We need more amateurs to post their annotated games.

This is a recent game where I played against one of this rare opening setups that involve cramping your own position without challenging the center:

Good game! But bishop captures queen was a big blunder, which your opponent should have seen.

here is an epic that i just won

 Yeah, but the previous move, Qxg5!! was a very nice move though, and with playing a blitz game, a free queen is too hard too let go!

The juxtaposition of these thread titles may explain why more people don't do this:

WELL SAID !! Also if your opponent developes one piece then makes 9 pawn moves in the opening PLEASE do not post those games ! 

It wont post :(

Here are three of my annotated games with some explanations about them.

This is a King's Indian Defense game that I played as black. My opponent was aiming for center control, while I was waiting for him to make a mistake and counterattack. One pawn's gambit and a rook sacrifice were enough for me to win the game within 22 moves.

Here's a Modern Defense game I played with black some time ago. My opponent was good, but at the end he made some mistakes that cost him the game. Anyway, it was fun to play. This is how the game went:

Here's a game I played as black that can show the importance of and correlation between good pawn structure and strategical play. Philidor, the greatest chess player of his age, said: "The pawns are the soul of chess". Since pawns are much more stationary than pieces, their structure determines middlegame play to a big extent - the appropriate overall strategy as well as specific tactics. Therefore having a good pawn structure and exploiting your opponent's bad one can determine the outcome of the game.

Going over your played games and annotoating them is very useful. You learn a lot by doing so. This improves your pattern recognition and strategy skills. Furthermore, learning how to express in words what the board position is and what your game strategical and tactical ideas are will improve your position evaluation skills. I would recommend to everyone to review his game after it's played and look for every move's reasons and every position's features.

Maybe it's just me but I prefer this kind of annotations : few words , in capital letters, no endless babbling and only on the key moves.

Hey how do i post my game in this forum?

http://www.chess.com/article/view/how-to-use-the-chesscom-diagr

or you can see this one

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/help-support/a-guide-to-posting-your-games-on-chesscom

you don't have to post a new thread for that, just post it here if you want to.

did you look in the links that given in post #54 and #55 ?

Probably the biggest thing to understand is the limit to which people can understand things. Ie. I typically find a 200-300 margin ideal for learning as above that level and it's very difficult to learn and you're versing players who always would beat you (as opposed to the 200 point gap where it's a case of, you win 1 in 5 or something) .

However, the above isn't universally true. There's a certain point where people start learning tactics, and it can be less than a 200 point difference, even if there's a world of difference in skill.