Pre-Script: I decided not to post a game tonight (Sunday night). I'll just post 'em on those Sundays when I had one worth posting that week. This week my games were all very short and not very interesting (I won them all, though!). I'm not gonna play tonight as I'm...tired after last night's post-game mourning.
In the last month, I have finally started to analyze each game I play at ICC, or at least each of my losses. Some of my wins are not worth analyzing, as they are due to opening destruction I sometimes wreak with the Fried Liver Attack. Here's what I do:Step 1: Create an evaluation profile in Fritz to determine my key stupid moves.
This involves opening the pgn of the game in Fritz and analyzing the game in Blundercheck mode with the threshold set to 0, depth of 4 moves (at my level, I don't think I need to analyze much deeper than 4-ply), being sure to select 'Save evaluation profile.' I then quickly go through the game, checking out the evaluation profile and trying to figure out the reason for each large fluctuation.Step 2: Fritz deep position analysis of each position in which I screwed up.
Once, in Step 1, I have determined my dumb moves, I then run deep position analysis for those positions right before my bad move. For this, I go 10 moves in. I then do my best to figure out why Fritz chose the move(s) it did, and why my move was dumb. I sometimes use the Windows-->Panes-->Explain all Moves function in Fritz, in which it provides a brief natural language evaluation of each move.Step 3: Enter the position in my game notebook.
Using Fritz's useful File-->Save Position function, I save an image of the position(s) analyzed in Step 2. I then save them into my notebook which is in MS Word. On the left I put the image, while on the right margin I list three things. First, what Fritz suggested and why, second what I actually played, and third which step of Chessplanner (my thought process) I didn't correctly apply in my actual move. (The five steps of Chessplanner, briefly, are 1. Pattern recognition, 2. Board evaluation and planning, 3. Real Chess (select best candidate move from Steps 1 and 2), 4. Blundercheck, 5. Make the move).
I find the above steps take about 15 minutes per game, and hopefully will provide a helpful record for me to go over to discover my main weaknesses.
The main concern I have is that I am placing too much trust in Fritz's evaluation profile: is it heavily biased toward material, and hence, will it tend to highlight only my tactical weaknesses? We'll see. Despite that concern, this analysis certainly won't hinder
my chess development, though it just may bias me toward tactical play.
So far, most of my games are lost because of tactical mistakes or a failure to blundercheck. For the games where I still don't understand what the hell I did wrong, I'll probably pay someone at ICC a few bucks to provide analysis. When I can afford it, anyway. I did this once already with Salinnikov, a Russian IM. It was pretty darn good analysis, but set me back 15 checkels.
I predict Duke will destroy UNC tonight in the season finale
. Ummm, boy was I ever wrong.