What do you think of my study plan?

This is my first post, so hello everyone. Good to be part of this community.

I am a beginner in chess. I learned the rules and stuff a long time back but never played more than a few games at the time. The last 1 month I have been taking chess seriously again and have been studying as much as possible with the resources available online. And fortunately or unfortunately I was in an accident and my leg broke. I won't be going to school for another 9 days at least. So I am completely free and want to spend all the time getting a head start on my chess studies.

So far what I have done is 

1. Watch a lot of youtube videos (John Bartholomew - Climbing the rating ladder series, ChessNetwork - Beginner to Chess Master series). Both of them had videos on undefended pieces and those 2 videos have single handedly improved my tactics a lot. I am so grateful to both of them for that.

2. Browsed quite a bit on r/chess and read through the various suggested methods for improvement. Same here on chess.com

3. Watch quite a bit of Twitch Streams - Most of them play fast games so I find it quite hard to follow but it is very relaxing and many chat members have been kind enough to provide me with advice on how to improve. Sladgie is a streamer who plays longer time controls and I do like his stream very much

4. I am also currently going through 1 book which is 5337 chess tactics and combinations by Laszlo Polgar. I have done about a 100 each of mate in 1 and mate in 2 puzzles. I plan to do 100 problems from there each day.

5. I am also playing a bit here and elsewhere and doing tactics there (and the free 1 puzzle rush and 5 tactics per day here). My rating is not at all accurate as many players have timed out due to bad connection and 1 person even resigned when he had a queen and a rook and all I had was my king. Really weird I know. This is that game in case you are curious https://www.chess.com/live/game/3290240997

I think he got upset at me not resigning. I am sorry about that. Also I played a cheater and got refunded lot of points

The gist of the advice I have received so far is - don't study openings, focus on tactics, play long time controls, analyze your games both by yourself and then with an engine etc. I am doing all that but I have a few questions I need help with from you guys if someone has the time 

1. I see a lot of posts here about openings and many of the players discussing are low rated players like me. So it got me worried if I should be studying openings as well? Consider that my real rating here is around 1300

2. How do I go about the post game analysis. How much time to give it? I saw a post here saying that post game annotation takes about 12-13 hours. Should I really be spending 12-13 hours on a game I spent just 30 minutes playing? Is it required at my level? Also what do I do when analyzing without an engine? I hardly see anything other than maybe a blunder i made or my opponent made which was not capitalized on. 

Sorry for the long post, but I wanted to give as much context as possible to anyone who might want to help.

Thanks

One big piece of advice is learning is MUCH better when active, i.e. you are actively engaged and not just watching. Videos have there place. But it is rare where people actively learn when watching them. It is far better to get out a book and a real board and pieces, and try to actively figure things out for yourself. Tactics puzzles are good not just because tactics are such an important part of chess. They are good because it is a form of active learning.

Thanks. I watch videos because they seem to be tailor made for the things i am trying to improve like rapid development, undefended pieces etc. I am assuming that books would be covering a more broad range of topics which might include opening theory and other complicated things I might not be able to fully grasp by myself. 

I do actively learn while watching I think because I do try the things I learnt right after the video. For e.g. I learned all the very basic checkmates from videos and I did try them myself immediately after learning. I have learned all of them (Queen, Rook, two bishops, two knights and a pawn) except the bishop and knight one, which I do still struggle with. Same is the case with opposition.

As I said I am studying from 5337 combinations book. Should I study from one more at the same time? Which one would you recommend? My brother has been seriously learning chess from a tutor so he has many books which I can use. But the ones I have glanced through looks very difficult.

https://www.chess.com/article/view/how-to-start-out-in-chess

https://www.chess.com/article/view/study-plan-directory
"... In order to maximize the benefits of [theory and practice], these two should be approached in a balanced manner. ... Play as many slow games (60 5 or preferably slower) as possible, ... The other side of improvement is theory. ... This can be reading books, taking lessons, watching videos, doing problems on software, etc. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2002)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627084053/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman19.pdf
"... If it’s instruction, you look for an author that addresses players at your level (buying something that’s too advanced won’t help you at all). This means that a classic book that is revered by many people might not be useful for you. ..." - IM Jeremy Silman (2015)
https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-best-chess-books-ever
Here are some reading possibilities that I often mention:
Simple Attacking Plans by Fred Wilson (2012)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708090402/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review874.pdf
http://dev.jeremysilman.com/shop/pc/Simple-Attacking-Plans-77p3731.htm
Logical Chess: Move by Move by Irving Chernev (1957)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708104437/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/logichess.pdf
The Most Instructive Games of Chess Ever Played by Irving Chernev (1965)
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/most-instructive-games-of-chess-ever-played/
Winning Chess by Irving Chernev and Fred Reinfeld (1948)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708093415/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review919.pdf
Back to Basics: Tactics by Dan Heisman (2007)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708233537/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review585.pdf
https://www.chess.com/article/view/book-review-back-to-basics-tactics

