Stigma wrote on 01/04/18 at 11:34:12:

I want to add 2 things about that aspect.
1) Yes I agree we should also cover the ideas which popped up during the game but did not materialize on the board in the analysis of a game. I do that as mentioned on my blog but from technical point there is not much to say. The ideas are something personal so you have them or you don't have them.
2) A serious standard game lasts between 3-5 hours. During that time you are normally concentrated maximally at producing the best calculations and eventually moves. It is very unlikely that 1-2 hours of some individual analysis afterwards often in a too relaxed environment will produce interesting analysis. I see nowadays most postmortems immediately use engines.

Stigma wrote on 01/04/18 at 11:34:12:


Some IMs already told me personally that they don't put the same effort into analyzing their games as I do. So yes I am aware that I am not the average player fooling around with some chesssoftware. However even the IMs admit that often they learn something how they can improve the quality of their analysis by reading my blog. In fact I was recently invited to give over 2 weeks a double session about chess-software to a group of chessplayers. I am right now working on the program together with my contacts to make it balanced for everybody.

proustiskeen wrote on 01/03/18 at 17:37:23:

These articles mainly try to convince the readers how important it is to analyze one's own games. It only scratches the surface about how you should analyze one's own games.

When I talk on my blog about analyzing my games then I focus on the technical aspects.
1) When to use full analysis/ deep position analysis/ monte carlo analysis, infinite analysis.
2) Does it makes sense for e.g. 1600 rated player to check his analysis with Komodo and then once more with Stockfish, Houdini,...
3) How much time should I give the engine to analyze a game?
4) Which databases should I check for the opening?
5) From which move onwards should I check the opening as clearly from move 1 does not make any sense?
6) Should I use tablebases for the endgame and how?
7) What is the benefit of backwards analyzing?
8) From which point can I consider my played move a mistake?
9) Should I also look at alternatives for every move and what exactly is an acceptable alternative?
10) Should I add comments to the analysis and which comments?
11) Can I remove (bad) analysis as sometimes the file becomes unreadible? How do you deal with that?
12) Should I revise analysis made of years ago or can I let it rest?
13) How often should I check for new versions of engines, databases, hardware? Can I skip some releases....
14) Which shortkeys do you use often? Do you have developed some special tools/ other techniques?

All this I discuss on my blog and much more. For me that are the questions which people are searching when they want an answer about how to analyze one's own games.

Chris Baker (2002) Learn from Your Chess Mistakes

At the risk of self-aggrandizement:

https://new.uschess.org/news/chess-tech-university-philosophy-game-analysis-part...

https://new.uschess.org/news/chess-tech-university-philosophy-game-analysis-part...

How would you rate those books of Crouch's?  I remember browsing through one and thinking highly of it.  

One similar book that I learned a tremendous amount from is Yermolinsky's The Road to Chess Improvement.  It's more "pure chess" and less about the though processes behind errors, though, so perhaps not quite what you're looking for.