We need more amateurs to post their annotated games.

@ divide-et-impera

if he took a break from putting you in check you win period, just run your king around until he cant check it anymore, also i will analyse it for you

you were winning, he had to keep checking you in order to win

here is one of my recent games, i need to work on Kand 1pawn vlone king, it had a brilllinat knight sac at the end though

hello i have another game here for analysis by those here oh and in my analysis of someone elses i accedentaly did not delete a line with a dropped queen even worse i didnt take it in the analysis sorry

any way here is mine

 Sorry Jetfighter, most of your moves, I wouldn't give your moves exclams, I'd give your opponent's moves question marks. Your opponent played pretty poorly. You exploited those mistakes though.

Haha wow, I got my first double-exclamation move (!!) in a Fritz analysis today! In the game I remember it took me like 3 minutes to even see the possibility of the move, and maybe a couple more minutes to check it.  That's quite a lot of time for a Live Chess and I think my opponent assumed I had left the game without resigning lol, since he was 1 turn from checkmating me before that move turned everything around.

By the way, for anyone who has Fritz, you can go to your Live Chess, click "view" to go to the game you want, and then click "Get PGN" - you save this file and open it in Fritz and you can run an analysis from there to compared with the chess.com analysis (which is usually really good as well).

Jetfighter13: Your last comment shows a lack of understanding of what the French is. That isn't the French opening, so why are you saying that "this guy obviously doesnt [sic] know how to play the french"?! Your opponent transposed into the Sicilian!

BTW, in your first variation, why don't you take the pawn with bishop? I find it hard to believe that black has an advantage at the end of that variation, since a Black pawn is hanging, the Black pawn structure is incredibly weak and over-extended, and the king is in a crappy position.

jetfighter13, I must ask you a question: Do you ever think that you've made a mistake in a game of yours? It seems like very game you showcase has 50% !!!!! with your moves, even when they're simple moves like recapturing a piece (move 15). I have yet to see you post a game where you recognize that you made a mistake. One can only learn if you do recognize that you do make mistakes and you try to learn from them...

That's great! I have yet to get a double-exclam... but I've gotten plenty of one exclamation marks!

i dont post my realy awefull mistakes because i see them as soon as i make them, also i forgot he had transposed and to your other points d'oh i missed them and all i wanted to show was the cool attack, i will refrain from using the punctuation tool in this forum unless it is fairly obvious to all it deserves it or the computer analysis tools says so

Actually, if 37.Kd2, then black should play ...Rf2+, after which the White Queen on h6 hangs and White easily loses.

LOL DOUBLE EXCLAMINESS!! HERE'S A DOUBLE EXCLAM MOVE IN A GAME I PLAYED!!

Nice job then! I'd only ever gotten one (!) before this. Isn't it nice that Fritz gives us something to feel good about? I haven't seen other engines do it!

Thanks, but sometimes you can have great games with horrible mistakes-- if you recognize those, it's even more of a feel-good thing if you win . BTW, don't feel like you have to refrain from putting exclamation marks. I for example, wouldn't put an exclam for Rf1 because it seems like a simple move for me, but for you, I guess you could, since it demonstrates good attacking skills and works well in your plan!

ps, please don't shy away from putting question marks on moves (especially yours), since it'll make you appreciate the good moves even more!

 well thanx for making me feel beter, but i do need to cut back, because sometimes, i do get carried away can you annotate it by the way because i get a litle tired of flipping back and forth between posts and pages

It's so great because not only does it stop the mate, but I lose no material and end up winning material in the moves after the save.

Here's two games I played against the same person 3 days ago. I'm not exactly sure how to analyze/annotate games so judge my chess skills and my analyzation/annotation skills. :P

Sorry about the double post, well heres the game I played as black. I played the games in the order I posted them

A simplified pattern of analysis can be:

1) what is the opening (and variation if there is one) until the game goes out of book;

2) analysis of the position after the game goes out of book provided no threat or forcing move has just been made:

- material (equal or advanatge for one side; exchanges and available pieces);

- pawn structure (majorities - center/kingside/queenside, chains, holes, doubled/backward/isolated/passed pawns, created open / semi-open files and diagonals, etc, whatever is specific for the position);

- center control, initiative, space advantage;

- king safety;

- piece development (is a player ahead/behind; coordination of pieces and of pieces - pawns).

3) possible middlegame plans for both players according to the position:

- how the position can be used - taking control of files, diagonals; putting pressure on an enemy weakness; exploiting early initiative, material, or space advantage (if existent); other position specific plans;

- attacking chances for the player that has the initiative - kingside/queenside/central attack; favorable pawn breaks; exploiting enemy weaknesses;

- counterplay for the other player - if existent, what it is; if there isn't, can it be achieved and how; how to prevent the opponent's plans;

- conclusion whether the position is favorable and should be used or unfavorable and should be changed, and how can that be done;

4) middlegame:

- plan choice; execution and adherence to it; opposition by the other player according to his counterplay options;

- variations of some "tactical" positions; tactical blunders;

- move choice reasons;

5) endgame:

- position at the beginning - pawns, pieces, advantages (material; passed/semi-passed pawns, king advancement and others), etc.

- game plan; for "exact" endgames - correct way to win/draw;

- execution and result.

6) overall conclusion - when did the game become sharp; was it slow or fast paced, closed/open; when did a player take (change) the advantage, why (opponent's blunder/passivity; good plan and efficient execution) and how (advantades usage); when the outcome of the game was clear.

I know it sounds long, but don't worry, 10-15 sentences are usually enough to describe the whole game (without counting variation analysis) depending of its complexity. Analyzing some games in a similar way will help you perform better when playing too, because you will have some pattern of what to look for, and you will save time. Basically there's not much difference between playing a game and annotating a game, because both are exercises of position analysis (strategical and tactical) and move choice, and improving at annotating goes along with improving at playing. That's the main reason for this topic too

Here's what an analysis of the first game could be: