I used to think that analyzing my own games was some godly process where brilliant revelations were reached after a rigorous examination of every single move had been done. It was like I thought that the analysis itself was done for its own purpose and was more than just a means to an end. After reading some good articles by some amazing masters though, I realized that the analysis is supposed to be exactly that, a means to an end. The end being improvement. I don't have to do a detailed, thorough analysis of every move (not at my level any way). All I have to do is try to identify my mistakes, and minimize them in the future.
For me, at this stage in my chess ability, this shouldn't be too dificult. Most of my mistakes are tactical. I don't think there would be any point in analyzing subtle possitional nuances when I'm still missing moves that win/lose material. So the plan right now for analyzing my games is to focus on tactics and openings (and maybe piece activity). I include openings because I've heard it recomended that the best way to learn openings is from your own games. I don't plan on making any detailed examination of the openings in my games; just a couple of notes identifying the opening, where it left the main line, and where I could have improved. If there is anything else that seems important to the game, I will include that too.
This is my first real attempt to consistently analyze my own games, so I can't claim this is the "correct" way to do it or that anyone will improve drastically by following this method. I think this is a good start for me though, and hopefully, I will improve from my efforts. If anyone has any constructive criticism about my methods or my games, it would be much appreciated.
Unless otherwise noted, all of the games I analyze where organized through the Dan Heisman Learning Center (DHLC) group here at chess.com and were played at a time control of 45/45. If you'd like to know more about the DHLC, check out this link:
The following game was played in round 2 of the Slow Swiss #2 tournament. This was my first win in the tournament, but I can't say I am very happy with the way I won. I made 2 major blunders (which houdini rated as changing the position by greater than +/- 3.0 pawns) in this game, the last of which should have completely lost the game for me. These are such crucial mistakes, that my focus has to be on correcting them before anything else. Even worrying about a 1 pawn difference is inconsequencial compared to winning/losing a whole piece. So the only way I believe I can begin to correct these horrible mistakes is to figure out what is causing them. I think that the main culprits are bad time management combined with faulty analysis skills. I took about 2 minutes to play my first blunder, and I took about 1 and 1/2 minutes to play the second. I knew these were critical positions and didn't take the time to double check my preliminary analysis. In the future I have to try to slow down and do a more thorough analysis of positions I know are critical.
Okieman played a good game here, and my hat goes off to him. I'm going to try to continue analyzing my games and posting them every so often. Like I said before, if anyone has any ideas on how I can improve feel free to post a comment or message me. Thanks!