How to analyze properly by yourself? • page 1/1 • General Chess Discussion • lichess.org

I'd like to get into analyzing master games of the openings I play, and also just analyzing my games in more depth.

Plan:
Start by making a study, clicking the lichess masters database, playing out my preferred variation, then clicking like 10 (however many) games of strong players where mostly my color won. Once you have the games you can analyze them by yourself using a variety of methods:

Quick method: playing through the whole game quickly
2 minutes method: give yourself time to guess each next move
20 minutes method: play up to the start of the middlegame and then spending 20 minutes thinking about the position, possible plans for both sides etc, then play the rest of the game
You do your own analysis with comments and arrows, and then at the end do analysis with the engine and see if it approves/disapproves certain lines, why or why not, and explore interesting lines/alternative lines/lines you missed/didnt consider

But there are problems with analyzing yourself.

Firstly if you want to get your preferred variation, and then explore some moves you're curious about, your range of possible games will probably decrease quickly and the ratings quickly go down from 2700 to like 2200-2500, and even though these players are still very strong, there are definitely lots of mistakes/missed opportunities you will miss, especially the kind of practical information a coach or GM commentary can give you. (example "black played e5 here but they also have a super practical option Nd7 because when white is aiming for this, you can fall back on the idea of... blah blah blah"

Even if you can get a game by Carlsen or Pragg, there will still be some mistakes and subtle decisions you will never be able to pick up without getting that human feedback. You can only rely on your own discipline and curiosity and help from the engine. But even if you figure tactical things out with the engine you still won't be getting any practical advice about the position from a coach.

Similar problems happen when analyzing your own games honestly. I try to analyze them myself first (comments, arrows, no engine) and only then compare with what the engine says, and explore lines it suggested that I missed, explore alternative ideas and under what circumstances they work. But it's hard to get a perfect technique.

I know coaching can be very effective, but I am not going to pay consistently for one - plus I need to figure out the right techniques myself anyway, because even if you have a coach, most of the improvement probably comes from yourself.

If anyone has any thoughts or tips they use/used for doing very effective analysis I'd love to hear. Thanks

I'd like to get into analyzing master games of the openings I play, and also just analyzing my games in more depth. Plan: Start by making a study, clicking the lichess masters database, playing out my preferred variation, then clicking like 10 (however many) games of strong players where mostly my color won. Once you have the games you can analyze them by yourself using a variety of methods: - Quick method: playing through the whole game quickly - 2 minutes method: give yourself time to guess each next move - 20 minutes method: play up to the start of the middlegame and then spending 20 minutes thinking about the position, possible plans for both sides etc, then play the rest of the game You do your own analysis with comments and arrows, and then at the end do analysis with the engine and see if it approves/disapproves certain lines, why or why not, and explore interesting lines/alternative lines/lines you missed/didnt consider But there are problems with analyzing yourself. Firstly if you want to get your preferred variation, and then explore some moves you're curious about, your range of possible games will probably decrease quickly and the ratings quickly go down from 2700 to like 2200-2500, and even though these players are still very strong, there are definitely lots of mistakes/missed opportunities you will miss, especially the kind of practical information a coach or GM commentary can give you. (example "black played e5 here but they also have a super practical option Nd7 because when white is aiming for this, you can fall back on the idea of... blah blah blah" Even if you can get a game by Carlsen or Pragg, there will still be some mistakes and subtle decisions you will never be able to pick up without getting that human feedback. You can only rely on your own discipline and curiosity and help from the engine. But even if you figure tactical things out with the engine you still won't be getting any practical advice about the position from a coach. Similar problems happen when analyzing your own games honestly. I try to analyze them myself first (comments, arrows, no engine) and only then compare with what the engine says, and explore lines it suggested that I missed, explore alternative ideas and under what circumstances they work. But it's hard to get a perfect technique. I know coaching can be very effective, but I am not going to pay consistently for one - plus I need to figure out the right techniques myself anyway, because even if you have a coach, most of the improvement probably comes from yourself. If anyone has any thoughts or tips they use/used for doing very effective analysis I'd love to hear. Thanks

kindaspongey edited

"... Despite the obvious advantages of occasionally going to the extreme, I suggest a norm of getting out a chessboard, playing each move, reading what the author has to say about the move, and then making the next move. At this rate, it should only take 20-40 minutes to play over an annotated game. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2005)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627023809/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman50.pdf
https://lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/how-should-we-analyze-our-games
https://lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/how-to-analyze-our-own-games

"... Despite the obvious advantages of occasionally going to the extreme, I suggest a norm of getting out a chessboard, playing each move, reading what the author has to say about the move, and then making the next move. At this rate, it should only take 20-40 minutes to play over an annotated game. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2005) https://web.archive.org/web/20140627023809/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman50.pdf https://lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/how-should-we-analyze-our-games https://lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/how-to-analyze-our-own-games