Use of engines

Is it better to analyze GMs games without engine or with engine. What about analysis of self games. I think every time I use engines to analyze I just come out of it in a state of confusion. I think there is a fundamental difference between humans and engines. a human has certain style certain piece cnfiguration motifs positional sense whereas engines just spit out the best possible move. I think that is harmful because you can never 'learn' to play like a computer but you can learn to play as a better playing human.

It's better to analyze WITHOUT an engine.

The point that so many people seem to miss is that all the engine can do is tell you what the best move was.

Who cares what the best move was? You aren't likely to ever encounter that position again. Why waste your time and energy memorizing "best moves" for positions that you'll never see again?

What you should be learning instead is the best way to LOOK at a position... the best way to break the position down into elements and weigh them against each other, then to synthesize a plan from those components.

That is a skill that you can actually USE, in game after game.

An engine cannot teach you that. Only your own efforts can teach you that.

The engine is useful to consult. It is like a 3000 rated super GM you can ask questions 24/7 and for free. Would not it be better to analyse games with help of e.g. Carlsen than without? Use the engine as your free coach.

Carlsen could tell you WHY a move is good or bad. He could point out problems with pawn structure or weak squares or piece activity... or explain why one of these elements is more important in THIS specific position.

An engine does none of those things.

An engine won't even tell you that superior development is increasingly important the more OPEN the position is... and any decent 2000+ player could tell you that.

Pretty sure all 2000+ rated players are above "decent." They are practically gods compared to lowly beginners like me.

Depends on your perspective. I'm 2350, and I consider myself to be a rather mediocre player.

There are LOADS of beginners on this site. 2350 is very high, probably 99th percentile, on chess.com. Compared to most people on this site, you are a very strong player. Don't be modest!

Wait... you only play daily...

Both ways are better than not analyzing your games at all. Its slightly better to analyze it by yourself and/or with a help of higher rated player/coach than just simply skipping moves with an engine and you finish by 2 minutes complete game. First analyze it without an engine, try to evaluate position, who is better and why, try to find atleast 3 good and solid plans for both sides, try to point out crucial moment and move of the game and only after you have done all of that check out your game once again and this time quicker with an engine. This time you just make sure you havent miss anything or made a mistake while analyzing. For me that is the best way to analyze any game you want. Best of luck! :)

All you should be using an engine for is to check for blunders and missed tactics.

I got a gold membership so I can check all my games for brilliant moves. Only 1 so far...

Which explains your ratings after 17 months and 3600+ games.

I am trying to get better. Stop insulting players with lower rating than you.

I didnt insult you.  I pointed out facts why you arent improving.

Best is without an engine and with another GM commentating on all the moves

Like many of the adult players here, I learned to play chess before Stockfish ever existed. Home engines weren't a "thing" back then. The internet wasn't around yet, either.

Back then, it was just myself, the chess board, and chess books. I would sit for hours and try out different lines and variations, just to see where they might lead. Looking through the games of old masters, in books. Making mistake after mistake, then struggling to find improvements.

These days, I use an engine to find things that I miss. And I find the engine to be a valuable tool. I would've LOVED to have an engine to study with, back in my kid days. It's so easy to have the answers fed right to you.

Though, I believe those "pre-engine" days helped me a lot, in terms of chess understanding. I was forced to find answers on my own - to rely on my brain. There was no other tool available to fall back on ...

I like to anyazle first and then check with engine

Engines have some advanteges, like for exemple never get tired.

I am also of the opinion that engines just recover a move from a database. I don't know if an engine can create a move like a human.

It seems that a mixed human + engine criteriais is what will prevail.