Golden Rule Of Chess Improvement

#10
I respectfully disagree.
"oh that is something Ive done right and should keep on doing" Say your opponent falls into a trap, but if he does not your trap is a bad move. The succes of your trap will makes you play for traps more.
"oh at this point I could have done much better, I missed that" Yes but all is well that ends well, I won anyway, so let us forget aboiut the inconsequential lapse. Mistakes in won games do not stick. Mistakes in lost games stick unless repressed.

@tpr Nobody talked about traps here lol, you are just making things up now. Also I mean actually to NOT think "I won anyway" but to think "it was a mistake to win 10 moves late - because in a losing position such a mistake would be fatal"

@tpr I agree with you that the games you lost should be analyzed properly, because the analysis will uncover what went wrong. This is really important.

However, why shouldn't analyzing wins not be beneficial for chess improvement? IM Sielecki aka youtuber chessexplained also analyzes the games he won and he is extremely critical in the analysis.
When analyzing games you should be objective and not let the fact that you've won the game cloud your judgement.

It doesn't make sense to leave out the wins, because your games are good training material. Why leave out the majority (or minority:)) of your games who represent where you are in chess right now?
The only games that are worth analyzing are games with classical time control. That means you can't play a bunch of them because we have limited time because of family, work, university, school etc. By leaving out the wins from the limited pool of games that are worth analyzing, you loose valuable training material.

Here's an example
I had a game for my chess club team and I've won in a Maroczy type structure. However in the analysis it turned out that I made a serious tactical mistake which should have costed me the c4-pawn.
The funny thing is that I had that position multiple times before in my games and none of my opponents saw the tactic. When I analyzed my win I realized that in all the games I played before I repeated that mistake over and over again without realizing it. The reason for that, was that I wasn't analyzing my games at that time at all.

agree w @TacTicIsTicTac

analysis of both wins and losses is necessary for serious improvement, and to find ways to navigate positions better. In this way, analyzing blitz (not bullet) games can be helpful too because you can learn what patterns and habits are instinctual, and work to improve your strategic instincts. Speedy pattern recognition is important to train for tactics AND for positional play.

I learn from all of my games, even the bad Blitz ones. Guys, in practically all games you have won: there are countless occasions where you had displayed bad "technique"!? Missed some tactics?

Blitz: you can learn your openings properly, typical middlegame motifs, endgame skills, everything glued together with tactics and calculation.

In fact the only way to train openings because it is rather a procedure than accumulating dry knowledge. In fact it would be better to play 1000 classical games to every opening, than 1000 rapid games, than 1000 Blitz games. However, only in Blitz you can do that.

You mean only because concrete-brain Botwinnik hated Blitz it is bad forever? Times have changed.

(PS: Bullet is too time-related. Bashing the clock doesn't help you at the chessboard.)

@Sarg0n yep. times have changed cause now all our online blitz games are logged automatically and we can easily and quickly go back and review them. definitely room to grow with blitz, always. technique, middlegame motifs, formation of a simple plan, endgame technique -- all of this is honed and streamlined through blitz.

IMHO analyzing lost games are more important than won ones, but that doesn't mean you don't have to analyze the won games @tpr

@The_Human_Paradox exactly

tactics