Please help me analyse

I don't play the Caro-Kann defense but against it I like the Advance variation with the idea of transposing to lines the Paulsen variation of the French.

Frank Marshall and Howard Staunton wrote that in analysing moves you should always remember that each move or sequence of moves should have three or move of these purposes: attack, bolster, contain and control, and defend.  Later writers would include: effect, flexibility, and gain (or loss).  With each move, you need to aassess these.  So, just remember the a, b, c, d, e, f and g.

Then, you have to divide the game into opening, middle, and end. For my purposes, I like to divide the files as so: Queen side= a,b,c; Center= d,e; King side= f,g,h.  Some people like to lump the c and f as Queen and King "wings" respectively but I like to keep it simple because this varies depending on the stage of the game: opening, middle and end.

Usually, to analyze a game you need to start at move one. So, I need to know where do you want to begin? 

If you want to start at move 6. using those principles White should advance the pawn to h4--- this attacks the King side, bolsters the pawn chain formed by f and g, threatens to trap the Bishop after h5, and prevents the Black Queen from going to h4 if Black plays e6.  The text move 6. f4 loses a tempo and creates an outpost for the Black Bishop at e4, attacks the White Rook, and gives Black control of the open squares on the a8-h1 diagonal. 

At move 7, White should still play pawn to h4--- this attacks the King side, bolsters the pawn chain formed by f and g, and prevents the Black Queen from going to h4+ now that Black played e6.  Black can either play h5 or Be4 attacking the White Rook but only temporary control of the a8-h1 diagonal.

BTW, don't be dismissive about my 1200 rating on this board--- I'm new and I don't play chess except for fun.  Anyway, I've played a long time over many years and I just play against chess engines.  And, if I'm off on my numbering's a bit dodgy, it's because I'm used to descriptive notation and this pseudo-algebraic that's in fashion is a bit much.

Mike