Is it important to analyze your games without an engine?

So as the title asks, should I start to analyze my games without the engine? Right now i only use the engine and then try to understand why the move was a blunder, and why the optimal move was better. 

Am I hindering myself with this? Should I analyze my games without the engine first, and then use it? Or should I not analyze with an engine at all? 

If I should analyze my games on my own, then I have 2 questions.

1. What is the best way to go about it? 

2. Can I get help here? This part of the forum seems like the place to go to if you want someone to help you analyze your games for you/with you. What is the way to go about that(i would assume you would have to write your thought process down during the game or something like that. 

Thank you in advance 

the recommended approach is to analyse for yourself first and reach a conclusion about what you did correctly and what you did wrong and why you did what you did. and then compare your conclusion to the engine's. here the most difficult part is putting into words what the engine will point out, as you're not supposed to be able to do that accurately as you are not strong enough, but you have to start somewhere.

you could post your analysis here. it's better to include your thought process and make it as wordy as possible. i can try to pitch in the analysis. however, i am only around 1900 in strength so you have to take that into account. but i won't hold back when criticizing.

+1

Relying on an engine to point out your mistakes before analyzing the game yourself is a crutch that will hinder your development. 

I always analyzed my games with an engine, but that was because I didn't have anyone to analyze my games... I'd just look at its lines and remember tactics and ideas. If possible, though, you should analyze with someone else, probably around your own strength or ideally stronger than you.

Analyzing with an engine will certainly teach you how to click buttons and read a computer screen. Those are the core skills involved in the process.

Unfortunately, it won't teach you anything about analyzing a chess position, since you are avoiding that entirely by relying on the engine to provide the analysis.

It's best to think for yourself first, because the aim is to improve your own brain.

Then do the engine verification. Also the engine is obviously useful to discover new lines. But once you discover them, also check the possibilities yourself. It's tremendously helpful.

I think analyzing by yourself first and then with the engine is diminishing returns in terms of time wasted. I analyze all my games with the engine on, but i also use the engine actively to weigh different options and not just look at the top suggestion.

This is just widly incorrect. Engine evaluations are an amazing learning opportunity in pattern recognition. Most of chess is subconscious pattern recognition, and concrete calculation and analysis is an add on refinement to the last 200 points of your rating strength, being exposed to hundreds of position and seeing their evaluation enhances these sub-conscious processes.

engine analysis is useful for pointing out mistakes to you & showing better lines of play... you're actively engaged by reviewing these things, so why not take the blinders off right away?

when going over missed puzzles or blunders in my games i find it useful to try to formulate one cause of the error into a phrase that's easy to sublimate:

'don't rush key positions', 'watch out for counterplay', 'develop before attacking', 'calculate carefully', etc...

this way you take measures to avoid a similar fate befalling you in the future by adjusting your internal system of chess values with condensed lessons.

I agree. Often I have analyzed games that I think I played really well, only to have the engine show me some tactics that were missed. There have been quite a few times where I played a move that I thought was good, only to find out it was a blunder that my opponent missed. I find it helpful to look at those moves to see what I missed.

The point is that trying to find those yourself first is more helpful than immediately going to the engine.

Dark’s point is that doing what I said above wastes time

im not saying its a waste of time, that would imply there is no  benefit to doing that but that the time it takes to do that and then, analyze the game again with an engine (at least the way i do so) i find is time better spent elsewhere.

I do enjoy discussing a position after a game with an otb opponent if they are up for it though. Its enjoyable to ask "what if i played x here? what did you have in mind?"

Using engines was before my time. I just played and got better and noticed common moves. However, now we have access to knowledge that is hundreds of years in the making at our fingertips. What I suggest is to play a game, take a 5-10 minute break and see what you remember. Write down or make mental notes of when you thought were important moves or situations. Then look at what the computer says. This type of learning is called frontloading. You also give your brain a time to process what went on.

Secondly, don't rely on computers every game. You can only learn so much so make sure you find enjoyment in the game as you play and improve to when you can. 

Analysing your games only with an engine won't probably make you a better player, but you're guaranteed to become a lazier person.

Lazy beginners and post beginners never reach intermediate level if they rely purely on engine analysis. One should try brain analysis then check with engine analysis. Once your brain analysis is about 70% accurate, one can use engine analysis exclusively.

Agreed.

Here's how I look at it:

What's the point of analyzing your games, anyway? Is it to find the best move in that specific position? What for? That specific position will probably never recur in your future games.

In my opinion, the main point of analyzing your games is to learn the proper WAY OF THINKING about that position and similar positions. Learning productive habits of thought, learning how to approach a position and analyze it, is far more important than memorizing specific moves or sequences of moves.

... and no amount of button-clicking will teach you that. You have to teach YOURSELF that.

Have you heard about a guy who has claimed that "he, who analyses blitz, is stupid"?

Google him.

only if you are serious abt ches

contrasting better moves with your choices during analysis involves engagement & understanding why the engine moves are superior... people assuming that this is a passive process makes no sense to me.