More like this! This video is important because it highlights that sometimes the problem is something that cannot be solved simply by more Puzzle Rush.
My personal take-aways: 1. Dump your in-game thoughts into a PGN as soon as possible: otherwise you may forget them and not be able to reassess them. 2. Don't narrate the game: the analysis is for you, not somebody else! 3. Focus on critical moments 4. Write down your in-game calculation and evaluation and compare them to your post-mortem calculation and evaluation: you want to identify your mistakes and learn from them. 5. Reassess your approach to critical positions, as sometimes your mistake was not in the line itself but in, for example, spending time calculating it rather than dismissing it on strategic grounds. 6. Identify the cause of your mistakes: if you missed a move by the opponent, why did you miss it? What did you think they were going to play? You want to learn about yourself, not just about the game.
Man this is so helpful, I have been annotating my games like they are in chess books, its kind of embarrassing looking back at my annotated games lol, a 1300 scrub writing like they know anything about chess.
Thank you for this video, analyzing my games is something I've only done a small handful of times on my own and something that has always slightly caused me anxiety. The way you break things down here is great and should help me going forward.
I am so pleased I found this video - this is the clearest and most resonant advice I have heard on what is important to focus on at my level. Thanks a million!
Such an exceptional video! Bravo! These instructive videos and the chats with David, Eugene, Jesse and Kostya are the reason I subscribed in the first place.
Very useful! Thank you for steering me towards this video! Between this and the calculation exercise on stream today, I have a better idea of what I should do when looking at positions from my own games!
I think this is an important counterpoint to standard thinking, since trying to analyse as a GM would is a difficult and thankless task for your average player. It basically becomes counterproductive as it feels like a waste of energy.
Just bumped into this - tyvm!🙏 A couple of observations from a beginner… It’s perfectly legal and imho valuable to note the time points on a scoresheet. Putting my game summary comment in a consistent spot, like at the beginning or the end, seems to make sense. It will be very important for me to analyze my games asap. Even a few hours later I’m much less likely to recall what I was thinking or feeling on a particular move. After I’m done analyzing on my own using an engine might be worthwhile, to see if a certain move resulted in a sudden and significant swing in evaluation, and then try to figure out why.
Just joined the Dojo Training program so this was great! If you guys haven't already maybe you could link this video in the training program itself since I didn't see anything in there about how to physically annotate games
12:00 but you can push the pawn on g7 threatening the Bishop and moves to g3 and play bishop g7 threatening to take the knight if he takes yours then you will have one of the rooks after that
One coach of mine, a WGM, said to analyse move by move, just like the student here. And Botvinnik said to analyse for publication, which implies analysing ‘as if’ for a book or similar. And so in-depth. So, my question is, how are we to understand the conflicting views on game analysis? If game analysis is the main source of improvement, shouldn’t it be more exhaustive?
I’ll be honest, I expected this video to come from Jesse, but thanks David for a thorough overview. Given that the annotations should be primarily a learning tool for yourself, if I investigate the position fully, just without the writing aspect, will I learn it to a lesser extent? My biggest gripe with annotating my own games is how redundant it feels while doing it. Is the writing aspect beneficial only because of motor memory? Thanks again!
Hi, I'm not sure I understand the question. What is redundant when you annotate? Are you writing notes about parts of the game that you already understood beforehand?
@@chesscomdpruess the redundant part isn’t the exploring variations/learning aspect, it’s the writing aspect that feels redundant since I feel as though I’ve already learned what’s worth learning about my play and possible improvements, etc. and I question whether writing it down will enforce the learning. Maybe it clearly does - idk. Do the annotations come in handy in a tangible way in the future? One possible use would be to show a coach, but for my own purposes I’ve doubted the efficacy of writing down analysis
@@ChessLifestyle If you are really engaged while you do the work, you probably don't need to write anything down in order to learn or retain it. But some people do-- it depends on the brain in question. If you are doing your analysis on a computer, then it's being saved for you already, and you can always play through it or show it to someone else. If you are doing it on a board, then writing it down can slow you down or be tedious I suppose. The important part is just that you engage, and reflect. Don't stop at an answer like "This is a blunder because I simply missed this move my opponent could do." That's just the surface, you need to answer why you missed it, and start to think about how not to miss such things in the future.
