The Sad Truth ~ Game Analysis is Useless

You pay attention to what kind of mistake you made, why you made it, what you can do so that you don't make similar mistakes in the future. The engine analysis can also tell you what idea is bad in a certain situation and what is good. You can test whether some moves that you have played in your games were good or not. Analysing games helps for pattern recognition, possibly even more than puzzles, as you are analysing positions which have arised from the openings that you actually play. 

For instance, let me analyse one of your recent games and show you how you can take valuable lessons from it. 

Move 9.b3 is weakning the dark squares on the queenside. b3 doesn't accomplish much as your c4 pawn was already defended, being able to recapture on c4 with a pawn is not worth creating massive dark square holes on the queenside, especially since his dark square bishop can park there (Ba3 for instance would control the c1 square where your rook wants to go).

On move 12 you played Ne4 because you didn't see that your bishop is attacking c7 and that your rook is also X raying c7. 12.cxd5 followed by 13.Rxc7 would win a pawn and also cxd5 in general would open up the file for your rook. As long as the c file is closed, your rook isn't really doing anything. Combination of playing both Rc1 and b3 is really weird because either you want to open the c file or you want to recapture on c4 with a pawn.

For the couple of later moves you didn't play cxd5 to open up the rook which I would have played.

13.Bf3 takes away the retrating square from the knight which makes you vulnerable to 13..f6 14.Ng4 Bxf4 15.exf4 The lesson is pay attention when you block the retreat squares of your pieces and pay attention to how your pieces can get attacked.

On move 18 you missed a 4 move tactic. When analysing it, you can then say ok, what made this tactic possible? When you ask yourself that question you will see that the answer is that your bishop is making contact with his knight, your rook is X raying his knight and thus it is also pinning the opponent's c pawn. Your light square bishop is attacking the d5 pawn which is defended by the pinned c pawn. Noticing things like this can help you spot more tactics in the future, but it is completely fine that you missed this one, as even I missed it when I was scrolling through the moves and I am 900 points higher rated than you. Still, I see what components made this tactic and that can be a good lesson for the future. Another lesson is that you can't immediately take on d5 here, because he would take back with the knight, you have to switch the order of first 2 moves which is something that GMs say you should often do when calculating a tactic. The tactic also has the attraction motif and removing the defender motif, as you first play Bxc7 to attract the queen on the rook's X ray and you simultaniously remove a guard of d5. As you see, this tactic was comprised of many tactical motifs (contact between pieces, X ray, pin, switching the order of first moves, attraction, removing the defender). 

On move 20 your opponent blundered a skewer. You could have played Bd6. You spot moves like this by looking at all checks, captures and attacks and if you miss it by looking at all the attacks, you should look for when your or your opponents pieces are on a forkable/skewable squares by the bishop, knight or pawn. Either of those 2 things would make you play the correct move and win material.

I don't know why you blundered your queen on move 29, probably a mouseslip and I see no point in analysing any further as you are down a full queen. I don't know about you but I saw plenty of very valuable lessons in that game.

I try to interpret the plans in the moves that stockfish gives me, and what was wrong with my plan and why the engine didn't think it was the best. Learning that kind of stuff helps me know what types of plans generally work in what types of positions, and I can also see what areas I need to work on the most (If I analyze my games and see that my losses generally come from a blunder in the endgame but my opening / middlegame play is fine, then I probably need to work on my endgames or vice versa.) 

The only thing that analysis does is tell you the best move in a very specific situation with no explanation. I don't know about you, but I'm not going to memorise every single position I've ever been in. That's what computers are for.

When I quickly analyze my games, I try to hit a few points:

1. Who was better? 

During the game I am always asking myself this and it determines how I play. It is interesting to compare that to the computers interpretation and try to figure out what I'm missing in the position. Tactics flow from a better position or if your opponent makes a mistake. On the other hand, recognizing when you need to play defensively to salvage a draw is also important.

2. What were the critical moments?

There are many games that I ask myself "Where did I go wrong?" You can feel the initiative shift and your opponent suddenly is putting a lot of pressure on you. That is the moment that I care most about because everything else is often just a domino effect.

3. Did I miss a tactic?

I often find neat ideas that I didn't think about during the game that are possible because of tactics. I also gauge how human-like that task is and if it is a common tactical pattern. A good amount of times it is a tactic that I should of seen, but it is also common to see moves that are just ridiculous. I really only care about the ones that I should of seen. I can do drills with puzzles pertaining to that tactic to help cement that pattern into my brain and correct a weakness.

4. What was the correct move?

If I was lost on what move to make, I like to play through different lines in the middle game and see how the computer would react to try to get a better understanding of the position. If you have a basic opening repertoire, it isn't uncommon to run into that position repeatedly.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

There are times that I find something interesting and that is when I dive deeper and try to "learn something" per se.

An example would be:

Why does this pawn break, that worked in a similar position, not work here?

Questions like this usually require a few different similar positions from Master games and playing around with lines with the computer for a while to get an answer. 

My main goal in any analysis that i dig into is always the same: improving my ability to accurately recognize what the position is demanding.

That will directly correlate to becoming a better chess player.

Tactics reap way better benefits in my opinion though.

     It is better to analyze your games yourself, or with your opponent, first. Try to see where you went wrong, figure out what better plan you might have tried, see if you can spot inaccuracies you or your opponent committed but the other player failed to capitalize on. 

     Then check your reasoning with the computer. Also, don't just look for what the computer thinks is the best move but notice the moves that the machine rates as almost as good. Often the program will see so far ahead that it will chose a move no human would consider because chances for a more favorable ending will result after 25 moves of perfect play or something similar that you or I will never. Seeing strong moves that you can understand can suggest better plans to follow in similar positions.

its mostly helped me in understanding certain patterns, endgames, and openings i can remember

By game analysis people are talking about the old fashioned roll-up-you-sleeves kind of analysis. Not the analysis feature of chesscom.

i don't get what that means but we are talking about the feature i think so yea what i meant

This is the reason why we always tell beginners to write out their thought processes while going over their games in a notes section on a database.  You may never see the exact moves again, however, if you try an eliminate incorrect thinking in your play you won't come up with bad moves in the first place.  It's not the moves you are trying to change, it's your thinking on general principles, or on making plans, etc.  The analysis is the time where you sit and wonder if the reason why you made that last mistake was that you misevaluated the position, or forgot to evaluate.  If that is the case, you know you need to learn to evaluate positions after the fireworks end and identify when you need to do it.  This is just one example.  If this same thing is repeated in games then obviously you would know that game evaluation while playing needs to be focused on.  This is just one example, and there are many.  

About studying openings...  There is a lot out there on openings, and one can fill the bookshelf with a lot of books fast if they start to randomly buy books on certain openings...  Here is my two cents on openings.  Just go over the old study plans on the articles section of the site.  There you will find various study plans for beginner, intermediate, etc.  One of the categories is Openings.  There, you will get all you need to know about openings and more.  A one-stop shop, no need to buy 50 books.

About reading books... you can speed read most theory books or chess improvement books.  Simply, go over the words of the books and skip the games.  You will get a big picture of what the author was trying to say, but you will need to eventually go over the book in detail later.  Of course, in order to remember the material you will have to take some form of notes, or else you will forget.

On practicing board vision...  Doing puzzles, and going over annotated master games, will help.  Also playing.  Trying to do some of the moves in your head when going over an annotated master game will help too.  Doesn't matter how long it takes, at first at least.  Someone told me a long time ago that the vision exercises are useless, while also saying if you really wanted to do it, just do 5 minutes, maybe 3 days a week, or to your preference.  Aimchess has an exercise to do for vision.

Counting... The bread and butter of a chess player.  For now, all you can do is count the number of attackers and defenders all the time until you don't have to do it anymore.  I remember when I started playing chess I would think a long time for my moves, counting the attackers and defenders, seeing if the square was safe, and I would move it, and let go of the piece, and most of the time, it wasn't safe!  Practice.  It won't come overnight.  Someone can say they don't count, but that's because they are already a  good player and don't need to do it because they do it instinctively already.  You probably don't.  So, keep doing it!

Blindfold chess...  Just stick to the visualization techniques for now.  you need to be a strong player to consider doing this.

There are things to consider when analyzing a game.  You need to, if you are a beginner, go over the game with a stronger player after you write your analysis, then show him your analysis.  If you do not do this step, you are leading yourself into a ditch.  You can't correct your thinking if you do not have correct thinking.  As I said before, analysis is mainly, to change your thought process.  the reason why you lose games, is bad ideas.  Not bad moves.  The ideas form the moves.  

You also need him to find the tactics you missed, where and when you misevaluated the position, if you did, etc, etc.  If you are trying to do it without a stronger player, then, that is your problem.

On going over computer lines...  I'm a big fan of going over what the computer said, and coming up with alternate lines, however, that is too much work for a beginner, and I do not recommend you do it.  That may be why you don't like analyzing games.  9 times out of 10, the lines you come up with, will be incorrect or have some blunder.  It isn't till you get to about 1500 that you can confidently come up with lines.  Save, going over alternate lines, with or without computer assistance, until you are a much higher-rated player.  

Hi

If my opponent forfeits, and I think I am winning, i like to prove I could have won by playing the position against the computer until I am able to secure the win. This often reveals hidden nuances of the position to me and can provide me with ways to come up with better plans in the future.

I like going over learning methods with people and trying different ways. Thanks to everyone who is sharing their experiences and methods.

But you didn't blunder a pawn before blundering the queen. The material was equal at the moment you gave your queen away. The rest I didn't want to analyse because you are down a full queen.

I step through the game while the engine is showing me its top 3 choices. Look at positions where the evaluation changed a lot, or where I had a strong opinion about the position (such as a move was particularly good or bad).

When the engine surprises me (e.g. the eval dropped a lot without me knowing) or when the engine disagrees (I thought a move was good very bad but it wasn't) then I explore the variation... but not by playing whatever moves the engine wants. For example if it says the move is not bad, then I essentially start playing against the engine by making moves for the other side, then I play the engine move that will show why the move isn't bad, then I make another move etc.

You have to actually explore lines like in the above example, using your brain, not just passively looking at moves and numbers. The two biggest questions I ask are "why not this move?" and "why does this move work?"

Of course this does have limited impact. You have to also learn strategy and tactics and etc (e.g. from books). That way you'll ask more meaningful questions, and you'll be able to interpret the engine better.

By the way, very complex tactical liens you can just ignore. That's not a practical way to play and isn't instructive. Also what at least 1 other person said, if you analyze your games you'll notice recurring mistakes, and those are the most useful ones to fix.

This is very interesting. Is there a collection of annotated games on the internet? or do you have a resource you can share?