What game would you suggest a beginner to intermediate level of player should study?

Playing chess has become more than a habit and not merely an entertainment, to be able to devote extended periods of time just marching on the 64 squares is quite a feat. The more we learn it seems the more enjoyment we attain and so, the purpose of this is to seek ways in which we could better learn and thus enjoy chess more. We would appreciate it deeply, for anyone to share their knowledge and experiences here, thank you in advance.

Start with the very early stuff. Morphy, for example. Philidor. Etc.

Anything modern will be informed by past theory so many of the moves will be mysterious.

I think it is good to move up chronologically as far as studying games goes.

Well, it depends on their style. If that player is aggresive, they might want to look at games using the Evans Gambit and the Max Lange Attack for white, and the Sicilian and Stafford Gambit for black. If they prefer solid and slowers games, for white, they should study the Italian or the London System, and the French, Scandinavian or Caro Kann for black.

"... [annotated games are] infinitely more useful than bare game scores. However, annotated games vary widely in quality. Some are excellent study material. Others are poor. But the most numerous fall into a third category - good-but-wrong-for-you. ... You want games with annotations that answer the questions that baffle you the most. ... masters usually don't make the kind of instructive mistakes that amateurs learn the most from. In master-vs.-master games, the errors are usually minor and the punishment is so slow coming that the educational value is often lost. Perhaps the best game collection written specifically for novices is Logical Chess, Move by Move. It provides an explanation for every move and shows why the good moves are good and the bad ones are bad. Many of the games were lost by non-masters. ... there are major advantages to studying older games rather than those of today. The ideas expressed in a Rubinstein or Capablanca game are generally easier to understand. They are usually carried out to their logical end, often in a memorable way, ... In today's chess, the defense is much better. That may sound good. But it means that the defender's counterplay will muddy the waters and dilute the instructional value of the game. For this reason the games of Rubinstein, Capablanca, Morphy, Siegbert Tarrasch, Harry Pillsbury and Paul Keres are strongly recommended - as well as those of more recent players who have a somewhat classical style, like Fischer, Karpov, Viswanathan Anand and Michael Adams. ..." - GM Andrew Soltis (2010)

@kindaspongey said in #4:

"... [annotated games are] infinitely more useful than bare game scores. However, annotated games vary widely in quality. Some are excellent study material. Others are poor. But the most numerous fall into a third category - good-but-wrong-for-you. ... You want games with annotations that answer the questions that baffle you the most. ... masters usually don't make the kind of instructive mistakes that amateurs learn the most from. In master-vs.-master games, the errors are usually minor and the punishment is so slow coming that the educational value is often lost. Perhaps the best game collection written specifically for novices is Logical Chess, Move by Move. It provides an explanation for every move and shows why the good moves are good and the bad ones are bad. Many of the games were lost by non-masters. ... there are major advantages to studying older games rather than those of today. The ideas expressed in a Rubinstein or Capablanca game are generally easier to understand. They are usually carried out to their logical end, often in a memorable way, ... In today's chess, the defense is much better. That may sound good. But it means that the defender's counterplay will muddy the waters and dilute the instructional value of the game. For this reason the games of Rubinstein, Capablanca, Morphy, Siegbert Tarrasch, Harry Pillsbury and Paul Keres are strongly recommended - as well as those of more recent players who have a somewhat classical style, like Fischer, Karpov, Viswanathan Anand and Michael Adams. ..." - GM Andrew Soltis (2010)
Lol what was andrew soltis thinking when he said Anand and Karpov games are good for beginers? I guess beginer means 2000 fide otb for him

I made a study which I put a lot of time into based on some old chess books for beginner and intermediate players. It analyses the games of beginners, which contains the types of mistakes beginners make. It discusses why those are mistakes, and basic concepts in development, tactics, and strategy. I hope that it can be as useful to others as it was to me. Since I myself am a beginner/intermediate player I can relate to the issues you have. The study is not perfect and I am open to suggestions for improvement.

Also, I would appreciate knowing about any other studies like this that are directed at beginners.

I would suggest study your games...

Artur Yusupov on Analyzing Your Own Games...

'Our own games are nearer to us than any others. We played them, and we solved the problems which were put in our way. In analysis it is possible to examine and to define more precisely the assessments by which we were guided during the course of the game, and we can establish where we went wrong and where we played inaccurately. Sometimes our opponent punishes us for the mistakes we make, but often they remain unnoticed and may only be brought to light by analysis. So, what do I consider are the important points to pay attention to when you analyze your own games?

Above all, you need to find the turning- points - to establish where mistakes were made, where the assessment of the position changed, or where an opportunity to change the situation on the board abruptly was not exploited. The ability to find the critical moments of a game during analysis is itself exceptionally important, since this will also help you to track down such moments during actual play. This is perhaps the most difficult aspect of chess - recognizing the critical turning-point in a game, the point when it is necessary to think really hard and to solve a problem; when the outcome of the whole game depends on a single move.

The second point to which you should pay attention when analyzing your games is the search for the reasons for your mistakes. By revealing your mistakes you will gradually come to realize what they might be associated with, and you will see the deficiencies in your game. Of course, it is easier if you have a trainer who can help you. But you will feel the benefit only when you yourself begin to sense the reasons for your mistakes acutely and no longer wish to put up with them. An objective awareness of one's own weaknesses is a necessary first step in the serious business of correcting them.

The third aspect that I wish to mention is that it is very important to look for new possibilities, moves which in the course of the game you paid no attention to because you were fascinated by other ideas. After analysis you begin to get a better feeling for the type of position being studied, you master the strategic and tactical methods which are typical of such positions. And the conclusions that you arrive at independently imprint themselves on your memory much more permanently than those obtained from other sources.

A final point. When analyzing a game you have played, you need to give considerable thought to the opening phase, to try to improve on your play, especially if you were not entirely satisfied with the outcome of the opening. By adopting a critical approach to the problems that you faced in the opening it is possible to improve your knowledge, to outline new plans and to think up important novelties.'

Now if I could only take my own advice...sigh...

I agree with #7. It makes sense, because you are trying to improve yourself. So look at your own games with a critical eye. Try to do this without any help first. Try to identify the critical moments in the game and then understand what went wrong. How could you have done better? Are there patterns emerging from this analysis? Keep a notebook and record them. If you can get a chess buddy who is stronger than you to analyse some of your games, do that. Having someone else give you their view is valuable. Finally, the chess engine can be abused, but after you analysed your game by yourself, you can go thru it with the engine to see what you missed. Not everything will make sense, but the big blunders should. If you can't understand why something is a blunder, again get help from a chess buddy, and eventually consider a coach.

I have started analysing longer time format games that i play by opening them in a lichess study, and the more i invest in this the more i realize its value. But I still feel like @acercamp . I should follow my own advice more!