Any advice for fide masters? I've been having problems analyzing GM games. how deep should I be going, lack of calculating sometimes, and is there a better aproach to analyzing.
Should we be only/mostly analyzing games in which we lost? And in those that we won, should we annotated a particularly proud moment? Is that just as valid sometimes?
If you have the time, all games. If you don’t have the time prioritize games you lost. In analyzing a won game for myself, I focus on things I was unsure about, not on my proud moments; that is something I would only do if I was preparing an annotation or lesson for others: then I will often use positions and moments that I understand the best.
Personally I would look over the game with a computer and look for drastic evaluation shifts or when I reached a position where I may not have known where to move. That’s where I have found out that there are nuggets of skill not yet in my toolbox.
Sorry for not seeing your question long ago. Often it would be a moment in the game where you did not know what to play. You stopped and thought during the game, but were not sure of your decision, and eventually chose something partly bc the clock was ticking. You can go back in analysis to revisit that moment and check on your decision. Another way is if you talk with your opponent after the game and it turns out they have a different opinion about something than you do, e.g. where the game turned, or who had the advantage at move x. Even without talking to your opponent, you can go back to the moment where you think one of you made a significant error and see if you are right.
More like this! This video is important because it highlights that sometimes the problem is something that cannot be solved simply by more Puzzle Rush.
My personal take-aways:
1. Dump your in-game thoughts into a PGN as soon as possible: otherwise you may forget them and not be able to reassess them.
2. Don't narrate the game: the analysis is for you, not somebody else!
3. Focus on critical moments
4. Write down your in-game calculation and evaluation and compare them to your post-mortem calculation and evaluation: you want to identify your mistakes and learn from them.
5. Reassess your approach to critical positions, as sometimes your mistake was not in the line itself but in, for example, spending time calculating it rather than dismissing it on strategic grounds.
6. Identify the cause of your mistakes: if you missed a move by the opponent, why did you miss it? What did you think they were going to play? You want to learn about yourself, not just about the game.
excellent notes. thanks for sharing
Man this is so helpful, I have been annotating my games like they are in chess books, its kind of embarrassing looking back at my annotated games lol, a 1300 scrub writing like they know anything about chess.
1300 puts you in the top 5% of players in the world dude, don't sell yourself short!
Thank you for this video, analyzing my games is something I've only done a small handful of times on my own and something that has always slightly caused me anxiety. The way you break things down here is great and should help me going forward.
I am so pleased I found this video - this is the clearest and most resonant advice I have heard on what is important to focus on at my level. Thanks a million!
This is legit stuff. Glad I found this channel! Will be joining program
Such an exceptional video! Bravo! These instructive videos and the chats with David, Eugene, Jesse and Kostya are the reason I subscribed in the first place.
Very useful! Thank you for steering me towards this video! Between this and the calculation exercise on stream today, I have a better idea of what I should do when looking at positions from my own games!
I think this is an important counterpoint to standard thinking, since trying to analyse as a GM would is a difficult and thankless task for your average player. It basically becomes counterproductive as it feels like a waste of energy.
Just bumped into this - tyvm!🙏
A couple of observations from a beginner…
It’s perfectly legal and imho valuable to note the time points on a scoresheet.
Putting my game summary comment in a consistent spot, like at the beginning or the end, seems to make sense.
It will be very important for me to analyze my games asap. Even a few hours later I’m much less likely to recall what I was thinking or feeling on a particular move.
After I’m done analyzing on my own using an engine might be worthwhile, to see if a certain move resulted in a sudden and significant swing in evaluation, and then try to figure out why.
Very good video, im looking for more "how to analyze your games" material, your video is one of the best so far
Just joined the Dojo Training program so this was great! If you guys haven't already maybe you could link this video in the training program itself since I didn't see anything in there about how to physically annotate games
Yep, will do!
