thanks for the article. if i may ask a question, how would i go about picking the games to analyze, or do you think all of them should be. i am a far cry from the most active chess players, but even i play several games a week. so, if i were to narrow my focus (as a hobbiest trying to be a better hobbiest) what would i look for? oh, and i have way too many loses just to narrow it down that way :). i also think that you can learn from wins as well since we have errors in those as well.
so, would it be best to pick games that seemed to get into complicated or interesting positions. games in positions where i commonly find myself. what about games where an idiotic series of blunders just wiped you out. i think i am answering my own quesiton here...all of them...but is it really? i saw in another thread that said you analyze students games up to the point where a piece is lost with no compensation, so perhaps that is the answer for me too?
thanks for your time.
ps: just a small note on the article - in step 2 (about makeing notes) you say to see more in step 6 when i think you meant step 5.
It's been 45 years since I took an English class, so unfortunately I can't give you the reason "to" is wrong, nor am I well enough versed in Spanish to compare sentence structures. I just know that it is not the way a native speaker would phrase it. Wish I could help more but I'm out of my depth here.
agreed. it is different in english and spanish. i am not sure how to explain it, but our verbs do not start with a base of "to write" like it does in spanish. our base verbs are just the action like "write". adding to usually makes things in the furture tense. "i am going to write an artical", for instance. i'm not an english scholar or spanish scholar (or really literate) so that is the best explanation i can come up with.