To annotate or not to annotate?

Jun 19, 2007, 2:17 AM |
  It makes a lot of sense to study Master Games but what about studying your own games? I do think self-annotated games can be a great way for the ambitious player to improve. The fact that I am a rather crappy player is not an obstacle. My gut feel is that even the “so-soish” player can learn a lot from trying to identify errors and other short comings in your own games.  First of all I try to identify blunders or strange moves and then I try to classify the errors as for example: 
  • Lack of attention
  • Lack of theoretical knowledge
  • Lack of positional judgement
  • Miscalculations
  • Lack of imagination
  • Logical Blunders

 The key thing is to have a humble approach to annotating your own games. You do not have to come up with a perfect analysis. You just have to make a better analysis than your previous analysis and hopefully learn something in the process.


note: The suggested categories for classifying mistakes are suggested in a presentation of the book: ”Chess: Knowledge, Training, Mastery” by IM Zlotnik