It's refreshing to see somebody that's read the previous threads on a subject before asking about it.
I would say that a combination of the two game types is probably best but playing either is just fine. I suspect that most people would say that the "standard" games are better than the "online", but I don't think there is too much in it.
The important thing is that you play, you analyse your games and you study. You say you're doing all of those so that's great. I wouldn't change anything.
I find it annoying aswell that people keep asking for the same things that have been asked for so many times aswell. So I try to avoid it.
Thank you for the info! It's nice to hear that I'm on the right track.
At the moment my goal is to get a stable rating, see what it is and then make like a small goal (+100 or whatever rating in a certain time period) and then go from there.
Analyzing-wise(?) I try to find the play/place where I lost and go backwards from that point until I can find the play/way to stop it. Is that a good way or should I do it differently?
I just looked at your only legitimately finished game (that wasn't against a sandbagger).
Obviously you can see that c6 was a bad move, but I want to point out that g5 was also a bad move. It ruined your pawn structure and potentially your future King safety. Better moves were simply Nc7 or Nd7 developing a piece whilst protecting your pawn.
Analyzing-wise(?) I try to find the play/place where I lost and go backwards from that point until I can find the play/way to stop it. Is that a good way or should I do it differently?
I'm not sure about this. That's great and makes sense. Definitely do this, but I can't imagine it's going to take very long and will probably just highlight a single blunder.
I think it's best to look over the whole game and take a second look at the decisions you made. Why did you follow that plan? In hindsight, did it work? What could you have done differently? Of course I mean games that you won or drew too.
If you don't get further advice here (which hopefully you will), then I'm sure there are other threads on how to best anaylse your games. I'm not sure I'm best qualified to answer that question.
Yeah that blunder is kinda obvious now :(
I did g5 at that point with the idea of defending the pawn on e5 ... But Nc6 would have been better indeed and would have also defended that pawn indeed.
And yeah, I saw some people ask that question but i didn't have the time yet to check them out. I'll do that first for sure and if I still have some questions I'll post them here or in a new topic.
But thank you for everything!
I'm fairly new to chess and want to learn to the best of my capabilities.
I've seen the question 'How to learn the best' asked multiple times and if I understand it the best it's with the tacticstrainer?
Now I also wonder, should I play correspondence games or Live chess games?
I wonder because, in correspondence games (3days/move) you have way more time to think about your moves. It takes a long time to finish and that makes analyzing it more difficult?
In live games (I'll stick with standard probably ... 30-60min games), well the game ends faster so you can analyze it faster and hence learn faster?
I'm not sure what to do.
At the moment I'm working (as a teacher) so live games are a bit difficult until summer vacation kicks in. So i'm doing some mentor courses, tactic trainers and correspondence chess. Am I on the right path or should I change some stuff?
Any coaching, advice, ... is much appreciated!
Pudú