Great advice
Very helpful, David! Thank you! 👍🏻
Really good advice. Merci beaucoup.
This is based. Exactly what I was looking for, not sure who you are but have a sub!
Great stuff
12:00 but you can push the pawn on g7 threatening the Bishop and moves to g3 and play bishop g7 threatening to take the knight if he takes yours then you will have one of the rooks after that
Great video!
I like this it’s really help full thanks!!
Interesting approach
Great advices, thank you!
One coach of mine, a WGM, said to analyse move by move, just like the student here. And Botvinnik said to analyse for publication, which implies analysing ‘as if’ for a book or similar. And so in-depth. So, my question is, how are we to understand the conflicting views on game analysis?
If game analysis is the main source of improvement, shouldn’t it be more exhaustive?
I’ll be honest, I expected this video to come from Jesse, but thanks David for a thorough overview. Given that the annotations should be primarily a learning tool for yourself, if I investigate the position fully, just without the writing aspect, will I learn it to a lesser extent? My biggest gripe with annotating my own games is how redundant it feels while doing it. Is the writing aspect beneficial only because of motor memory? Thanks again!
Hi, I'm not sure I understand the question. What is redundant when you annotate? Are you writing notes about parts of the game that you already understood beforehand?
@@chesscomdpruess the redundant part isn’t the exploring variations/learning aspect, it’s the writing aspect that feels redundant since I feel as though I’ve already learned what’s worth learning about my play and possible improvements, etc. and I question whether writing it down will enforce the learning. Maybe it clearly does - idk. Do the annotations come in handy in a tangible way in the future? One possible use would be to show a coach, but for my own purposes I’ve doubted the efficacy of writing down analysis
@@ChessLifestyle If you are really engaged while you do the work, you probably don't need to write anything down in order to learn or retain it. But some people do-- it depends on the brain in question. If you are doing your analysis on a computer, then it's being saved for you already, and you can always play through it or show it to someone else. If you are doing it on a board, then writing it down can slow you down or be tedious I suppose. The important part is just that you engage, and reflect. Don't stop at an answer like "This is a blunder because I simply missed this move my opponent could do." That's just the surface, you need to answer why you missed it, and start to think about how not to miss such things in the future.
@@chesscomdpruess understood, thanks David
This guy looks like a grown up version of Allen from the original Jumanji
Great video. I’m still trying to figure out how to analyze my games as a learning tool. How much should I use engines in analyzing that key moment?
Not at all. Zero engine.
Any advice for fide masters?
I've been having problems analyzing GM games. how deep should I be going, lack of calculating sometimes, and is there a better aproach to analyzing.
Does anybody know what program he is using to type in his notes?
Chess.com's analysis board
I remember annotating my game with something like "putting a question to the bishop" then i thought... why the hell do i sound like nimzowitsch 😂
Thankyou
Should we be only/mostly analyzing games in which we lost? And in those that we won, should we annotated a particularly proud moment? Is that just as valid sometimes?
If you have the time, all games. If you don’t have the time prioritize games you lost. In analyzing a won game for myself, I focus on things I was unsure about, not on my proud moments; that is something I would only do if I was preparing an annotation or lesson for others: then I will often use positions and moments that I understand the best.
Is the advice the same for someone rated 1900-2200?
Good shit
If you're a low level player, how do you recognize a "moment" worth annotating?
Personally I would look over the game with a computer and look for drastic evaluation shifts or when I reached a position where I may not have known where to move. That’s where I have found out that there are nuggets of skill not yet in my toolbox.
Sorry for not seeing your question long ago. Often it would be a moment in the game where you did not know what to play. You stopped and thought during the game, but were not sure of your decision, and eventually chose something partly bc the clock was ticking. You can go back in analysis to revisit that moment and check on your decision. Another way is if you talk with your opponent after the game and it turns out they have a different opinion about something than you do, e.g. where the game turned, or who had the advantage at move x. Even without talking to your opponent, you can go back to the moment where you think one of you made a significant error and see if you are right.
The video is rather long. But it brings brilliant ideas such as analyse
Follow up : analyse to understand something about yourself !