What do you discuss during your post mortems? Do you show or explain the moves of the game with your opponent or do you leave him in the dark?! If you lose to a stronger player do you think its okay to ask for some tips? Maybe you dont have post mortems after your games, but why not?

No-one has ever had a post mortem with me,

except those who coach me, and they've analysed my games for/with me.

I go back and realize what plans I should have had to stop his counterplay.

it probably depends onthe atittude of your opponent, some people are nice and some are $^#$^%%$#3 .

I always have them during live (in person) chess games.  But rarely online.

I think post mortems are another courteous way to show respect for your opponent, therefore I usually accept a post mortem offer from any opponent, although of course you are likely to learn more the stronger your opponent is, but so far I believe I have gleaned a bit of information from every analysis I had with an opponent. In my experience some (very few, in fact) titled players are reluctant to share analysis, probably because they want to save time and effort for the fight at the top of the tournament table, or perhaps they consider analysing with lower rated players a sort of lesson they normally get paid for. However, a polite request has always got me at least a few minutes of their precious time

When discussing the game, I talk openly both about plans and actual variations, which can get quite detailed if both of us have a bit of time. 

This is true for otb games, for some reason internet players don't seem to value post mortem analysis much, but I haven't got an idea why.

I agree with Torkil that internet players dont seem to like to have post mortem analysis. Most of my discussions with internet players turn out to be about the opening rather than anything else. Very few players online even wish to chat in general while many seem to be very angry (just a vibe i get).

 

Over the board, i never turn down an offer to go over the game with my opponent regardless of their strength. Its strange though because sometimes weaker players tend to avoid post mortems and say: ''oh no, its ok, i dont want to see that position ever again!'' or something to that effect. It is horrble feeling when you lose but for weaker players i would say even if you play a horrible game dont avoid a post mortem because it might get you down. You never know, just because you thought you had a bad position your opponent may have showed you what your advantages were.

 

I have had many post mortems OTB and generally speaking most people are friendly. It is understandable that people will generally not talk about other opening variations that could occur since you could be local rivals and want to keep some information to yourself incase you play again. This is odd because my experience online is that people discuss openings much much more!

 

On very strong players and masters; i dont agree that they dont put much effort into post mortems with weaker players. After battling it out with an Irish FM, he bought my a drink at the bar and discussed the game with me in alot of detail (at least for me) and told me my weak and strong points. He actually analyzed the other games i played in the same tournament for me too, free of charge. 

 

I also had the privilege to play some top Grandmasters in some unrated games and most of them were extremely helpful and very open with their comments. I even seen GM Boris Spassky analysing a game with two players at a large national tournament here in Ireland. I must say on the otherhand i do know some strong players here in Ireland, one being a former Irish Champion who didnt seem pushed to have a post mortem with me after he beat me, who dont share the same attributes.