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5856bd64ff7c50433c3803db/t/5895fc0ca5790af7895297e4/1486224396755/btbtactics2excerpt.pdf
Discovering Chess Openings by GM John Emms (2006)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627114655/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen91.pdf
Openings for Amateurs by Pete Tamburro (2014)
http://kenilworthian.blogspot.com/2014/05/review-of-pete-tamburros-openings-for.html
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/openings-for-amateurs/
https://www.mongoosepress.com/catalog/excerpts/openings_amateurs.pdf
Chess Endgames for Kids by Karsten Müller (2015)
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/chess-endgames-for-kids/
http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/Chess_Endgames_for_Kids.pdf
A Guide to Chess Improvement by Dan Heisman (2010)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708105628/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review781.pdf
Studying Chess Made Easy by Andrew Soltis (2009)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708090448/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review750.pdf
Seirawan stuff:
http://seagaard.dk/review/eng/bo_beginner/ev_winning_chess.asp?KATID=BO&ID=BO-Beginner
http://www.nystar.com/tamarkin/review1.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627132508/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen173.pdf
https://www.chess.com/article/view/book-review-winning-chess-endings
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708092617/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review560.pdf

Thanks for the list. I have 3 of the books mentioned in the list at my home 

Simple Attacking Plans by Fred Wilson (2012)

Back to Basics: Tactics by Dan Heisman (2007)

A Guide to Chess Improvement by Dan Heisman (2010)

I think I will start with Simple Attacking Plans. I do struggle with coming up with a plan most often and most of my plans revolve around simple 2-3 move combos that rarely work out. 

If you are constant and dedicated, there is no reason why you should not improve (at least, you will get much better at tactics). However, if you are really interested, I would suggest you to hire a coach, so that you can identity your weaknesses and work on them more effectively

Just go on with your study plan. It looks feasible.

Maybe one day I will be able to convince my parents to get me a coach. I hope to speed that up by improving by myself and perhaps enter a few tournaments and do decently.

Thanks. I am following it as diligently as I can

That's a lot for me to read, especially when (I assume) it's basically a diary entry.

As for plans, as Mike Tyson once said, everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face, or something like that.

Just play long time controls, and when you read books set up positions and games on a real board and do some analysis yourself. That's about it.

Not sure why you felt the need to post that useless comment. Shut up and move on if you have nothing useful to add

I wouldn't want a ghost to haunt me! Especially one of pushwood.

Don't know about you tho.

Spending a long time on position or game, trying to figure it all out until you're satisfied you've done all you can, is a great way to learn. A lot of work, but very satisfying once you've completed it.

I remember one endgame I thought I'd figured out really well, only to completely fail an endgame puzzle with the same idea. So I pulled out the old position, and tried to figure out why the solutions were so different, and what I could learn from it all. It took me about 8 hours, and was very annoying at times, but I was happy with what I'd done after it was all over.

That is a good point. Looking at a game after a long gap can be interesting. Thanks, I will keep that in mind

Do you think it should be based on one's rating? Did you do the same when you were a beginner? Considering where I am right now, I squeeze out all I possibly can out of a game in 2-3 hours maximum. I just don't have enough knowledge to dissect the game to any more depth I feel like

That's a good point. The more you already know, the more you can work with something like an instructive game or position.

When I was a beginner I tried different things. Some of them were good ideas for higher rated players, but not useful for a beginner. Probably the most useful thing I did in the beginning was solve tactic puzzles out of a book for hours at a time. That and playing G/30 games against stronger players. I was lucky to have a 2100 rated guy in my small town who I got to play unrated games against fairly often.

Something I wish I'd done differently though was look at GM games. Usually they made me frustrated because I wanted to understand every move. You know, like why didn't they capture the pawn? I looked like they could win it for free? But that's the opposite way of going about it. First of all look at GM games just for exposure. You're exposed to openings, tactics, and endgames you've never seen before. It's enough to see 1 new or interesting thing each game. Don't spend a lot of time. Maybe 5 to 10 minutes a game, 1 or 2 GM games a day. Don't make a big deal out of it, but the cumulative effect over time can be very good. Again, not to understand every move, but just to see something new.

And for example, something super easy would be to load up chessgames.com and go to their world championship matches.

You could start with Steinitz and work your way up through history to Carlsen.

I've never seen someone mention this as a game collection, but I asked a GM once if this would be a good idea, even if I'm not going to study them in depth, and his eyes lit up and he said "that would be excellent."

Didn't know about the site. Looks very interesting. Thanks for the tip

Can you explain what you mean? 

Hmm, I'm not sure what you mean exactly @donostrilssmell but it seems like good advice.

If it means what I think maybe I'd say it differently. Something like... there are problems calculation can solve, and problems it can't. For problems you can't solve just make your best guess based on logic, or principals or just intuition. For example which rook to put on d1 in a calm opening position? The difference is probably very small, and not something you can calculate. But when something can be solved through calculation (the easiest example is a tactic puzzle) then go ahead and push the limits of your ability to analyze, at least sometimes (spending 20 minutes on every puzzle is just too slow unless you're training calculation).

I'd start with that book for tactics rather than on-line tactics trainers or the Polgar book. Keep going through it until you can solve all of the problems more or less instantly.