Do you analyze blitz ( 3min) games ?

You could have just edited the original post. I'm pretty sure the "language" barrier doesn't extend to your internet capabilities.

@TheNaphtali

I usually edit my postings. But this time I made a new one inadvertently. Thanks for your valuable contribution.

Edit: Personally, I don't analyze my 3min games - I don't play less than 5+0 :D

Touche! Well met sir.

I analyze all my games, so yes, I also analyze my 3+0 games. Of course it does not make sense to be too harsh on yourself, still it's at least very valuable for lower rated players like me, who still blunder a lot or miss interesting opportunities for an attack etc. I mean, in one game I had the opportunity to sacrifice a bishop on h2 (I think), threaten his rook with my queen afterwards and then swing her over to the kingside with check, the knight comes in and I have a great initiative. I did not see that during the game, but still remember that part of the analysis, so I think it contributes to your improvement, yes.

"I hate analyzing my own stuff tbh. Can't stand it. Why would I want to analyze the moves that made me lose when I could analyze the moves that will help me win?"

Not losing is remarkably helpful for winning. ;)

At topic, I try to analyze everything, though in shorter time controls the analysis will usually be short, too.

For those who think that zero blitz games are well-known here's Korchnoi-Fischer, Herceg Novi blitz (1970) with annotations by Bobby Fischer. Special note for 24...Nh8!! :
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1044673

Sure, particularly for the question of 'How could I have played the opening better?'. Beyond the opening, computer analysis can also be useful for pointing out unusual and missed tactical motifs.

@Sarg0n

"Why not analyzing it? Does it really matter where it stems from? Or do you believe every old chess myth?"

There is a theory that says knowledge goes through 4 phases:

1) We do not know what we do not know: unconscious ignorance.

2) We know what we do not know: conscious ignorance.

3) We know: conscious knowledge.

4) We do not know what we know: unconscious knowledge.

When I analyze my blitz games, my mistakes, due lack of time, are those of which I already have answers.

This is my conclusion: I don't feel like I have learned from analyzing an error that I am already aware of (I make they because I don't have enough time to detect it in real time).

According to the theory above, it just means that I have to make knowledge 'part of me'. Like the knowledge gained by an experienced driver who doesn't need to pay attention to what he does!

However (in terms of my post above), analyzing blitz games can teach or help improve the act of analyzing itself. Stronger players not only analyze, they LIKE to analyze. Every diagram, every position, they look and begin the analysis.

Amateurs, people like me, who are neither 'club players' nor 'torunament players', have in the act of analysis a certain mental discomfort. Analyzing takes mental stamina, and it also takes time if not experienced.

But I think, after reach 2100 in blitz, I have some potential in chess and although my advanced age (36yo) may be able to raise my level if I get consistency and improve my methods of 'practical', 'absorption' and 'refinement' of knowledge...

My goal is reach expert level, a strong amateur. Make sense for any non-professional, right? Maybe the peak for any non-tournament player is expert level, above that one need study beyond the socially acceptable, due to the time and other non-chess activities...

My question is because I would know if I need analyze my blitz games or I need play rapid or long to analyze...

@will_is_myth #18
You are focusing on blundering it seems.
In my experience it is for sure possible to play a great 5 minute game without mistakes, opposing the "We blunder because we have too little time, and we know why we blundered".
Analysing with Stockfish can show tactical oversights or interesting ideas, even positional ideas.
New ideas can be fun and inspiring, and we can learn from it and in the future apply this new toys.
It can also give insights into moves we doubted about during the game. Apart from that Lichess has the fantastic build in 7 pieces tablebases. On top of that it can be rewarding and inspiring to see that you played a flawless game. It also can be good to see you played a game full of mistakes while during the game we thought we did very well.