the game like it's a live one...but I'd rather just have the notes (and play my own games).

Merely guessing won't do it and nor merely gazing masters games.
One needs to well analyse the game oneself and understand.

Me I prefer Find Best Move (FBM), review game, look at engine analysis. Then go over an annotated edition of the game (assuming you have one.)

0. I use the playgrandmasters.com site that has various player (26) collections (games from Move by Move series but not the annotations). Also game collections by ECO numbers.
1. Play Game
   You select your total time 30, 60, 90, 120 minutes and then play moves starting with move 6 in the game. You get credit for a move that matches the game or the best engine move. You see if your each individual move is correct or incorrect. A current percent correct score displays. At the end of the game you get an overall EEP for the game (estimated performance rating) and it shows a pseudo ELO rating based on all your games.
2. Next, review the game and also engine lines included for each move.
3. If you have the Move by Move book/pdf for the player, you can then play over the annotated game.

I did FBM for 218 games. I like that you have to engage and work hard like in a game or else you get a poor result. Iget a lots move wrong in a row, you can pause the game and take a break and return refreshed ready to do better.